Attachment_1_-_Response_to_Additional_Questions.pdf

PDF 93 KB Posted

Attached to
Strengthening Urban Resilience for Growth with Equity (SURGE)
Solicitation number
SOL-492-14-000003
Issued by

About this file

Attachment 1 - Response to Additional Questions

View the file

Other files

File Type Posted
RFP_Amendment_5.pdf PDF
RFP_Amendment_4.pdf PDF
Attachment_1_-_Response_to_Questions_RFP_No.SOL-492-14-000003.pdf PDF
RFP_Amendment_3.pdf PDF
RFP_Amendment_1.pdf PDF
RFP_NO.SOL-492-14-000003.pdf PDF

On GovTribe

Work with this file

  • Download the original file
  • Contacts named in this file
  • Similar government files
  • Ask GovTribe AI about this file

Text version

RESPONSES TO ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS UNDER RFP NO. SOL‐492‐14‐000003 (SURGE)

QUESTION 1: Responses 36 and 37 indicate offerors are permitted to include a staffing plan table and short‐term technical assistance matrix as annexes to the technical proposal, but these were not added to the list of approved annexes on pages 120‐121 of the revised RFP.

RESPONSE 1: RFP amended to include the staffing plan, etc., as an annex.

QUESTION 2: Response 22 confirms the level of effort chart can be included in the cost proposal only, but it was then added as an annex to the technical proposal in the revised RFP.

RESPONSE 2: RFP amendment to delete the LOE as an annex to the technical proposal.

QUESTION 3: There are several RFP requirements that can best be addressed through the use of 11x17 pages such as the illustrative schedule required in the Monitoring and Evaluation Plan and the organization chart required in Annex F. We would appreciate the government amending the solicitation to allow the use of 11x17 pages, as long as each 11x17 counts as two pages.

RESPONSE 3: RFP amended to allow the use of 11x17 or other than 8‐1/2” x 11” paper pages for illustrations, matrixes and charts. Such will count as one page. See RFP amendment Section L.4 L.4(c)(1).

QUESTION 4: In addition to Cover Page, Transmittal Letter, Table of Contents, Executive Summary and Acronym list, please confirm that tabs separating each section of the proposal will be excluded from the page count.

RESPONSE 4: These are not included in the page count.

QUESTION 5: We would appreciate the government considering excluding from the page count letters of commitment required in Annexes D and H.

RESPONSE 5: Annexes D and H have been removed from the list of annexes to the technical proposal. Offerors are advised to include these letters as annexes to the cost proposals. See RFP amendment.

QUESTION 6: The response to question 38 confirmed that SF 294 forms, in addition to the narrative on using small business concerns, will not count against the 150‐page limit. Amendment 0003 did not change the RFP requirements. Will the response be incorporated into a subsequent amendment?

RESPONSE 6: The RFP does not require the submission of Form SF 294. Offerors may submit these forms as annex to the cost proposal.

QUESTION 7: RFP Section C; Page 13 & 21: We are seeking clarification on Key Personnel.

Objective 4 has been added to the SURGE scope. In the original RFP there were three required (Component) Team Leaders (designated Key Personnel) and we assumed that each Objective would have a Component Team Leader. The other Key Personnel were the COP and DCOP. If one (Component) Team Leader covers each of the four objectives in the revised RFP, it would bring the number of Team Leaders to four (4). Because this last scenario would challenge the 5 Key Personnel maximum stated in the RFP, we would appreciate any further guidance on this point.

RESPONSE 7: The statement of objectives, allows each offeror to define its approach to achieving the desired outcomes for the RFP. Offerors are advised to designate Key Personnel in accordance with ADS 302.3.5.4(a). There is no requirement that all component team leaders be designated as key personnel.

QUESTION 8: Would you also adjust the page limits to reflect the additional objective? We recommend that the PWS limit be adjusted to 60 pages and the total proposal limit be changed to 170 pages.

RESPONSE 8: Yes.

QUESTION 9: Amendment 3 added an objective 4 for strengthening capacities to ensure social inclusion and healthy urbanization. Does the addition of this objective impact the anticipated budget for this contract?

RESPONSE 9: No.

QUESTION 10: The original proposal in L.4.c.5 required that hard copies be submitted one week after the electronic copy. In the Q&A for amendment 3, Q&A 33 confirmed that the hard copies must be received NLT Jan 9, 2015. Will USAID allow one week for delivery of hard copies and change the deadline to Jan 13, 2015?

RESPONSE 10: Deadline changed to the January 12, 2015.

Additional links to workshops under INVEST are provided below:

https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0ByS15Zw6‐BC8amt0MEFjekVLQ00&usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0ByS15Zw6‐BC8RFFDU1FpV2Z5cFU&usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0Bwzg4PTJfsf0akl5VTkwazRqUjA&usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0Bwzg4PTJfsf0dHZnc1RsenJOOEk&usp=sharing_eid&invite=CPK4vu8E https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B842iSOZ0W7KY01MTFRCVE42bTQ&usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0Bwzg4PTJfsf0akl5VTkwazRqUjA&usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0Bwzg4PTJfsf0dHZnc1RsenJOOEk&usp=sharing_eid&invite=CPK4vu8E https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B842iSOZ0W7KeUM1cmNKM1JhM3M&usp=drive_web

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .