SOL-486-17-000004_Amendment_No._1.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT 11 . CONTRACT ID CODE I PAGE OF PAGES

1 I 20

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE 4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO. 15. PROJECT NO. (If applicable)

000001 03/16/2017

6. ISSUED BY CODE RDM/A 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6) CODE I Regional Office of Procurement Regional Development Mission/Asia Athenee Tower 25th Floor 63 Wireless Road, Pathumwan Bangkok, Thailand 10330

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., street, county, State and ZIP Code}

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

SOL-486-17-000004

x 98. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

03/01/ 2 017

10A MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

CODE FACILITY CODE

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

IXI The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specrtied for receipt of Offers D is extended. Ill is not extended.

Offers must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended • by one of the following methods: (a) By completing

Items Band 15, and returning copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted ; or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGEMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT

THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER tt by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted • such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

13. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO MODIFICATION OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS. IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

CHECK ONE A THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify aufhorify) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT

ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(b).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor D is not. Dis required to sign this document and return -------- copies to the issuing office .

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

The purpose of this Amendment is to provide answers to questions submitted by interested parties and incorporate r esulting changes throughout the Solicitation.

See specific changes on the following pages.

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9 A or 10A, as heretofo

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print) 16A. NAM

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of person authorized to sign)

NSN 7540-01-152-8070

Previous edition unusable

Brue

15C. DATE SIGNED 168. UNI 16C. DATE SIGNED

J 16 Qo/1-

Solicitation No. SOL-486-17-000004

Amendment No. 01

A. SPECIFIC CHANGES TO THE SOLICITATION

1. SECTION C – DESCRIPTION / SPECIFICATIONS / STATEMENT OF WORK

1.1. In Section “C.4.4 ACTIVITY OBJECTIVES” delete “Such opportunities can target practices across AFOLU commodity value chains, including but limited to:” and replace it with:

“Such opportunities can target practices across AFOLU commodity value chains, including but not limited to:”

1.2. In Section “C.4.6 COORDINATION” delete the sentence “(See in Annex “Summary of

Sustainable Landscape Activities by USAID Bilateral Missions in Asia”.)” in its entirety.

2. SECTION F - DELIVERIES OR PERFORMANCE

2.1. Delete Section “F.3 PLACE OF PERFORMANCE” in its entirety and replace it with the following:

“F.3 PLACE OF PERFORMANCE

The primary and initial place of performance of this contract is Southeast Asia. With the prior written approval of the COR, performance may be extended to other developing countries in

Asia.

Note: It is not envisioned presently that performance will take place in Burma. No work may be performed in Burma without the prior written approval from the COR.”

2.2. Delete Section “F.5 KEY PERSONNEL” paragraph (b) in its entirety and replace it with the following:

“(b) Key personnel are considered essential to the work being performed under this contract. At least three of the four key personnel, including the COP, will be under the direct supervision of the prime Contractor (not under a subcontractor), unless otherwise approved by the COR.”

2.3. In Section “F.6.3.1 Task Order Limitations” paragraph (iii), delete “in (d) above” in the first sentence.

3. SECTION I - CONTRACT CLAUSES

3.1. In Section “I.1 NOTICE LISTING CONTRACT CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY

REFERENCE” add the FOLLOWING clause “52.217-4 EVALUATION OF OPTIONS

EXERCISED AT TIME OF CONTRACT AWARD (JUN 1988).”

3.2. In Section “I.1 NOTICE LISTING CONTRACT CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY

REFERENCE” incorporate AIDAR clause “752.7036 USAID IMPLEMENTING

PARTNER NOTICES (IPN) PORTAL FOR ACQUISITION.”

3.3. Add FAR Clause “52.217-9 OPTION TO EXTEND THE TERM OF THE

CONTRACT (MAR 2000 )” as follows:

“I.5 52.217-9 OPTION TO EXTEND THE TERM OF THE CONTRACT (MAR 2000)

(a) The Government may extend the term of this contract by written notice to the Contractor within 60 days; provided that the Government gives the Contractor a preliminary written notice of its intent to extend at least 60 days before the contract expires. The preliminary notice does not commit the Government to an extension.

(b) If the Government exercises this option, the extended contract shall be considered to include this option clause.

(c) The total duration of this contract, including the exercise of any options under this clause, shall not exceed five years.

(End of clause)”

4. INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE PREPARATION OF THE TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

4.1. In Section “L.6.3 Content of the Technical Proposal” add the following:

“The Offeror’s technical approach must focus on the base contract alone and must not consider the options.”

4.2. In Section “L.6.3.3 Institutional Experience (See Section M.3.3)” delete the first paragraph and replace it with the following:

“The prime Offeror must demonstrate experience in sustainable landscapes activities, see (i) below. The prime Offeror and its major subcontractor(s) combined must demonstrate experience in (i) and (ii) below.”

