SOL-520-12-000005 - Amend 2 .pdf

2. Standard Form 33, Box 9 delete “0” and substitute with the following:

“one (1) original and two (2) copies of the Technical Proposal as well as one (1) original and (1) copy of the Cost/Business Proposal.”

3. Section C.2 Background, Country Context, third paragraph, first sentence delete in its entirety and substitute as follows:

“The National Food and Nutritional Security Strategy (PESAN) 2009-2012 has five components1 : (1) Food Availability, (2) Food Accessibility, (3) Food Consumption, (4) Food Utilization, and (5) Program Coordination.”

4. Section H.12 Key Personnel, Program Monitoring and Evaluation Specialist, Education, delete in its entirety and substitute as follows:

“Education: Required Master degree or equivalent in Economics (or related areas but which strong demonstrated experience in monitoring and evaluation), PH.D. is preferred.”

5. Section H.12 Key Personnel, Program Monitoring and Evaluation Specialist, Experience, delete item No. 2 in its entirety and substitute as follows:

“Must have demonstrated technical expertise, ample field of experience, and relevant technical background in evaluating rural development and nutrition programs; in addition knowledge in environment would be preferred.

6. Section H.17 Grants under Contracts, delete item “a” in its entirety and substitute as follows:

“a. The Offeror may propose the amount of each subaward most effective to its own strategy, taking into consideration that the total value of any individual grant to any US non-governmental organization shall not exceed $100,000.”

7. Section H.17 Grants under Contracts, add the following language at the end of item “b”:

“Threshold in only for simplified and fixed obligation grants, there is no restriction on standard grants for non-US non-governmental organizations.

8. Section L.8 Instruction for the preparation of the Technical Proposal, (2) Management plan and staffing,

c) Staffing plan and key personnel, Program Monitoring and Evaluation Specialist, Education, delete in its entirety and substitute as follows:

“Education: Required Master degree or equivalent in Economics (or related areas but which strong demonstrated experience in monitoring and evaluation), PH.D. is preferred.”

9. Section L.8 Instruction for the preparation of the Technical Proposal, (2) Management plan and staffing,

c) Staffing plan and key personnel, Program Monitoring and Evaluation Specialist, Experience, delete item No. 2 in its entirety and substitute as follows:

“Must have demonstrated technical expertise, ample field of experience, and relevant technical background in evaluating rural development and nutrition programs; in addition knowledge in environment would be preferred.”

10. Attachment 2 to this RFP Amendment 2, includes information of the GOG Climate Change Policy.

-- END OF THIS AMENDMENT --

PAGE NO.

SOLICITATION/CONTRACT NO. ORDER NO. AMENDMENT NO.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (CONTINUED)

STANDARD FORM 30 (CONTINUATION)

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

CONTINUATION PAGE

SOL-520-12-000005 02

Request for Proposal (RFP) No. SOL‐520‐12‐000005 Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Program

Amendment No. 2 Attachment No. 1

1. Canadian companies are eligible to bid on the following project?

Yes, this is a full an open competition, all responsible sources are permitted to compete, subject to the limitations to the RFP. In accordance with Section L.6 of the RFP, USAID reserves the right to perform a pre-award survey to any potential awardee if needed.

2. Given that the selected contractor will be involved in monitoring and evaluating the Economic Growth portfolio as well as other programs funded by USAID in Guatemala over a five year period, will the contractor and its subcontractors be excluded from bidding on new project opportunities that that would be subject to this monitoring and evaluation initiative?

As indicated in section H.25 of the RFP and the Contract Information Bulletin (CIB) 99- 17, the evaluation contractor will be precluded from furnishing implementation services, as a prime or subcontractor, that are required as a result of any findings, proposals, or recommendations, in the evaluation report within eighteen months of USAID’s acceptance of the evaluation report.

In additional, there are restrictions on the use of information obtained as a result of an evaluation.

If a subcontractor performs substantive evaluation work, the subcontractor shall be subject to the same restrictions as the prime contractor.

At this moment USAID has not deemed to process a waiver determining that preclusion of any contractor from implementation work would not be in the Government’s interest.

3. Given that potential interested organizations in this solicitation might also have USAID-funded projects in the associated technical areas, can USAID please clarify how it plans to resolve any potential conflict of interests for these organizations?

See answer to question No. 2.

4. Component 3 of the Scope of Work contemplates the establishment of a web-based MIS system and database for use by USAID and its implementing partners. Does USAID anticipate that the website and database will be an official USAID website, initially operated and maintained by the contractor or a website that is external, but linked to the USAID network? Will the server on which the database is housed be located within the Mission or at an off-site location in Guatemala? Will the website and database be subject to USAID and US Embassy security protocols?

USAID recommends that the contractor establish and maintain an official project web-based website that is external, kept at an off-site local and subject to USAID, State Department of US Embassy security protocols.

5. Does USAID require a database platform that would exclude certain types of database software, while focusing the design on more commonly used platforms such as Oracle, SQL or Access?

No

6. Can USAID provide information about the anticipated number of users of the database system (from within USAID as well as outside users and implementing partners)?

USAID anticipates that implementing partners, USAID staff and limited outside users would access the data base system and estimates that approximately 100 users, in total would be a reasonable estimate.

7. Can USAID provide any guidance as to the relative weighting of the Feed the Future/Agribusiness and the Global Climate Change programs as well as other programs that are being implemented within the Economic Growth Office portfolio? What other sectors or activities are or will be included within the EOG portfolio? Can USAID provide the approximate start-up, mid-point and final points of the Feed the Future, Global Climate Change and other programs?

This is a multi-part question. As to relative weights, approximately 60% of the total M&E contract cost will be assumed by Economic Growth Office resources. Of this 60%, approximately 65% of the total cost and effort would be allocated to Feed the Future and the balance (35%) to Global Climate Change-funded activities. The EGO portfolio will include a future Environmental project that may possibly include an Economic Observatory. Here are the approximate start up dates for the FTF and Environmental projects: Feed the Future (Rural Value Chains Project): Award on/before May 2012, mid-term evaluation Nov. 2014 and final evaluation May 2017. Global Climate Change/Environment Project: Award October 2012, mid-term evaluation mid-April 2015 and final evaluation October 2017.

8. The implementation of the M&E Program will require, in addition to the two key personnel, several different long-term and short-term consulting skill sets. Would USAID provide any guidance as to these additional skill sets? Is there any limit on the number of consultant CVs that a bidder may include in its proposal?

No additional information will be provided regarding additional skill sets, USAID will evaluate the approach proposed by each offeror as part of the management plan and staffing. Proposed key personnel shall be in accordance with ADS 302.3.5.4.

There is no limit on the number of consultant CVs that the bidder can include in its proposal. Per information in Section L.8 of the RFP, biographical information including CVs are not included in the 40 page limit of the technical proposal.

9. Section M of the Solicitation specifies that the three major categories of evaluation criteria are presented in descending order of importance. Can USAID provide a weighting factor (in percentage terms) for each of the three categories, to enable the bidders to better know the relative importance that USAID places on each of these criteria?

USAID/Guatemala will not use weighting factors in percentage terms to evaluate this project, as indicated in section M.5 of the RFP, USAID will use an adjectival scoring system.

10. Can USAID confirm that technical proposal cover letter is not included in page limit?

Cover letter is not included in the page limit.

11. Please specify where the attachment “Disclosure of Lobbying activities” should be included (technical proposal or cost proposal), and whether it is required only from the prime contractor or also from subcontractors?

The disclosure of lobbying activities and all the certifications should be included as part of the cost proposal.

This form should be submitted for the prime and the identified subcontractors.

12. Please confirm that Evidence of Responsibility is to be submitted by the prime only, not by subcontractors?

Offerors are requested to submit Evidence of Responsibility only for the prime organization; however, USAID expects that offerors perform responsibility determination for the identified subcontractors. USAID may request additional information of the evidence of responsibility of the subcontractors to the offerors in the competitive range or the selected contractor.

13. Under what labor category personal security contractors should be budgeted and billed?

May these costs be budgeted and billed as ODCs?

Yes, these costs may be budgeted under ODCs. All costs should be clearly justified on the budget notes.

14. Please confirm that biographical data sheets are needed for all expatriate personnel (US and non-US) as well as for long and short term CCNs?

Biographical data sheets should be submitted for all the identified personnel (long term as well as short term).

15. The RFP is unclear as to whether the Contractor will be responsible for management of the PMP for the EG program or for the Mission-wide PMP. Could USAID please clarify what PMP(s) it envisions the successful bidder preparing?

The contractor will be required to develop and manage only the PMP for the EG program.

16. Standard Form 33 Box 9 indicates that offerors are to submit one original and “0 (zero) copies” of their proposals, while “Section L.7 (d)Number of hard copies, requires that offerors submit “one (1) original andtwo (2) copies of the Technical Proposal” as well as “one (1) original and (1) copy of the Cost/Business Proposal.” Can USAID please clarify how many copies of the Offeror’s Technical and Cost/Business proposals are to be submitted?

Offerors are requested to submit one (1) original and two (2) copies of the Technical Proposal as well as one (1) original and (1) copy of the Cost/Business Proposal.

Additionally, offerors are requested to submit electronic copies of the technical and cost proposals.

17. Section C.4, Component 4: Evaluations Conducted and Results Reported (pages 26 to 29), discusses the performance and impact evaluations to be performed by the successful bidder. Could USAID provide the number of overall evaluations it anticipates under this contract, disaggregated by impact and performance?

Please refer to section C.7 Tasks, Indicators and Expected Results, Component No. 4 (Page 37 of 156)

18. Expected Tasks a) and b) in Section C.4, Component 3: Clearinghouse for monitoring and evaluation developed and implemented (RFP page 26 of 156), discuss the web-based Management Information System (MIS) and web-based Geographic Information System (GIS) to be established and managed by the successful bidder. We would like to ask the following two questions about these systems:

a. Could you please clarify whether the Contractor is to develop the web-based MIS and GIS capabilities within the Mission. If not, where does USAID anticipate them being housed and managed once developed by the Contractor?

USAID/Guatemala staff has received some training, and while it would be useful for the Mission to have some enhanced capability, the objective is to have a web-based platform that partners, including the GOG can utilize. USAID does not have firm ideas where this platform should be housed once developed by the contractor and believes the contractor should propose its own ideas. Final decisions will be made during the course of the implementation of the project.

b. Who does USAID anticipate the MIS and GIS will be handed-off to at the conclusion of the contract?

USAID does not have a firm opinion on what organization or organizations would be good candidates to house the MIS and GIS platform upon completion of the contract.

19. “Section L.7 (d) Number of hard copies, stipulates that “Electronic copies and hard copies should be submitted not later than the date state in Block 9 of the SF 33 cover of this Solicitation.” Would USAID consider allowing an Offeror’s electronic submission to serve as the official filing of their proposal with hardcopies to follow as long as evidence is shown that the hardcopies were sent to USAID by the due date, for this proposal being shipped by April 30th?

No. Hard copies and electronic copies should be submitted not later than April 30, 2012 at 10:00 a.m. Guatemala time.

20. On Page 138 of the RFP, Section L.9 Instruction for Preparation of the Cost/ Business proposal, (e) Part 5 Subcontracting Plan, requires that offerors propose minimum 1% goals for each of the categories of Small Businesses, including "veteran owned small business, service-disabled veteran-owned small business, HUBZone small business, small disadvantaged business, and women-owned small business." Since these represent five different categories of businesses, offerors would be required to identify up to five different US Small Businesses for performance under this contract. This would have the effect of diminishing opportunities for subcontracting with local organizations, which would seem to be contrary to the goal of increasing local capacity, as well as increasing the administrative burden of managing several different US subcontractors.

Would USAID therefore consider changing the requirement to one overall minimum goal of 5% for any/all categories of Small Businesses combined?

USAID values the inclusion of small businesses and understands that finding the balance between local partners and US Small Business is challenging. The 5% small business goal can be met be any combination of the US small business categories.

21. On Page 11: According to the RFP, PESAN has five components. The numeration goes up to (6) but skips (5), is there a fifth component?

The numbering is incorrect, there are five components only.

22. In general the RFP is very vague regarding which data collection activities (social and environmental) are to be paid by the M&E Contractor, which are ongoing, which are paid by the Gov, which by other donors, … For instance, Page 20 of 156 numeral a) says “schedule, design, and carry out baseline, mid- and final-term surveys.” Can USAID/Guatemala provide any guidance in this regard as the specific expectations of the M&E Contractor?

The contractor will be required to gather data; however, there are some existing activities that will be gathering baseline data for a major impact evaluation of the Western Highlands Integrated Program (WHIP) that will be given to the successful contractor. This initial baseline work is being carried out by MEASURE, Inc. a USAID-funded activity.

23. On the same page (Page 2), section c) “establish a mechanism to be able to buy, through a third party organization, INE’s services as needed” needs clarification. What is the anticipated role of a third party organization?

USAID’s intention in this section is to encourage partners to access information, such as that held by INE or other governmental entities, through the most efficient mechanism.

24. Several links provided in the RFP do not seem to work (especially those of the agencies of the Guatemala’s Government), could these documents be provided as attachments? For example: http://www.marn.gob.gt/sub/portal_cambio_climatico/docs/politica_cc.pdf and http://www.sesan.gob.gt/plan_estrategico_de_san_2009-2012.html

Updated link for SESAN:

http://puntohot.com/sesan.gob.gt/pdfs/documentos/PESAN2012-1016.pdf. With respect to the GOG Climate Change Policy link, we are aware that the link is not working; this information is being included as the Attachment No. 2 of this RFP amendment.

25. On page 137 (Section L.9 (e)) “Part 5 – Subcontracting Plan” the RFP says “These plans must contain small business subcontracting goals of at least 1% of total planned subcontracting, including non-zero goals (greater than 1%) for each of the following:

veteran owned small business, service-disabled veteran-owned small business, HUBZone small business, small disadvantaged business, and women-owned small business.” Is the intent that non-small business bidders must subcontract tasks to all five of these categories of small businesses? If so, would USAID consider reducing this requirement, or allowing a higher percentage for a single category?

See answer to question No. 20.

26. The education requirement for the Chief of Party is a Masters degree. Will USAID accept years of experience in lieu of a Masters degree?

27. On page 16 of the RFP, under Section C.3 “Overview of M&E Service Program Coverage”, the RFP says, “To carry out M&E Objectives, the contractor shall operate in and support activities of three-related areas”, one of which includes, measuring “Whole-of-government” progress for other USAID Offices and USG agencies.

Question: Can you provide more specific detail on the contractor’s responsibilities to measure progress under the FTF initiative outside of USAID’s programs? Does this include data collection and analysis under Component 1 for non-USAID programs, and if so are there any limitations to this work? Do the MIS and GIS systems to be developed under Component 3 require coordination and access by other USG agencies for data entry or other tasks? Will the contractor be required to handle FTF reporting for other USG agencies?

This is a multi-part question. As for including data collection for non-USAID programs, the Contractor will be responsible for gathering data from other USG agencies such as, but not limited to, the US Peace Corps, the US Department of Agriculture, but not conduct primary data collection itself. These agencies are to be routinely collecting M&E-related data and reporting on indicators themselves. The Contractor will contact these organizations and include their reporting within the M&E contract. As for GIS and MIS data access this will require coordination with other USG agencies but USAID will facilitate this access. As for the FTF reporting itself, the contractor will only report on USAID-funded activities.

28. On page 22 of the RFP, under “Component 2”, the RFP describes a special clause in the award for USAID’s policy on Transition Awards. In accordance with this clause, the RFP states, “the contractor will develop the local organization’s capacity to become stronger and a more mature entity that will enable them to become eligible to receive a direct award from USAID or other donors in the future.” The section also mentions that there must be certain conditions met for sub recipients to receive future awards.

Question: Are there conditions for eligibility beyond those dealing with USAID contract administration, as listed in ADS 303.3.6.6 provided in the ADS, against which the contractor can measure progress towards capacity development to specifically address this clause? If so, can you please specify the requirements that must be met by the sub recipient to become eligible for a direct award?

Under this component, the contractor should strengthen the technical, financial and administrative capacity of local organizations to be able to comply with the requirements of ADS 303.3.9.

29. Page 76, Section H. 25 “Organizational Conflicts of Interest” states, in part, that … “In accordance with the principles of FAR Subpart 9.5 and USAID policy, THE

CONTRACTOR 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….” In addition to this restriction, we are increasingly noting that other USAID RFPs include a broader interpretation of restrictions of FAR Subpart 9.5 and USAID policy relating to COI.

Question: Does USAID/Guatemala also interpret the principles of FAR Subpart 9.5 and USAID policy to include the additional restriction of the contractor selected to implement this Monitoring and Evaluation Program shall also be ineligible to furnish, as a prime contractor or subcontractor or otherwise, USAID/Guatemala implementation services under any contract, task order, cooperative agreement, or grant for the life of this contract?

See answer to question No. 2.

30. We find the RFP unclear about the various (possibly contradictory) ways the Contractor should engage local partners in capacity-building efforts. The RFP mentions local partnerships, sub-contracting, and sub-grants to local partner organizations: Page 10, Section C 1 says Offerors are encouraged to consider “creating partnerships with local organizations…. Section C.3, page 18 says the M&E contractor is encouraged to “partner with the GOG government statistical agency, INE, as well as with NGOs …[and].. academic and private research organizations to be involved in the implementation of M&E program activities.” Page 22 says the program will “strengthen statistical and M&E capacity of Guatemalan academic and private research institutions through learning-by-doing partnerships...” In addition: “Offerors are expected to form alliances and/or partnerships with local organizations involved in data collection, analysis, monitoring and evaluation...” Component 2, Illustrative Task D. asks the Contractor to: “Develop local M&E capacity…through training workshops, and sub-contracting of collaborative partnerships ….” Page 7 mentions that the Contractor “will execute a Grants under Contract (GUC) mechanism to award individual sub-grants to further build the capacity and improve the performance of local partner organizations..”

Question: Can USAID please clarify the meaning of “local partner” for this project?

Local partners are Guatemalan organizations that must:

a. Be a Guatemalan Non-Governmental Organization organized under the laws of Guatemala;

b. Have its principal place of business in Guatemala;

c. Be managed by a governing body, the majority of whom are citizens or lawful permanent residents of Guatemala; and

d. Attach official documentation of their formal legal status as an NGO in Guatemala.

