The file's text, extracted by GovTribe without its formatting.
CBSI M&E IQC RFP QUESTIONS & ANSWERS
SECTION B
| 1 |
| Section B.10(e) describes USAID’s anticipated actions in the event a Contractor is found to have an organizational conflict of interest that would exclude them from bidding on a particular TO. Assuming that only two firms are awarded this IQC, can it be inferred that any organizational COI will result in sole-sourcing a given TO to the remaining holder? |
| Awarding a task order on a sole source basis is an option; however, it is not the only option available to USAID since we reserve the right to solicit sources outside of the IQC framework to fulfill a requirement. |
| 2 |
| With regards to Section B.10 (e), could USAID please clarify under what conditions subcontractors would be found to hold an organizational COI and whether that would effect the prime contract holder’s opportunity to bid on TOs. |
| The prime contractor or subcontractor will not be able to evaluate projects/programs implemented by the prime or subcontractor. If an instance like this surface, the prime contractor will not be able to partner with the subcontractor on that particular task order but can partner with a different subcontractor. |
| 3 |
| Would USAID please clarify the percentage amount of the fixed fee that the task order’s estimated cost may not exceed that is mentioned in section B.11.(a)? |
| Offerors are supposed to propose a ceiling on the fixed fee in the cost proposals submitted in response to this RFP. The negotiated ceiling will be added to Section B.11 (a) after contract negotiations are final. |
| 4 |
| Under Section B.5 – Estimated Cost, Fixed Fee payment and Obligated Amount (pg. B-1), could USAID clarify if the initial obligation funds in the amount of $____ is equal to $25,000 per the language in section B.3 – Minimum Obligated Amount – to cover the minimum order guarantee. |
| USAID will complete the actual obligation amount at the time the funds are obligated in the basic contract. This information is not necessary for the solicitation phase. |
| 5 |
| Will USAID provide the Offeror a local compensation plan in accordance with Section B.6 – Labor – Section (d)(1) and (2) when Task Orders are released and specific missions require a local compensation plan. |
| Yes, USAID will provide Offerors with a local compensation plan when task orders are released and specific missions require a local compensation plan. |
SECTION C
| 6 |
| Among the deliverables mentioned in section C.3 is “the compilation of an inventory (last five years) of all studies/assessments/evaluations conducted in the CBSI targeted countries, addressing the identified CBSI programmatic areas”. Would USAID please clarify: 1)the specific time frame for the documents that the contractor would be expected to review and; 2) whether Missions (and implementers if applicable) in the difference CBSI countries would be able to provide some of the studies and assessments they have used in the past to inform some of their interventions |
| a) As stated in the description of this requirement, studies, assessments, and evaluations conducted in the last five years should be collected. |
b) Yes, missions may be able to provide some of the studies and assessment they have used in the past; however, the USAID TO COTR will not be responsible for coordination.
| 7 |
| Among the deliverables mentioned in section C.3 is “a social justice index, developed at the beginning of the award period, will be an additional monitoring tool that will be used as part of the CBSI M&E effort”. Would USAID please clarify whether they foresee particular countries where this index would be more critical to the successful monitoring of CBSI-funded activities? |
| The Dominican Republic, Jamaica, Guyana and Barbados are the biggest priorities. |
| 8 |
| Among the deliverables mentioned in section C.3 are “mid-term performance evaluations, to be conducted with the objective of providing CBSI stakeholders with an opportunity for mid-project course correction, guidance and direction”. Could USAID please clarify: 1) how many performance evaluations it expects to conduct over the next five years; 2) where it expects to conduct the mid-term performance evaluations; 3) if the distinct lead assigned to some of the CBSI countries will influence the type of evaluation conducted in that country; 4) which specific stakeholders the performance evaluations are aimed at (i.e. USAID Staff, host country government); and 4) whether the primary and secondary audiences included in the Branding Strategy on p. D2 will also use evaluations’ findings? |
| This will be an indefinite delivery contract and USAID’s definitive requirements will not be known or communicated to contractors until task orders are issued. That said, the answers to parts 1 and 2 of this question can be found in section C.4. 3) The decisions regarding the type of evaluations that need to be performed in each country and on each program are jointly made by the IQC Contracting Officer’s Representative and the POC for each project. 4) USAID is a stakeholder interested in the results of all the performance evaluations. Additional stakeholders will be defined for each performance evaluation as part of the task order issuing process. 5) USAID cannot determine whether or how the primary and secondary audiences will use the evaluation findings. The interest level will vary according to the project evaluated and the environment in the cooperating country. |
| 9 |
| Among the deliverables mentioned in section C.3 is a “rigorous quasi-experimental impact evaluation” of the Dominican Republic At-Risk Youth Program. Could USAID please clarify: 1) the criteria by which this IE can be defined as rigorous; 2) what is meant by the “relevance of objectives to implementing partners; 3) what the rationale behind the distinction between resources and inputs is; 4) what kind of gender analysis framework USAID would like to the evaluation to use; and 5) what the most common gender analysis framework used in the region is? |
| 1) Per USAID evaluation policy “an impact evaluation measures the change in a development outcome that is attributable to a defined intervention. Evaluations based on models of cause and effect and require a credible and rigorous (accurately/ precisely) defined counterfactual to control for factor other than the intervention that might account for the observed change. |
2) Please disregard implementing partners.
3) This question will be answered when the request for task order proposals is issued for this evaluation requirement.
4) The terms are synonymous – there is no distinction.
5) USAID's approach to gender analysis of programs and projects is built around two key questions:
How will the different roles and status of women and men within the community, political sphere, workplace, and household (for example, roles in decision-making and different access to and control over resources and services) affect the work to be undertaken?
How will the anticipated results of the work affect women and men differently?
A Good gender analysis should provide:
Gender Awareness ‐ Understanding of Gender Relations and their Implications for Development Policy and Implementation Analysis of the Division of Labor ‐ Activities, Access and Control A Review of Women’s Priorities: Restraining and Driving Forces Recommendations to Address Women’s Practical Needs and/or Strategic Interests. Offerors can use their judgment on the best and most appropriate method to use to conduct the gender analysis.
| 10 |
| Among the deliverables mentioned in section C.3. are “final performance evaluations”. Would USAID clarify whether these evaluations need to be conducted on the same programs as the mid-term performance evaluations mentioned above? |
| USAID only anticipates conducting one mid-term evaluation for a CBSI project. Please refer to section C.4 to see a list of USAID’s anticipated projects requiring mid-term and program evaluations. |
| 11 |
| In section C.4 number 4 it is mentioned that the contractor will be responsible for “two English oral presentations of the evaluation results”. Could USAID please clarify whether the presentations will need to be done in each of the countries where the evaluation took place and what stakeholders would need to be involved? |
| USAID will be able to answer these questions if and when a task order is issued for this anticipated mid-term evaluation. |
| 12 |
| In section C.4 number 5, USAID provides an illustrative list of the projects that may require a performance evaluation. According to the new evaluation policy, at least one performance evaluation is required for the largest intervention falling under each Development Objective. What are the other criteria that would make a performance evaluation of CBSI interventions “required”? |
| Offerors should only be concerned about the evaluations listed in this section. |
| 13 |
| The note to number 6 in section C.4 states that “some programs may have individual evaluations planned and therefore the work of the contractor, through the Task Order COR, shall ensure that there is no duplication in its evaluation work but shall use the results of such local evaluations to guide its overall work to the maximum extent practicable”. Could USAID please share what evaluations have already been planned, when they are expected to take place, and when findings will be disseminated? |
| No, USAID is not able to share this information at this stage in the process. This is an appropriate question once requirements are clearly defined for specific evaluations and requests for task order proposals are issued. |
| 14 |
| In Section C.4 number 7, it is stated that “the contractor shall aggregate and analyze the qualitative and quantitative data collected on common CBSI indicators by all CBSI projects.” Could USAID please inform offerors whether a list of common CBSI indicators for all CBSI projects already exists or does this section refer to the list which the contractor will develop? |
| USAID is establishing common CBSI indicators and all CBSI-funded projects will report on the applicable indicators. The contractor will not be required to draft indicators. |
| 15 |
| Could USAID please clarify whether any TOs are anticipated to require the establishment of a field-based office? |
| At this time, USAID does not anticipate any task orders requiring the establishment of a field-based office. |
| 16 |
| In Section C.4 number 7, it is stated that “the contractor shall aggregate and analyze the qualitative and quantitative data collected on common CBSI indicators by all CBSI projects.” Could USAID please inform offerors whether a list of common CBSI indicators for all CBSI projects already exists or does this section refer to the list which the contractor will develop?Section H.1(a) states that the “Contactor shall be ineligible to furnish as a prime or subcontractor or otherwise, implementation services under any contract or task order that results in response to findings, proposals, or recommendations in the evaluation report within 18 months of USAID accepting the report. We respectfully suggest that USAID consider reducing this period of ineligibility. |
| USAID/DR will not reduce the period of ineligibility. This is an agency-wide policy and mandatory, standard language required for evaluation services. |
| 17 |
| On p. C-1, the background Info states that “The first year of CBSI funding includes $14 million to strengthen Caribbean partners’ ability to control… and $20 million to be implemented by USAID in crime prevention programs that build on previous USAID efforts…” What are the yearly funding allocations for all programs under CBSI for years 2-5? |
| USAID does not have and will not provide the yearly funding allocations for all CBSI programs for years 2-5. |
| 18 |
| On p C-2, the Background Info states that “The CARICOM Secretariat will receive a small grant… to gather best practices on youth programming in the region and help strengthen the capacity of CARICOM countries…” as well as that “The CARICOM Directorate of Human and Social Development has access to and will gather data that is potentially useful for the CBSI M&E effort; thus, the Contractor is encouraged to leverage CARICOM as an important information resources.”When will this data, collected by the CARICOM Secretariat and Directorate, be available to the Contractor? |
| USAID will be able to discuss specific details about this and share information once task order(s) are in place for evaluations needed on programs in the Organization of Eastern Caribbean States countries. |
| 19 |
| What are the expectations with respect to the design and implementation of the evaluation framework since it is no longer an expected deliverable? |
| Because one contractor will no longer implement all of the necessary CBSI evaluations as part of one award, an evaluation framework is not included as a deliverable for the basic IQC or illustrative task order. Any evaluation frameworks will be requested as part of the SOW in task order requests for proposals. |
| 20 |
| Are you expecting that a single Social Justice Index (SJI) will be used for all twelve targeted countries? Or might there be minor variations in national SJIs to account for different cultural/political/social factors? |
| Offerors should propose what would be most convenient given the cultural, political and social variations in each country. |
| 21 |
| Do any of the CBSI programs have direct third party (EU, Canada, IDB, Japanese, Chinese, World Bank, etc.) participation? If so, will their records/personnel be available for review purposes? |
| No, the CBSI programs do not have direct third party participation. In case a third party participates in any future CBSI implementation activities, Offerors should not expect to be able to review records/ personnel. |
| 22 |
| What minimum/maximum length of time do you anticipate the quasi-experimental impact evaluations to be conducted for comparison purposes with the Dominican Republic At-Risk Youth project? |
| The DR At-Risk Youth Initiative will be a five-year initiative and ideally a parallel contract mechanism for the impact evaluation will be put in place at or around the same time the project is awarded. Detailed information about the impact evaluation will be provided during the task order solicitation process. |
| 23 |
| Do you anticipate that any of the programs here (such as the "A Ganar" program) will be extended to additional targeted countries during the life of this review process? If so, will they be included in the review process? |
| No, we do not anticipate any of the programs, even if extended to additional target countries, being included in the review process. |
| 24 |
| In general, are the findings/results of recent non USG funded studies/assessments/evaluations in targeted countries held at the national/local level or is there a central clearinghouse - either on-line or in the form of physical documents. |
| USAID is not aware and the Contractor is expected to research and locate any available information. |
| 25 |
| Haiti is listed as one of the 15 countries in the CBSI, however there is no mention of Haiti in the SOW. Would Haiti be included in the project, and if so, in what capacity? |
| This appears to be a question related to the previous solicitation. The current RFP explicitly states that Haiti is excluded from the monitoring and evaluation activities covered under this contract. |
SECTION F
| 26 |
| Under F.5(a), we understand we are able to provide the IQC Manager as Key Personnel. Please clarify whether personnel referenced under F.5(d) are also to be provided as Key Personnel as part of our proposal here, or whether that is just illustrative for future task orders. |
| No specific personnel positions were referenced under F.5(d) in the RFP. USAID added this section for future task orders in case future request for task order proposals specify key personnel positions. |
| 27 |
| F.3 Section lists no Key Personnel. Please advise on the preferred Key Personnel positions and profiles. |
| This question seems to refer to the previously posted solicitation. Please read section F.5 Key Personnel for the position identified for the Basic IQC. USAID is not prescribing the education and experience qualifications for personnel. |
| 28 |
| Could USAID please clarify if additional key personnel will be evaluated for the IQC other than the IQC Manager listed under F.5 – Key Personnel (pg. F-2). If so, could USAID please provide a position description and or qualifications needed for these individuals? |
| No, additional key personnel will not be evaluated for the IQC. |
| 29 |
| Could USAID please provide information on the qualifications needed for the Key Personnel described on page F-2, IQC Manager. |
| In accordance with the principles of performance based acquisitions, USAID made a conscious decision to not prescribe qualifications for the IQC Manager. |
SECTIONS H AND I
| 30 |
| Do all consultants working on the project have to earn less than the maximum threshold, or does that only apply to USAID contract employees? Do they also have to earn above the minimum? |
| The maximum threshold only applies to the employees of the USAID contractor. With respect to the minimum, the employees should be paid in accordance with the contractor’s personnel policies and the employee’s salary history. USAID does not dictate minimum salaries. |
| 31 |
| Does this restriction apply to firm fixed price tasks, or only cost plus fixed fee tasks? |
| AIDAR clause 752.7007 Personnel Compensation (July 2007) is applicable to cost reimbursement task orders. |
| 32 |
| In the regulations I noticed that executive salaries are considered as part of indirect labor. What constitutes an “executive” and are executive level staff able to work on the project without the need to get an exception approved? |
| Per FAR Clause 52.204-10, Executive means officers, managing partners, or any other employees in management positions. Executives that have a direct implementation or management role on the project do not need an exception to recover direct labor costs. |
| 33 |
| Does the threshold also extend to any subject matter experts subcontracted as advisors? |
| Please refer to AIDAR clause 752.7007 Personnel Compensation (July 2007) in section H of the RFP. This threshold applies to the employees of the USAID contractor. |
| 34 |
| Will the implementing contractor be restricted from implementing other CBSI initiatives? All CBSI initiatives, or just those applicable to countries where an assessment has been performed? |
| The contractor will be restricted from implementing any CBSI project that is to be evaluated by the contractor. One of the successful IQC contractors will be responsible for writing a report summarizing the regional impact of all the CBSI initiatives (using data gathered from actual evaluations conducted and data gathered from performance reports on CBSI standard indicators for all projects – including those not evaluated by the contractor. As such, in order to ensure an independent regional impact report, it would be prudent for USAID to restrict that contractor from implementing any CBSI activities that will be represented. |
| 35 |
| On page H-1, Section H.2, Source, Origin and National Requirements, states that the authorized geographic code for this procurement is 000. While we understand that this allows for local procurement of goods and services, it does not seem to allow for the use of regional subcontractors (organizations in one of the covered countries) to work across a variety of the other countries. This may be particularly important both in terms of building local expertise as well as for cost containment. Would USAID therefore consider changing this to a 935 Geo Code? |
| Please refer to H.9 Authorized Geographic Code where it lists the geographic codes 000, 517, 532, and 538. |
SECTION L
| 36 |
| Section L.3 states “The Government may elect to award a single delivery order contract or task order contract or to award two delivery order contracts or task order contracts for the same or similar supplies or services to two or more sources under this solicitation.” Could USAID please clarify (using examples) how it would award two task order contracts to two or more sources for the same services? |
| USAID can award Contractor X and Contractor Y an indefinite quantity contract (a.k.a. task order contract) in response to this CBSI M&E Services RFP. Once both contractors are awarded the contracts, they can compete for individual task orders to provide the same services. |
| 37 |
| Section L.6 (a) states that the USG anticipates “awarding approximately two contracts and two small business set aside(s) as a result of this solicitation” yet in the cover letter it is stated that USAID intends to award the contract only to two US small businesses. Could USAID please clarify how many contracts it intends to award and any many small businesses it will award to? |
| The language in Section L.6(a) is correctly stated. We anticipate awarding exactly two contracts and both of those contracts will go to two small businesses. |
| 38 |
| Section L.8(b) states that “Offerors shall describe the unique skills that the prime Contractor and each subcontractor contributes”. If subcontractors (and the prime contractor) have overlapping capabilities and skills (for example, in evaluation), should only one of them be identified as having said skill? Or are offerors free to expand upon the capabilities of the prime and subcontractors even if they overlap to some degree? |
| Offerors are welcome to expand upon the capabilities of the prime and subcontractors even if they overlap. |
| 39 |
| Section L.8(b) states that “Offerors must also describe their capacity to and experience with managing complex, long-term monitoring and evaluation projects…” Please confirm that this is grammatically correct and that offerors are not expected to describe their capacity to do something other than managing complex M&E projects. |
| This is grammatically correct and Offerors are only expected to describe their capacity to manage complex, long-term monitoring & evaluation projects, manage risk, and fulfill the requirements of multiple stakeholders with competing priorities. |
| 40 |
| Section L.8(b) states “all areas of Section C must be addressed through past examples, anticipated plans, and narratives of corporate capability and standards.” Corporate/ institutional capabilities are reflected though past performance and work the offeror has already completed. Taking this into consideration, would USAID please clarify what it means by “anticipated plans” since this is understood to mean work the offeror has not yet undertaken. |
| Including the term anticipated plans refers to the fact that Offerors may want to describe their technical and management ideas, strategies, and/or approaches with USAID regarding how they will meet the requirements outlined in the RFP. |
| 41 |
| Section L.8 (c)(ii) states that Offerors shall provide two 2-page resumes that demonstrate access to technical expertise to perform the work set forth in the Statement of Work for each Senior and Mid-Level labor category position proposed. Could USAID please clarify: 1) whether it will only accept two resumes total from the offerors; 2) whether it would like offerors to propose two resumes (one for Senior Level and one for Mid-Level) for each individual labor category proposed; 3)whether it would like offerors to submit four resumes (two for Senior Level and two for Mid-Level) for each labor category; and 4) whether there is a limit to the total number of resumes that can be submitted? |
| USAID is requesting two 2-page resumes for each senior-level labor category position and two 2-page resumes for each mid-level labor category position proposed. Offerors are limited to the number of resumes based on the guidance in Section L.8 and the number of labor categories proposed. |
| 42 |
| Section L.8 (c)(ii) states that Offerors shall provide two 2-page resumes that demonstrate access to technical expertise to perform the work set forth in the Statement of Work for each Senior and Mid-Level labor category position proposed. Could USAID please clarify how it defines senior and mid level personnel in terms of years of experience and degree requirements? |
| USAID will not define senior-level and mid-level positions in terms of education or numbers of years of experience. Offerors have the discretion and latitude to make that human resources decision. |
| 43 |
| Section L.8 (c)(i) states that Offerors need to propose an IQC Manager. Could USAID please clarify the qualifications it expects the IQC Manager to posses. |
| In keeping with performance based acquisition principles, USAID does not have minimum qualifications for the IQC manager. Offerors are encouraged to propose their best candidates for this position. |
| 44 |
| Section L.8 (e) states that Offerors are required to submit a “sample progress report” as an annex. Can USAID please describe this progress report in greater detail and clarify what progress will need be reported? |
| The successful contractor that implements this illustrative task order will be required to report on the status of the deliverables at regularly scheduled intervals (no less than quarterly). The sample progress report proposed by the Offeror should be a template of a progress report the Offeror will propose to use to keep the COR and Contracting Officer informed about progress made toward completing deliverables. |
| 45 |
| Section L.8 (e)(2) states that “The proposal should provide a clear and coherent approach and methodology, as well as a realistic implementation work plan (including a timeline, schedule milestones and required resources)”. Can USAID please clarify: 1) the difference between the timeline and schedule milestones; and 2) whether “requested resources” refers to financial resources and Offerors are expected to address cost issues within the technical proposal? |
| 1) A timeline is a schedule or timetable and a milestone is a significant event or stage in the progress or development of deliverables. |
2) ‘Resources’ refer to non-financial resources (staff, information, etc.)
| 46 |
| Section L.9 (B)(b) states that “The Offeror must provide in-depth details of the proposed costs/prices to allow a complete analysis of costs. The Offeror may also include an executive summary in the cost proposal.” Can USAID please clarify what must be included in an executive summary to the cost proposal and whether there is a page limit? |
| An executive summary is not required and USAID does not have specific content requirements and there is no page limit; however, USAID does not anticipate an executive summary exceeding one page. There is no page limit on the cost proposal. |
| 47 |
| Section L.9 (B)(c)(5) states that BOEs must “identify specific key ground rules and assumptions”. Can USAID please provide some guidance (in the form of examples) as to what a “key ground rules” or “assumptions” are? |
| If applicable, Offerors should outline any basic or governing principles of conduct or suppositions in relation to the deliverables. (e.g. The costs of in-country transportation are low because the contractor assumes that public buses in Barbados are safe and will therefore be used to the maximum extent possible to travel to meetings and the hotel. |
| 48 |
| Section L.9 (B)(c)(5) states that costs of the Branding and Marking Plan should be included? Can USAID please provide further guidance on how to cost the Branding and Marking Plan? |
| Offerors should read ADS 320, the branding strategy, and their own branding implementation plan and anticipated costs associated with branding and marking. Offerors should propose the costs as a separate line item and provide a justification in the budget narrative. |
| 49 |
| Please confirm that USAID wants Offerors to propose their own set of labor categories, and not against a specific set of labor categories defined by USAID, in terms of experience, skills and education. This approach may present difficulties in evaluating the technical and financial comparability of each offeror’s labor categories, both at the IQC and task order levels. |
| Yes, USAID wants Offerors to propose their own set of labor categories and not against a specific set of labor categories defined by USAID. |
| 50 |
| Please confirm that USAID requires pricing for senior, mid-level, and junior levels for each labor category to be proposed. |
| USAID requires pricing for senior, mid-level, and junior level positions for each labor category proposed. |
| 51 |
| Per L.8 (c)(ii) Personnel: Should offerors provide two candidates for each labor category it is proposing. If yes, please confirm one should be Senior level and the other a Mid level candidate. |
| Offerors should provide two candidates for each senior level and mid-level labor category proposed. USAID expects two representative resumes for the senior-level positions and two representative resumes for the mid-level positions. |
| 52 |
| Please confirm labor category candidates can be TCNs. |
| Labor category candidates can be Third Country Nationals (TCNs). |
| 53 |
| Per L.8 (d): Is there a particular format or template you would like offeros to present their past performance information in? |
| USAID does not require a particular format but Offerors are advised to ensure that all the required content is included in the past performance information. |
| 54 |
| Please confirm that there is no narrative on past performance needed in the Basic IQC page limit? |
| There is not narrative on past performance needed in the Basic IQC page limit. |
| 55 |
| Can the Task Order Contractor Past Performance Information include the same projects listed in the Basic IQC Contractor Performance Information? |
| Yes, the task order contractor past performance information may include the same projects listed in the Basic IQC Contractor performance information. |
| 56 |
| Per L.9 (c) Please confirm resumes should also be be included in the Cost Proposal. |
| Resumes and biodata should be included in the cost proposal for the labor categories proposed for the illustrative task order. |
| 57 |
| Within Task Orders released under the IQC for a Firm Fixed Price budget (or, Given the Firm Fixed Price budget,) with the burden of risk on the contractor to complete tasks within the budget ceiling, would USAID accept a budget that provides summary level information only for direct labor, ODCs, and fee? |
| USAID will accept a budget that provides summary level information and an accompanying detailed budget narrative; however, USAID may require a further breakdown of summary level costs if an adequate price analysis cannot be conducted based on the information provided by the contractors. |
| 58 |
| Is the Offeror correct in interpreting pages L 5 and L 7 as requiring two separate technical and cost proposals – one for the overall IDIQ and the other for the initial Task Order? If so, please provide guidance on the Technical Proposal requirements for the Illustrative Task Order RFP response. |
| Yes, the Offeror is correct in interpreting that two separate technical and cost proposal information is required for the IDIQ and the illustrative task order. Specific technical and cost proposal instructions are already included in the issued RFP. Please thoroughly read sections L.8 and L.9. |
| 59 |
| On Page L-4, (Section L.7 Proposal and Submission Information) the RFTOP indicates that proposals should be submitted to drrco@usaid.gov, however elsewhere it states that proposals should be submitted to aangulo@usaid.gov. Would USAID please confirm which email address we should submit proposals to? |
| All proposals should be submitted to drrco@usaid.gov. Based on USAID’s review of the RFP, aangulo@usaid.gov is listed in the cover letter to identify the e-mail address for potential Offerors to submit questions and twice in section L.7 as part of the information provided about the Point of Contact for this RFP and again to remind potential Offerors to submit questions to aangulo@usaid.gov. |
| 60 |
| Could USAID provide an estimate total cost for the Illustrative Task Order RFP in Section L.8 – Technical Proposal Instructions- Section (f) (page L-7). |
| USAID is not disclosing the budget since it is a firm fixed price type contract. The expectation is that Offerors will propose fixed prices for every line item. |
| 61 |
| Would USAID please clarify the difference between the ceiling price and the target price? |
| All three references to target prices are typographical errors and the term target should be deleted. |
| 62 |
| Could USAID please confirm the number of IQC awards they plan on issuing. |
| USAID plans on issuing two IQC awards. |
| 63 |
| Could USAID please confirm the number of Past Performance Records the Offeror must submit with the Illustrative Task Order as noted on page L-8. |
| Offerors must submit up to five of the most recent and relevant contracts for efforts similar to the work in the illustrative task order. |
| 64 |
| Could USAID please clarify the Personnel that is to be submitted with the IQC Proposal itself and with the Illustrative Task Order as per Section L.8 (c)(ii) and (f) 2 on pages L-6 and L-9, respectively. |
| Section L.8 (c)(ii) instructs Offerors to propose labor categories necessary to perform the work described in the Basic IQC proposal. Section L.8 (f) 3) instructs Offerors to propose key personnel with the relevant knowledge skills and abilities…to carry out the work in the illustrative task order. |
| 65 |
| Could USAID please provide the total ceiling amount for the Firm Fixed Price Illustrative Task Order as per Section L.9 – Instructions for the Preparation of the Price Proposal, Section (5) on page L-10. |
| USAID is not disclosing the budget since it is a firm fixed price type contract. The expectation is that Offerors will propose fixed prices for every task/ deliverable. |
| 66 |
| Given our request for a Firm Fixed Price budget, and should USAID accept this request (or, Given the Firm Fixed Price budget,) with the burden of risk on the contractor to complete tasks within the budget ceiling, would USAID accept a budget that provides summary level information only for direct labor, ODCs, and fee? |
| USAID will accept a budget that provides summary level information and an accompanying detailed budget narrative; however, USAID may require a further breakdown of summary level costs if an adequate price analysis cannot be conducted based on the information provided by the contractors. |
| 67 |
| Can Offerors propose a staffing structure which differs from the RFTOP in terms of key personnel, applicable labor categories, and roles? |
| USAID cannot answer questions regarding the proposal requirements for future RFTOPs. This question should be posed at the time that a RFTOP is released that specifies key personnel, labor categories, and roles. |