4.3. In Section “L.6.3.3 Institutional Experience (See Section M.3.3)” paragraph (i)(a) delete “developing Asian countries” and replace it with “Asia”.

4.4. In Section “L.6.3.3 Institutional Experience (See Section M.3.3)” paragraph (i)(b) delete “developing Asian countries” and replace it with “Asia”.

4.5. In Section “L.6.3.4 Contractor Past Performance Information (See Section M.3.4)” delete paragraph A.1. in its entirety and replace it with the following:

1. “List in an annex to the technical proposal up to five (5) of the most recent (active or ended no more than 3 years ago) and relevant contracts/agreements for efforts similar to the work in the subject proposal for the offeror and up to (3) three for each major subcontractor, if any, using the template provided in Attachment 4. The most relevant indicators of performance are contracts/agreements of similar scope, size, geographic coverage and/or complexity.”

5. SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

5.1. Add Section “M.1 NOTICE LISTING SOLICITATION PROVISIONS

INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE” as follows:

“M.1 NOTICE LISTING SOLICITATION PROVISIONS INCORPORATED BY

REFERENCE

The following contract clauses pertinent to this section are hereby incorporated by reference (by

Citation Number, Title, and Date) in accordance with the clause at FAR 52.252-2 CLAUSES

INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE” in Section I of this contract. Full text of the FAR clauses is available at https://www.acquisition.gov/far/ and full text of the AIDAR clauses is available at http://www.usaid.gov/ads/policy/300/aidar and http://www.usaid.gov/ads/policy/300/300.

FEDERAL ACQUISITION REGULATION (FAR) (48 CFR CHAPTER 1)

NUMBER TITLE DATE

52.217-5 EVALUATION OF OPTIONS (JUL 1990)”

5.2. Delete Section “M.3.3 Institutional Experience (See Section L.6.3.3)” in its entirety and replace it with the following:

“M.3.3 Institutional Experience (See Section L.6.3.3)

The extent to which the prime Offeror demonstrates experience implementing sustainable landscapes activities; and the extent to which the prime Offeror and its major subcontractor(s) combined convincingly demonstrate experience implementing sustainable landscapes and project pipeline development activities.”

https://www.acquisition.gov/far/ http://www.usaid.gov/ads/policy/300/aidar http://www.usaid.gov/ads/policy/300/300

B. ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS RECEIVED FROM INTERESTED PARTIES UNDER

THE SOLICITATION

1. Question: Section C.4.6 references a “Summary of Sustainable Landscape Activities by

USAID Bilateral Missions in Asia” as an Annex to the RFP. Would USAID kindly circulate the referenced document as it was not originally released with the RFP?

Answer: The relevant activities are listed in Section C.4.6, page 24 with bullet points. This sentence will be removed from the solicitation through this amendment.

2. Question: Section F.3 notes that it is not envisioned that performance will take place in

Burma and Cambodia. However, Section C.4.6 includes notes that “To ensure optimal impact, the contractor’s efforts should be designed wherever possible to complement

(the)...Cambodia: supporting Forest and Biodiversity (activity).” Please clarify whether offerors should consider Cambodia as one of the covered countries under RDMA.

Answer: Section F.3 contained an error, it is envisioned that USAID Green Invest Asia will work in Cambodia. Section F.3 will be amended accordingly.

3. Question: Page 91, Section K.1 of the RFP incorporates FAR 52.237-8 Restriction on

Severance Payments to Foreign Nationals. We respectfully request that USAID include

FAR 52.237-9, Waiver of Limitation on Severance Payments to Foreign Nationals so the eventual contractor can abide by local laws requiring payment of severance and can budget accordingly.

Answer: The Head of the Agency has not waived the 31.205-6(g)(6) cost allowability limitations on severance payments to foreign nationals for this Activity, therefore no changes are made.

4. Question: Can USAID confirm that Dahlberg Global Development Advisors (Dahlberg) who participated in the preliminary gathering of data and/or conducted advisory work on the design of this RFP has conflict of interest and is therefore precluded from bidding on this procurement?

Answer: Dalberg is not an eligible source for purposes of the competition.

5. Question: RFP page 17, Section C.4.3, “Overall Activity Indicators and Aspirational

Targets”, the first indicator in the table “Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions” has an

“Aspirational Target (2017-2022)” of “25 million tons of CO2 equivalent”.

a. Can USAID clarify how it is measuring the current level of greenhouse gas emissions

(GHG)?

b. Can USAID clarify the current benchmark that Green Invest Asia is setting for greenhouse gas emissions?