Subsidiaries or external branches of entities organized or located outside Guatemala are not considered “Guatemalan organizations” for the purpose of this RFP

Question: We would appreciate clarification on USAID’s intention on how the Offeror should propose engaging local partner organizations. Does USAID intend for the Contractor to engage with local organizations as teaming partners (e.g. sub-contractors), beneficiaries (e.g recipients of capacity-building efforts), or grantees?

USAID seeks to encourage bidders to link their activities with local entities as makes sense for their individual technical approach (sustainability, capacity building etc) and budget. The bidders must determine how they wish to forge relationships with local organizations.

Question: What is meant by a learning-by-doing partnership?

This was not meant as a category of partnership rather a means to strengthen local capacity through “learning by doing”.

31. Page 24, Section C, Component 3 describes a system to support data from USAID and implementation partners but that can be managed and sustained by a local NGO and/or GOG after USAID/M&E Program termination.

Question: Does USAID require that all data collected in the Clearinghouse be available to all USAID implementing partners, participating NGOs and GOG, or will USAID seek restrictions on which participants can see certain data?

USAID believes that all data should be available to all interested participants and does not see restrictions on which participants can see which data. Personally identifiable data would not be shared however.

32. Section C, Component 3.A, Number 6 on page 24 specifies the requirement to “Assess the feasibility of housing the online food security database on a GOG website”. The “food security database” is not described elsewhere in the RFP. Can you provide additional information about the “food security database”? Is this a performance monitoring database?

This is the MIS database that will contain data for FTF, GCC and other EGO programs.

This sentence refers to the FTF with the purpose of transferring USAID’s “food security” data and indicators to a GOG website.

33. Section C, Component 3.B, on page 24 states “The Contractor shall ensure GIS efforts are consistent with the standards developed by the new USAID Geospatial Center in USAID/Washington.” Are these standards publicly available, and if so, can USAID indicate where this information can be obtained?

These standards are not available at this time. USAID will coordinate with the implementer once the contract is awarded. Basic information can be found at:

http://www.usaid.gov/scitech/about_s-t_office.html

34. Is there a requirement to transition the “Mapping Database/Tool” mentioned in Section C, Component 3.B to an NGO or GOG upon USAID/M&E Program termination?

USAID believes it is important that the platform for M&E developed be transitioned to a local organization –either governmental, academic or NGO entity. USAID does not have a firm opinion on what organization or organizations would be good candidates to house the MIS and GIS platform upon completion of the contract. Bidders are encouraged to propose their own partners, or criteria to be considered in selecting a future home.

35. Page 69 of the RFP indicates the education required for the Program Monitoring and Evaluation Specialist is a “Required Master degree or equivalent in Economics, Ph.d preferred.”

Question: Would USAID accept a Master degree or equivalent in a topic OTHER than Economics (e.g. Business Administration, Finance, Engineering, etc).

The education requirements for the Program Monitoring and Evaluation Specialist as modified as follows:

“Required Master degree or equivalent in Economics (or related areas but with strong demonstrated experience in monitoring and evaluation), PH.D. is preferred.”

Question: Would number of years of professional experience be acceptable in lieu of an advanced degree?

36. Page 69 of the RFP indicates the Program Monitoring and Evaluation Specialist …”Must have demonstrated technical expertise, ample field of experience, and relevant technical background in evaluating rural development programs, nutrition, and the environment.

Question: Is it USAID’s intention to require the Program Monitoring and Evaluation Specialist to have a combined background in ALL of these fields: rural development, nutrition, AND the environment? Or would a background in AT LEAST ONE of these fields be acceptable?

Bidders should propose the strongest possible Program Monitoring and Evaluation candidate with technical background in evaluating rural development and nutrition programs; in addition knowledge in environment would be preferred.

37. Can USAID provide any estimation on the scope and scale of field surveys the contractor would need to carry out for this project, such as number of projects/programs and number of beneficiaries/communities/municipalities, etc. to be surveyed.

Please refer to section C.7 Tasks, Indicators and Expected Results. As an example: a baseline that is being designed for the FtF program (that includes the Rural Value

Chains, the Community Health and the MYAP programs) covers 30 munipalities with an estimated population of 1.2 m to 1.4m people. The estimated sample size for this baseline is between 7 and 8,000 households.

38. On page 41, under the subtitle “Performance Monitoring Plan,” the word “result” is used as follows: “…including illustrative indicators per results.”

Question: Is the word “result” here synonymous with the word “component” used in the RFP to represent the five components in the technical? Or if not, can USAID please clarify the intent of the reference to “results.”