| 68 |
| Please provide the responsibilities of each labor category currently provided for under the RFTOP. |
| There is no labor category currently specified under the illustrative task order or basic IQC. |
| 69 |
| Given the very brief period between question, submission, response by USAID with answers, and the January 20th due date, would USAID extend the submission deadline by 3-4 weeks? |
| USAID synopsized and solicited the same requirements for a different contract type more than 60 days ago. None of the questions or answers prompted substantive changes in the content of the RFP. The proposal due date has been extended to January 24, 2012 at 5:00 p.m. |
SECTION M
| 70 |
| Section M.4.(a) states that Offerors will be evaluated according to the “soundness, feasibility, and efficacy of proposed knowledge-sharing and networking solution”. Can USAID please clarify what it means by “networking solution” and be clearer as to what this refers to? |
| Please refer to Section C.3 #6 of the IQC or illustrative task order. The knowledge-sharing and networking solution necessary is purposely described in broad terms to describe what USAID needs without prescribing how contractors need to meet our requirement. |
| 71 |
| Section M.5 states that “Proposed costs shall be evaluated for target price reasonableness, completeness, allowability, allocability and the competitiveness of the target profit proposed. This analysis is intended to determine the degree to which the costs included in the price proposal are fair and reasonable. An overall evaluated price (target price plus target profit) will be determined and will be used as part of the tradeoff analysis in determining source selection.” Could USAID please clarify how it will determine “reasonableness, completeness, allowablity and allocablity” and how it conducts its tradeoff analysis? |
| Please refer to FAR Part 31.2 and Far Part 15 to get an understanding of cost allowability, reasonableness, completeness, and allocability. USAID does not have additional information about the tradeoff analysis to share with Offerors beyond the relative weights provided in the selection criteria. |
| 72 |
| The evaluation factor for price/cost (m.5) refers to “target price” and “target profit”. Please confirm these terms are no longer relevant to the newly issued RFP’s cost elements and methodology. |
| The terms target price and target profit are no longer relevant. They should be price and profit. |
ILLUSTRATIVE TASK ORDER
| 73 |
| In Attachment 1 Section C.2, the services the contractor is responsible for begin starting at number 7. Could the Mission please clarify that services #1-6 have not been eliminated. |
| This is a typographical error in the numbering and no services have been eliminated. The services included are the only ones being solicited in the illustrative task order. |
| 74 |
| In Attachment 1 Section C.2, the SOW for the illustrative Task Order is identical to many of the tasks required under the SOW (section C.3) for the IQC. Can the Mission please clarify whether offerors are expected to submit a separate technical proposal to address the Illustrative Task Order or will its response to the IQC be considered sufficient since the SOWs for both are nearly identical? Moreover several of the Deliverables listed in section C.3 of the Illustrative Task Order are also included in the SOW. Can USAID please clarify how these differ? |
| Offerors are expected to submit a separate technical proposal to address the illustrative task order. The response to the IQC will not be considered sufficient, since the instructions for the technical proposals for the IQC and illustrative task order are not identical. (e.g. the IQC proposal requires a narrative addressing the Offerors’ corporate capability, but the illustrative task order proposal requires a narrative approach addressing the technical approach.). The tasks listed in the IQC are to give Offerors information about anticipated requirements, but the tasks in the illustrative proposal are definite requirements that we anticipate awarding in a subsequent task order. |
| 75 |
| On the second page of the Illustrative TO Section C, please explain the difference between deliverables 1 and 2. |
| Deliverable 1 is a list of studies/assessments/evaluations and Deliverable 2 are the actual studies/assessments/evaluations. |