Answer to questions (a) and (b): For information on methodologies, please refer to the

USAID Climate Change Monitoring and Evaluation Resources found on the climatelinks.org portal at https://www.climatelinks.org/monitoring-evalution/usaid-climate-change-resources. However, please note that specific methodologies for monitoring and evaluation (including reductions of greenhouse gas emissions) will be proposed by the

Contractor after contract award as part of the Monitoring and Evaluation Plan (M&E) and are not requested in the RFP. The emissions benchmark levels will be proposed as a part of that M&E Plan.

6. Question: RFP pages 17-18, Section C.4.3 “Overall Activity Indicators and Aspirational

Targets”, includes a table with three key indicators for Green Invest Asia.

Can USAID clarify what countries are being used to calculate the aspirational targets? (For example, the “ratio of investments in high-emission versus low emission practices” (p. 18).

Is this based on only the countries Green Invest Asia works in? All countries in Southeast

Asia? Or some other calculation?)

Answer: The aspirational targets are for programmatic impacts across the countries where

USAID Green Invest Asia will be working during the five-year period of the activity. We emphasize that these are aspirational, and not hard targets.

7. Question: RFP page 23, Section C.4.5, “Geographic Coverage” lists example value chains of key commodities, including “timber, pulp and paper, shrimp, coffee, cocoa, tea, sugar, palm oil, rice and rubber”.

a. Can USAID clarify if there are priority commodities that Green Invest Asia should be focused on and, if so, please provide a list of those commodities in rank of priority?

Answer: We refer Offerors to Section C.4.5: “... it is expected that the activity will focus initially on the value chains of key commodities driving deforestation and degradation in the region, or on activities with high potential to reduce emissions from improved farming practices. Some examples of such value chains include timber, pulp and paper, shrimp, coffee, cocoa, tea, sugar, palm oil, rice and rubber.”

We expect Offerors to use their judgment on technical approaches and priority commodities, based on their experience and the market potential. And as noted in L.6.3.1, “The Technical Approach must demonstrate the Offeror’s understanding of the technical requirements of the activity and propose a realistic approach for achieving the overall vision and aspirational targets specified within the Statement of Work.”

b. Additionally, will certain commodities be focused in some countries versus others? If so, would USAID please provide priority commodities by individual country in Southeast

Asia?

Answer: See response No. 7 (a) above.

http://climatelinks.org/ http://climatelinks.org/ https://www.climatelinks.org/monitoring-evalution/usaid-climate-change-resources https://www.climatelinks.org/monitoring-evalution/usaid-climate-change-resources https://www.climatelinks.org/monitoring-evalution/usaid-climate-change-resources

c. Can USAID clarify if there are potential investment concentration in any one commodity that Green Invest Asia is concerned about? If so, can USAID provide that information?

Answer: A key objective of the activity is to catalyze private sector investment. The investment streams will depend upon the market dynamics and opportunities. See response

No. 7 (a) above.

8. Question: RFP page 24, Section C.4.6 “Coordination”, contains a bulleted list of countries and activities where “the contract’s efforts should be designed, wherever possible, to complement, including “Bangladesh, Cambodia, India, Indonesia, Nepal, Philippines, Vietnam”. However, Section F.3 “Place of Performance” (RFP page 29) states “Note: It is not envisioned that performance will take place in Burma and Cambodia.”

As these two solicitation references appear to contradict each other, could USAID please clarify the level of engagement it expects the Green Asia Project to perform in Cambodia?

Answer: See response to Question No. 2.

9. Question: RFP page, 24, Section C.4.6 “Coordination”, states that, “Based on the consultations with the bilateral missions, it is envisioned that there is potential for mission buy-in to USAID Green Invest Asia, whereby missions would buy into the activity and fund tasks that would develop project pipelines in their countries and link these projects to sources of financing.”

Does Option 1 (115 person months) and Option 2 (115 person months) reflect the potential buy-ins from Missions?

Answer: Option 1 and Option 2 may be utilized for bilateral mission buy-ins; however, RDMA may decide to exercise the option regardless of the source of funding.

10. Question: As outlined in the RFP, the Base Contract covers a period of performance of five years and Offerors are to bid 580 person-months for the five-year period of performance (116 person months per year).

If Option 1 and 2 reflects buy-ins and the LOE for each reflect the equivalent of one year of the Base Contract, for budgeting purposes, can USAID provide which year it anticipates the buy-ins to occur for Option 1 and Option 2?

Answer: For budgeting purposes only, Offerors may assume that Option 1 will be exercised in Year 2 and Option 2 will be exercised in Year 3.

11. Question: RFP page 29, Section F.3 “Place of Performance”, states “The primary and initial place of performance of this contract is Southeast Asia”.

Can USAID please provide the list of countries which it considers to be located in

Southeast Asia and where the Green Asia project could potentially work?