The correct page number for this question is 141. Component and results are not synonymous in this context. Results are the objectives to be reached under each component.

39. On page 51 of the RFP, under Section F.6.2 “Performance Monitoring Plan”, the RFP asks that the proposal provide a brief narrative for each indicator.

Question: Would individual indicator reference sheets in tabular form be acceptable to provide the required level of detail on each indicator, or is a narrative preferred over tabular format?

Either or both are acceptable forms of narrative the proposed indicators.

40. Would USAID be able to elaborate on any technical requirements or preferences for a web platform or content management system to be used for the Clearinghouse. Can USAID confirm what hosting environment the systems is expected to support (e.g. Linux, Apache, PHP, and MySQL, etc).

USAID expects offerors to propose the best technical system.

41. Would UAID consider Drupal an acceptable content management system for the Clearinghouse?

See answer to Question 40.

42. For the GIS requirement, does USAID have a preference for or restrictions on which GIS tools to use? For example, would use of Google Maps be acceptable?

See answer to Question 40.

43. Page 20 of the RFP, under Section C.4 Scope of Work or Component 1, Expected Task

(c) states, “Establish a mechanism to be able to buy, through a third party organization, INE’s services as needed, such as to expand the geographic cover of surveys, incorporate new questions into surveys, conduct new surveys, etc.”

Question: Will the mission provide an estimated cost for INE’s services as a plug figure?

Unfortunately USAID does not have a “plug figure” for INE’s services.

44. Page 74 of the RFP, H.22 says Travel to Guatemala requires that, “All travel from contractor’s personnel requires prior country clearance...”

Question: Does this mean that travel of contractor’s personnel to Guatemala which will not be charged directly to USAID must obtain prior country clearance?

Country clearance in only required for the travel funded under the resulting contract.

45. Page 76 of the RFP, Section H.24.C says Participant Training does not specify that in-country training be recorded in USAID’s TraiNet system, but our understanding is that the TraiNet system itself requires that all training, including in-country training, be recorded in USAID’s TraiNet system.

Question: Will in-country training need to be recorded in TraiNet?

All training should be recorded in USAID’s TraiNet system. As specified in the first sentence of this section “For all training activities financed under the resulting contract and conducted in-country, in the U.S., or in a third country, the resulting contractor must comply with the Automated Directive System (ADS) Chapter 253…”

46. Question: In reference to Page 93 of the RFP; since the RFP is not for Supplies, but for Services, should I.8 52.215-14 Integrity of Unit Prices.be included?

Yes, is applicable only if the offeror includes supplies as part of the budget.

47. The links in the RFP to the Feed the Future.gov website result in a “Page Not Found.

We are sorry, the page you are looking for does not exist.” Specifically, the links are: http://www.feedthefuture.gov/documents/Volume2_FTFBaseline.pdf and http://ww w.feedthefuture.gov/monitoringevaluation.html. Will the information on these websites be available by some other means?

Updated link is: http://www.feedthefuture.gov/progress , then click on Volume 2:

Baseline Guidance and Volume 1: Monitoring and Evaluation under Feed the Future

48. Since the Contractor may be asked to provide services to other offices in the Mission, will the Mission’s CDCS and Results Framework be made available before the submission date?

The CDCS for the Mission was only recently approved. A public version will likely not be available before the M&E RFP submission date.

49. What is the status of the implementation of the Feed the Future Multi-Year Strategy? How many Implementing Partners are there? How many are anticipated?

The FTF Multi year strategy was approved in April 2011. The “flagship” project under the FTF strategy is the Rural Value Chains Project (RVCP). This project is in the final stages of review and award and USAID can not divulge any information at this time.

50. What is the status of the implementation of the Global Climate Change Initiative? How many Implementing Partners are there? How many are anticipated?

USAID has been implementing activities with Global Climate Change resources since 2010. The GCC/LEDS is currently being launched and a solicitation will be released in calendar year 2012.

51. Where is there more information about the USAID Bureau of Food Security’s (BFS) global online M&E database?

There is a link for potential bidders to access FTFMS and provided the following response:

Username: tst_Guatemala Password: ~iK0$pN3”qHR URL: https://testing.ftfms.net

This login gives access to the testing environment of the FTFMS. The structure is exactly the same as the real FTFMS. Be sure to select "Screen Instructions" when you first log in. Contact John Spears at jspears.ftf@gmail.com if you have trouble logging in to the FTFMS. The FTFMS does not work with Google Chrome and does not work well with Internet Explorer 7 or older versions. Follow this link to view a webinar USAID/BFS conducted for FTF missions in December 2011.

52. Will the Clearinghouse be continued once the project ends? If so, how institutionally?

USAID anticipates that the M&E system will prove useful to partners, including the GOG and therefore would be useful to continue. USAID does not have firm ideas where this platform should be housed once developed by the contractor and believes the contractor should propose its own ideas. Final decisions will be made during the course of the implementation of the project, but it is USAID’s intention that if the platform is well designed and found useful that one or more suitable candidates will be found that can sustain it upon completion of the contract.

53. Please advise whether the final destination of the IT platform should be determined in the proposal or whether this determination may be made during project implementation.

Final decisions will be made during the course of the implementation of the project, but it is USAID’s intention that if the platform is well designed and found useful that one or more suitable candidates will be found that can sustain it upon completion of the contract.

54. Please advise how a USAID project can contract with, or buy, services from a GOG institution.

See answers to question 23.

55. Please advise the successful contractor of this M&E award will still be allowed to bid on other USAID contracts See answer to question No. 2.

56. Can you confirm that the environmental compliance verifications component (described under Component 3C) is for the Mission?

Yes

57. Is there a contractor currently conducting the verification for the environmental component?

58. Can you clarify the meaning of “buy” and who would be buying the services? (A task listed in Component 1C says: “Establish a mechanism to be able to buy, through a third party organization, INE’s services as needed, such as to expand the geographic cover of surveys, incorporate new questions into surveys, conduct new surveys, etc.”).

See answer to question No. 23.

59. Should the Branding and Marking Plan be submitted as an attachment?

Yes, these documents should be submitted as an attachment to the technical proposal.

60. What is the definition of a major subcontractor? On page 132 it states that a major sub is “considered one whose proposed cost exceeds $1 million USD”. On page 142, it implies that a major subcontractor is one that is performing 10% or more of the technical effort under the contract. Could you please clarify?

As stated on page 132, major subcontractor is considered one whose proposed cost exceeds $1 million USD. Separately, as stated on pages 131 and 142, offerors are requested to submit past performance references for each subcontractor performing 10% of more of the technical effort under this contract.

61. On page 10 the RFP states that “the M&E program will also coordinate M&E activities with those of [various USAID/G offices and other USG agencies]”. Could you expand the definition of the word “coordinate”? Beyond information sharing, what would coordination involved? Would this include requesting indicators from other agencies, for instance?

Coordinate in this case would mean to establish professional relationships with, in order to gather data for the contractor to enter the USAID data base, as for including data collection for non-USAID programs, the Contractor will be responsible for gathering data from other USG agencies such as, but not limited to, the US Peace Corps, the US Department of Agriculture, but not conduct primary data collection itself. These agencies are to be routinely collecting M&E-related data and reporting on indicators themselves. The Contractor will contact these organizations and include their reporting within the M&E contract. As for GIS and MIS data access this will require coordination with other USG agencies but USAID will facilitate this access.

62. The qualifications for the M&E Specialist include a Master’s degree or equivalent in Economics. Would you consider broadening the degree subjects that a person in this position could have to be more in line with the degree requirements of the COP and to provide more flexibility?

See answer to question No. 35.

63. On page 140, the technical approach section calls for the proposal addressing the “design and implementation of a multi-sector, whole of government (WOG) M&E system required for measuring the FtF and GCC initiatives”. Could you further explain the role the contractor will need to play to meet USAID/G’s expectations related to this WOG M&E System?

As for including data collection for non-USAID programs, the Contractor will be responsible for gathering data from other USG agencies such as, but not limited to, the US Peace Corps, the US Department of Agriculture, but not conduct primary data collection itself. These agencies are to be routinely collecting M&E-related data and reporting on indicators themselves. The Contractor will contact these organizations and include their reporting within the M&E contract. As for GIS and MIS data access this will require coordination with other USG agencies but USAID will facilitate this access.

64. Section L, page 136. There is a line for Participant Training in the template provided but there is no clarification Please provide clarification of what type of cost elements are included in this line.

Costs related to training activities. Per ADS 253, training is a learning activity taking place in the U.S., a third country, or in-country in a setting predominantly intended for teaching or imparting certain knowledge and information to the Participants with formally designated instructors or lead persons, learning objectives, and outcomes, conducted fulltime or intermittently.

The transfer of knowledge, skills, or attitudes (KSAs) through structured learning and follow-up activities, or through less structured means, to solve problems or fill identified performance gaps. Training can consist of long-term academic degree programs, short- or long-term non-degree technical courses in academic or in other settings, non-academic seminars, workshops, conferences, on-the-job learning experiences, observational study tours, or distance learning exercises or interventions.

65. Page 137. Local Guatemalan firms do not have TINs to provide, which is asked for in the Certs and Reps Section (Section K). How should this be handled?

Guatemalan firms have NITs (Numero de Identificacion Tributaria) which is equivalent to the TIN.