Answer: The primary countries we envision for work on the ground (i.e. in sustainable landscapes) in Southeast Asia are Cambodia, Indonesia, the Philippines, and Vietnam. It is also possible to work in other developing countries in Southeast Asia, with the exception of

Burma.

12. Question: RFP Page 30, Section F.5 “Key Personnel”, Subsection (b) states “Each key person will be under the direct supervision of the prime Contractor (not under a subcontractor), unless otherwise approved by the COR.”

Can USAID confirm that all Key personnel must be a direct hire/employee of the Prime

Contractor?

Answer: The section will be amended to reflect to read “At least three of the four key personnel, including the COP, will be under the direct supervision of the prime Contractor

(not under a subcontractor), unless otherwise approved by the COR.” Proposals should comply with this requirement.

13. Question: RFP Page 31, Section F.6.2 “Gender Analysis” states that “The Contractor must submit a Gender analysis report to the COR for approval within 45 calendar days of the effective date of the contract.” Page 112, Section L.6.3.2 “Key Personnel and Staffing

Plan” states that “the successful Offeror will propose the Gender and Social Inclusion

Advisor for this position after contract award.”

Considering that this staff member will not be mobilized under after contract award, would the government consider extending the deadline for the Gender analysis report from the stated 45 calendars days after the effective date of the contract to 90 days to align its delivery with the Work Plan deliverable (Section F.6.3, p.32)?

Answer: The solicitation is amended to revise the due date of the Gender analysis to 60 calendar days after award.

14. Question: RFP page 110, Section L.5(a) Delivery Instructions, in the table under

“Document” it lists “Original Paper Submission”. Under the related columns “Technical

Proposals # of Copies” and “Cost Proposal # of Copies” it states 1 for each.

Can USAID confirm that 1 original of the Technical Proposal and 1 original of the Cost

Proposal are all that is required in hard copy? Or is 1 original and 1 copy of the Technical

Proposal and 1 original and 1 copy of the Cost proposal required?

Answer: One original technical proposal and one original cost proposal is required as part of the hard copy submissions.

15. Question: RFP page 111, Section L.6.2 “Page Limitation”, states that “The text in any text boxes included within the technical proposal must be Times New Roman font not less than 12 points in size”. Further in the same paragraph it states that “Text in tables, graphics, charts, graphs, etc. may be smaller than 12 points in size, but must be legible”.

Would USAID allow text in text boxes included in the technical proposal to be smaller than 12 points in size, if they are legible?

Answer: The required font size for text boxes remains unchanged (must not be less than 12 points in size).

16. Question: RFP page 115, Section L.6.3.4.D. “Performance in using Small Business (SB)

Concerns”, Sub-section 3.a requires offerors to “Provide a narrative summary of your organization’s use of small business concerns over the past three years”. Sub-section 3.c requires offerors to “Provide the names and addresses of three SB concerns for us to contact for their assessment of your performance in using SB concerns.”

Can USAID confirm that both the narrative and the references can be included as part of the “Contractor Past Performance Information” annex?

Answer: Confirmed.

17. Question: RFP page 119, Section L.7, Part 2 – Proposed Costs/Prices, sub-section 3. LOE

Table (professional technical personnel) requests to following that the LOE table include

“position titles and names for each professional technical position”.

We wish to ask USAID to confirm that the LOE Table for Cost Proposal 2 are only to reflect Professional level of effort and not to include administrative/support staff?

18. Question: The RFP requires non-small business organizations to provide a Small Business

Contracting plan with the Cost Proposals.

As RFP Section L does not state where the Small Business Contracting Plan should be placed, should Offerors include those plans in Cost Proposal Section Part 8 – Consent to

Subcontract?

Answer: It is unclear which requirement this question refers to as the solicitation does not require the submission of a subcontracting plan for USAID Green Invest Asia. The solicitation requests information on Offerors’ past performance in using Small Business concerns.

19. Question: Could USAID please explain how the two Options will be activated, including what are the criteria that will be applied for making that decision?

Answer: The options represent the USG’s prerogative to procure additional labor which may be required at any point during contract implementation. The additional effort may represent mission buy-ins or increased work required by USAID/RDMA.

20. Question: Can USAID please provide more details on the differences between the two

Options? Since they will not be sequential, is the intention for the two Options to have separate thematic focus (i.e. bilateral buy in for technical assistance, or more community of practice activities)?

Answer: Please note that the Offeror’s technical approach need not consider the options.

21. Question: Is the LOE for the two Options periods in addition to the Base period LOE, or does it include the LOE of Base period experts (i.e. LOE for COP is counted both as part of the 580 and as part of the 115)?

Answer: The LOE included in each option are in addition to that included in the Base.

22. Question: Can you please confirm that the budget for the Option periods should include only additional resources (travel, equipment, etc.) needed for the Option in addition to the

Base period and should not include any funding already accounted for in the Base budget?

23. Question: Could USAID provide a funding range for the purpose of budgeting, including an indication of the funding range available for the Base period and each Option period?

Answer: This is cost-plus-fixed-fee (CPFF) term form contract, therefore a range for funding or total estimated cost will not be provided.

24. Question: Based on the language in the RfP, the aspirational targets are not fixed. Will specific hard targets need to be proposed in the proposal by respective bidders, or will they be discussed and agreed to after award?

Answer: Hard targets are not requested as part of Offerors’ proposals.

25. Question: Does USAID expect the aspirational targets to be achieved/significantly contributed to through the Based contract only or is it envisioned that the Offeror can use the Options to achieve this target?

Answer: The aspirational targets are to be achieved/significantly contributed to through the

Base contract.

26. Question: For the greenhouse gas aspirational target, will reduced, sequestered, or avoided emissions that are “committed” as a result of business policies or practices, but that may not be seen during the life of the project - due to the long timeframe needed for land based emissions to be actualized - be counted?

Answer: It is envisioned that GHG emissions reductions achieved and/or committed during the life of the project will be counted towards the indicator targets. Please see response to question 5 above.

27. Question: For the greenhouse gas aspirational target, can USAID please elaborate on what specifically is meant by the wording that “targets must be referenced and adhere to rigorous calculation methods and tools” to account for emissions reduction targets?

Answer: See response to question 5 above.

28. Question: Will it be sufficient for the Offeror to estimate emissions reductions using the

USAID AFOLU Carbon Calculator tool, or will additional measurement and verification methods be needed?

Answer: Please see response to questions 5 above.

29. Question: a. Can USAID please clarify how it defines “mobilized” in reference to the

$400 million investment mobilized under the aspirational target?

Answer: The definition of investment mobilization typically involves documentation from a bank or investor. The working definition for this indicator will be developed after contract award, in cooperation with USAID, as part of development of the M&E Plan.

b. Would loans/investments by a financial institution to a project or business or funds leveraged from private sector for greening supply chains and other emissions reduction measures be eligible to attribute towards this target?

Answer: Yes.

c. Does the investment have to be delivered within the duration of the project or will commitment to this investment during the project period suffice?

Answer: It is envisioned that both investment delivered and investment committed--according to the definition of investment mobilization mentioned in (a) above--will be counted toward the investment mobilization target.

30. Question: Can USAID please clarify the role of the contractor vis-à-vis the Development

Credit Authority, given that USAID RDMA “is also working in parallel with USAID’s

Development Credit Authority (DCA) to identify banks or projects that could access

DCA’s loan guarantee products for lending and/or investments in the SL sector in the region”? Is the contractor expected to work directly with DCA to broker deals, or solely in parallel with the expectation of coordination among efforts and identification of opportunities as appropriate?

Answer: The contractor should be prepared to coordinate and work with DCA to help identify opportunities for loan guarantee needs.

31. Question: As per Objective 3 (p.21), Community of Practice and Development of Action

Plan that “identifies systemic issues blocking” shift to low-emissions SL investments will expectedly involve elements that are identified in the RFP as not part of the project scope

(p.16-17), such as land tenure and policy frameworks.

a. Is the expectation that these elements (land tenure and policy frameworks) will be covered by bilateral missions in their programs and GIA will only leverage these activities through the Community of Practice?

b. Is it the intention for GIA to only recommend pathways to solutions on these issues for decision makers, but not to be directly involved in their implementation?

Answer to (a) and (b): There are many barriers to low-emissions SL investments, and not all of these barriers can be directly addressed by USAID Green Invest Asia. It is envisioned that the Community of Practice will be a useful platform for leveraging activities of other stakeholders, with a primary focus in the area of sustainable landscapes financing.

32. Question: On page 22, an indicator of community of practice success will be the development of tools and methods for measurement, reporting and verification (MRV).

Does USAID expect that development of specific tools, such as for MRV, should be an explicit output of the Community of Practice?

Answer: Please refer to the description of Objective 3 in Section C.4.4. of the RFP.

33. Question: The Geographic scope notes that “USAID bilateral missions in SE Asia have expressed strong interest” in the activity. Which USAID bilateral missions have already committed to/approved the GIA Activity working in their country?

Answer: The geographic scope allows for the possible buy-in from bilateral Missions. This does not imply any specific commitments or intent of commitments have been made.

34. Question: The RFP states “It is not envisioned presently that performance will take place in Burma and Cambodia. No work may be performed in Burma and Cambodia without the prior written approval from the COR.” However there is mention of complementing the

Cambodia SFB project, amongst others.

a. Can USAID provide rationale for not working in Cambodia and Burma?

b. Can USAID provide any indication on when this might change?

Answer to (a) and (b): See response to Question 2.

c. Can USAID provide more detail under what conditions would working in Cambodia and Burma be considered/receive approval from the COR?

Answer: See response to Question 2. This is not germane to this competitive process.

35. Question: USAID mentions the possible extension of project activities to South Asia. Is there any commitment or intent from USAID bilateral missions in South Asia other than

Nepal?

Answer: See response to question 33 above.

36. Question: Throughout the RFP there is slight ambiguity as to the size of actors the project will support. There is language about working with large commercial actors to develop a

“robust pipeline” of investible projects; there is a reference to SMEs and even smallholder and cooperative farmers, while at the same time singling out communities as not the focus of project activities; and the gender action plan references supporting ”female heads of households.” Can USAID clarify its expectation with regards to size of actors to be supported by this project?

Answer: There are several commodities and land use activities that may warrant funding, and the various references regarding the size of the actors to be supported, simply reflects that production systems vary across products and geographies. Please refer to the text box entitled “OUTCOMES: …” under Objective 3 in Section C.4.4., which describes a strategy for upscaling from the project to the portfolio level.

37. Question: Page 24 includes a reference to an Annex “Summary of Sustainable

Landscapes Activities by Bilateral Missions in Asia” but this does not appear to have been included. Can USAID please share this important annex?

Answer: See response to Question No. 1.

38. Question: The Evaluation factors for award under Section M are very generic and do not provide specific criteria – or their percentage weights - for which technical proposals will be evaluated. Instead, they list relative importance of each section as compared to other sections. Can USAID please provide specific evaluation criteria for the technical proposal to better guide the preparation of the proposal, including quantitative point allocation, so that the criteria can be applied in a consistent and transparent manner?

Answer: The relative weight of each technical evaluation factor is provided in the solicitation. All changes to the evaluation criteria are included in this Amendment.

39. Question: Can you please confirm that the Cover Page required on p. 111 is the same as the Cover Letter referenced on p. 112?

40. Question: Can you please confirm that grants, cooperative agreements, and other funding instruments will count towards Contractor Past Performance (in addition to contracts)?

Answer: Offerors may provide grants, cooperative agreements, and other funding instruments as part of their contractor past performance submission.

41. Question: For Contractor Past Performance, can the offeror provide a list of projects for which SF294 reports were submitted to eSRS as opposed to a copy of the actual SF 294 reports?

Answer: As stated in Section L.6.3.4 a copy of the reports are requested.

42. Question: In Section C.4.4, Activity Objectives, of the RFP, the last sentence of the introductory paragraph to Objective 1: Identify Investments (page 19) reads as follows:

“Such opportunities can target practices across AFOLU commodity value chains, including but limited to: 1) securing access to high-quality suppliers, 2) improving access to key export markets by supporting third party certification with emission reduction criteria, 3) enhancing productivity, facilitating reforestation for sustainable production, 4) developing deforestation-free supply chains, and 5) promoting climate smart agriculture.”

Please confirm either that this wording is correct as written or that the word “not” was inadvertently omitted and the sentence should begin as follows (capitals used for emphasis):

“Such opportunities can target practices across AFOLU commodity value chains, including but NOT limited to …”

Answer: The word “not” was in fact omitted and will be added in this amendment.

43. Question: Section C.4.6, Coordination (pp. 23–24), refers to the “Summary of Sustainable

Landscape Activities by USAID Bilateral Missions in Asia” annex. This annex does not appear in the RFP or on the FBO.gov page. Can USAID please provide offerors with this document?

Answer: See response to Question No. 1.

44. Question: Section F.5 of the RFP (page 30) indicates that key personnel must be under the direct supervision of the prime contractor. Please confirm that this requirement must be illustrated in the proposed chain of command among staff in the organizational chart. More specifically, please confirm that key personnel can be provided by either the prime contractor or a proposed subcontractor as long as all key personnel report to the prime contractor.

Answer: See response to Question No. 12.

45. Question: Please confirm that offerors may include a cover page for the technical proposal that does not count against the 20-page limit.

46. Question: A cancelation ceiling is not authorized for each year of the contract per section

B.9 of the solicitation. Would USAID consider establishing and authorizing a cancellation ceiling for all the program years except for the first year consistent with FAR 17.106-1?

Answer: As stated in Section B.9 the cancellation ceiling established pursuant to FAR

17.106-1(c)(1) for each program year is $0.00.

47. Question: Page 114-115, Section L.6.3.4 of the RFP asks for Contractor Past Performance

Information for up to 5 of the most recent and relevant contracts. As the RFP’s cover letter states that this solicitation is open to non-profit and for-profit organizations, may we assume that offerors can submit both contracts and cooperative agreements that are comparable in scope, size, geographic coverage and/or complexity to the proposed project as performance references?

Answer: Yes, Offerors may submit past performance information for efforts implemented through mechanisms other than contracts. The solicitation is amended accordingly.

48. Question: Can USAID confirm that for hard copy submission they are asking for one (1) original and one (1) copy of the Technical Proposal and one (1) original and one (1) copy of the Cost Proposal?

Answer: See response to Question No. 14.

49. Question: RFP Reference: “With regard to policy issues (Challenge 5), it is recognized that there may be systemic policy issues that impede investment. It is envisioned that the

Activity may need to address policy issues in some cases, and will endeavor to do so through partnerships with USAID bilateral programs, or with other donors working in the region on these issues.” (pg.16, C.4.1)

Can USAID provide clarification on current or proposed partnerships that will be used? If there are incentives or barriers in the form of laws, taxes/tax-incentives or other national/local government mechanisms, will they be addressed within this Activity?

Answer: See response to question 31 above.

50. Question: RFP Reference: “Overall Activity Indicators and Aspirational Targets:

Greenhouse Gas Emissions” (pg.17, C.4.3)

For the GHG emissions reduction indicator, is 25 million tons CO2e over 5 years intended as ex-ante (non-verified) estimate from project activities, and does the proposal have to identify related targets for number of hectares of land related to this target? Will USAID also consider co-benefits such as biodiversity, non- carbon environmental services and others that are important for a variety of commodities in the land use sector?

51. Question: RFP Reference: “Overall Activity Indicators and Aspirational Targets: Ratio of investments in high-emission versus low-emission practices in the AFOLU sector made by financial institutions receiving support” (pg.18, C.4.3).

For the ratio of investments in high emissions: low emissions practices, what sources of data will USAID use to estimate this ratio of investments?

52. Question: RFP Reference: “Objective 2: Encourage investments: Outcome: The primary desired outcome of this objective is increased green investment in the AFOLU sector.”

(pg.21, C.4.4)

What baseline is USAID using for current levels of green investment in the AFOLU sector

(to measure increase in loans/investment)?

53. Question: RFP Reference: “Objective 3: Build a community of practice in SL Finance:

Illustrative Indicators: Development of an Action Plan that identifies systemic issues blocking the scaling up of investment in SL of relevance to stakeholders across the Asia region.

- Execution of the Action Plan that addresses barriers to SL investment at the project, enterprise and portfolio levels. This plan would contain benchmarks according to which progress could be measured.” (pg.23, C.4.4.)

For the communities of practice in SL finance, does USAID intend for the development and execution of action plans to reduce barriers to green investment at project, enterprise, and portfolio levels to be undertaken by the project implementer, or collectively by the community of practice (as defined in RFP)?

Answer: It is envisioned that the USAID Green Invest Asia Work Plan will be developed and implemented by the Contractor. At the same time, however, it is envisioned that the

Community of Practice will leverage partner resources and will “... foster knowledge-sharing and learning across countries and .. [address] systemic issues that block the development and financing of low-emission land use businesses.”

54. Question: RFP Reference: “USAID/RDMA has done an assessment of business models and opportunities in the Southeast Asia region and the USAID bilateral missions in

Southeast Asia have expressed strong interest in the USAID Green Invest Asia activity.”

(pg.23, C.4.5)

Can RDMA share the assessment of business models and opportunities that are currently considered of high interest?

Answer: We refer Offerors to this reference in Section J of the RFP, “Assessment of

Business Models for Low Emission Land Use Management in Asia” http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PA00MK9D.pdf.

55. Question: RFP Reference: “The initial geographic focus of this USAID Green Invest

Asia is in Southeast Asia” (pg.23, C.4.5)

“The primary and initial place of performance of this contract is Southeast Asia.” “Note: It is not envisioned presently that performance will take place in Burma and Cambodia.”

(pg.29, F.3)

“USAID anticipates, at a minimum, one project office located in Bangkok, with part-time country coordinators for other target countries in the region outside of Thailand.” (pg. 113, L.6.3.2)

Can USAID clarify, which countries in Southeast Asia they envision the Green Invest Asia

Activity will take place?

Answer: See responses to Questions 2, 7, and 33 above.

56. Question: USAID lists four (4) Key Personnel, but only lists the minimum qualifications for the Gender and Social Inclusion Advisor. Does USAID have guidance for other minimum position requirements for the additional three (3) Key Personnel positions identified?

Answer: See Section L.6.3.2 Key Personnel and Staffing Plan and Section F.5(d).

57. Question: RFP Reference: Can USAID clarify what it determines “significant managerial experience” entails?

Answer: No minimum requirement is provided for managerial experience in terms of number of years. Offerors are requested to describe the Chief of Party’s managerial experience and provide narrative support for why they believe this experience is significant.

58. Question: RFP Reference: “Gender and Social Inclusion Advisor, Minimum

Qualifications” (pg.30, F.5) “Offerors should not propose a Gender and Social Inclusion

Advisor. Rather, the successful Offeror will propose the Gender and Social Inclusion

Advisor for this position after contract award.” (pg.112, L.6.3.2)

USAID states that they do not want the inclusion of a Gender and Social Inclusion Advisor in the proposal, but list the requirements for the position on page 30 of the RFP. Can http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PA00MK9D.pdf

USAID confirm that Offerors do not need to include a proposed Gender and Social

Inclusion Advisor in the proposal?

Answer: Confirmed. The Gender and Social Inclusion Advisor need not be proposed as part of Offerors proposals.

59. Question: As listed on the USAID Forecast, the Green Invest Asia Activity is valued an estimated range of $10M - $24.99M. Can USAID confirm that this is indeed the estimated range for the activity or provide a more approximate value?

Answer: This is cost-plus-fixed-fee (CPFF) term form contract, therefore a range for funding or total estimated cost will not be provided.

60. Question: In Section C.4.7 Cross-Cutting Issues on RFP Page 24, USAID/RDMA indicates that the contractor must “address USAID/RDMA’s smart development screens

(science and technology, partnerships, and gender equality and female empowerment)…”

In the sub-sections below C.4.7, partnerships as well as gender equality and female empowerment are described in detail, yet science and technology is not. Could USAID provide a short explanation of how it expects offerors to incorporate the science and technology development screen into Green Invest Asia?

Answer: Offerors unique approaches need to address this, based on their experience and lessons learned.

61. Question: Section L.6.3.3.i. Experience implementing sustainable landscapes activities.

Would USAID consider evaluating experience in developing countries outside of Asia to draw on best practices and replicable tools that would enhance the likelihood of successful implementation of USAID Green Invest Asia?

Answer: The solicitation is amended to consider relevant experience in all of Asia.

62. Question: Section L.6.3.3 Institutional Experience. Would USAID consider allowing offerors to include institutional experience of its entire consortium to provide USAID with a more complete overview of the consortiums qualifications?

Answer: Institutional experience will be evaluated as described in the amended solicitation.

63. Question: Section F.5.b. of the RFP states that “each key person will be under the direct supervision of the prime Contractor (not under a subcontractor), unless otherwise approved by the COR.” Please confirm if this is in reference to the reporting lines of the project organizational structure or if all key personnel positions must be directly hired by the prime contractor.

64. Question: Section L.7.2.14. Prime and Major Subcontractor Percentage of Work

Overview states that “Major subcontractors are those whose proposed LOE exceeds 25% of the total LOE (base plus options).” Please confirm if total LOE in this case includes professional technical personnel only (i.e. 810 person months for the base plus options).

65. Question: Does USAID envision that grants under contract will be included within the project budget? If so, would USAID consider including a plug figure to ensure parity amongst offerors?

Answer: Grants under contract are not part of the solicitation.

66. Question: Would USAID consider providing a total estimated ceiling for the performance of the work required?

Answer: See response to Question No. 23.

67. Question: Would USAID consider providing plug figures for activity funds and other direct costs?

Answer: No plug figures will be provided.

68. Question: The RFP states that the Offeror must provide a detailed budget for the Option 1 and for Option 2. The options are not sequential and (if exercised) will be overlapping with the base period and, possibly, with each other. For budgeting purposes, which year should the Offeror assume the option funding would likely fall under?

Answer: See response to Question No. 10.

69. Question: Attachment 8: Local Compensation Plan Pay Ranges (page 149) - Please confirm whether the scale provided is inclusive of mission LCP allowances such as miscellaneous, transportation and meals allowances, and offerors should not budget these allowances as part of the personnel benefits.

Answer: The rates provided represent salaries only.

70. Question: Attachment 8: Local Compensation Plan Pay Ranges (page 149) - Would

USAID please confirm that the currency presented in the table for Bangladesh is in US

Dollars? Would USAID also please confirm that all salary figures presented are per annum?

Answer: Confirmed, the currency for Bangladesh is in U.S. dollars and all salary figures are per annum.

71. Question: Section L.6.2 states that the text in any text boxes included within the technical proposal must be Times New Roman font not less than 12 points in size. Would USAID consider allowing the use of 10pt font in text boxes to improve readability?

Answer: See response to Question No. 15.

72. Question: F.5 (b) on page 30 states, “Key personnel are considered essential to the work being performed under this contract. Each key person will be under the direct supervision of the prime Contractor (not under a subcontractor), unless otherwise approved by the

COR.”

Can USAID confirm that Key Personnel positions can be staffed by a subcontractor provided they report directly to a position (such as Chief of Party) staffed by the Prime

Contractor?

[END OF AMENDMENT NO. 01]