66. Section K. Local Guatemalan firms do not have DUNS numbers. How should this be handled?

Proposed organizations (US or non-US) are required to obtain DUNS number, please refer to the Guidance for Obtaining a DUNS number included on ADS 302.3.6.12 which can be found on the following link:

http://www.usaid.gov/policy/ads/300/302sao.pdf

67. On Page 7 under the Component 5 header it states that “no more than $6 million should be reserved as a single line item for [this Component]”. Is there a minimum amount for this set-aside?

68. Page 19 contains a footnote (#16) that references work that the Bureau of Food Security is currently doing. Could you please provide more information on this project and also give an update as to the status of this project?

Please refer to question No. 51.

69. The RFP mentions the Title II-P.L 480 Food Aid program several times. Should the contractor expect to do an impact or performance evaluation of this project under Component 5?

It is possible that the Title II-P.L. 480 program would buy-in to the M&E contract, in which case the contractor would be expected to include performance evaluation work of the Title II program partner(s).

70. Cost Proposal: Cost line items listed on the 132 through 135 do not match the cost line items listed in the table provided on page 136. Please clarify.

The information provided on pages 132-135 are guidelines on the costs that can be included in the proposals, the table provided on page 136 is the format to be used to submit your budget, specific line items/costs will depend on the approach of each offeror.

71. Page 136. The (Q) Indirect Cost Information, paragraph (ii): Please clarify this paragraph. Please also clarify/elaborate on or provide detail as to the last sentence, particularly the part regarding “supporting computations of the basis for the indirect cost rates”.

If the offeror does not have a Negotiated Indirect Cost Rate Agreement (NICRA), offerors shall submit support information for the calculations of its indirect cost rates.

72. What are the expected funding levels for the first two years? Significant efforts will be required for the first year for baseline studies, which should include surveys down to the aldea, villa, and community levels, with incomplete data available from the two-year-old census.

Funding levels are not available at this time. Proposed budget should take in consideration the results and objectives to be achieved during the first two years. For the proposed budget for Option 1, offerors should take in consideration the results and objective to be achieved during the last three years of the resulting contract.

73. Please clarify USAID’s position on any Conflict of Interest issues that might relate to this RFP, given the evaluation roles contemplated. Are current USAID implementers in Guatemala barred from participating in the activities of this project, as either prime or subpartners?

See answer to question No. 2.

74. Should offerors budget the $6 million plug number reserved for Activity #5 as direct cost funding or as a ceiling for possible buy-ins from other agencies? Selection and commitment to staffing will depend on this.

The amount for component No. 5 should be reserved as a single line item (Offerors should not provide breakdowns for this component at this time). Once the contract is awarded and in the event the other USAID/Guatemala Offices choose to participate under the award, each Office will develop its own scope of work, budget and specific expected results, which will be made part of the Contract through a modification.

This line item should be budgeted as follows:

Total Est. Cost Plus Fixed Fee (without component 5) $_______ Component 5 $_______ Total Estimated Cost plus Fixed Fee (including component 5) $_______

75. Clarification on submission requirements: The "Solicitation, offer and award" form specifies one original and zero copies, while page 126 requests two copies of the technical proposal and one copy of the cost proposal along with the originals. Is this in lieu of electronic submission or are offerors required to do both?

See answer to question No. 16.

76. Page 19 appears to have an error in the date of the Population Census, which is 2013.

This makes a particular difference for the municipal data for this proposal, as existing data is from the 2002 census. Is this correct?

The population census was planned for 2012, but because of budget constraints it seems that INE is considering to do so in 2013. However, from ENCOVI 2011 and the census at the municipal level for “MlFAPRO” INE has developed estimates at the municipal level for selected municipalities that include the FTF area in the Western Highlands.

77. Please clarify expectations (page 21) regarding third-party relationship to buying services from INE. Is this to strengthen INE’s administrative capacity or more focused on INE’s ability to sell services?

USAID’s intention is that buying of information from a respected national sources is pragmatic, helps INE to cover some of its administrative costs and helps to build local capacity to undertake work with international partner organizations.

78. Please clarify USAID’s position on the exclusivity of local partners for this RFP. Should local partners be expected to be available to any winning consortium, or enter into exclusive relationships with selected consortia?

Partners should be non-exclusive to all offerors.

79. Should offerors budget for the mid-term evaluation by an outside party, or will this activity be funded directly by USAID?

Mid-term evaluation for this contract (M&E Project) will be funded directly by USAID.

80. Page 24 refers to standards of the USAID Geospatial Center? Please share a link to these standards for further reference.

See answer to Question 33.

81. Does USAID intend to have its own independent monitoring and information systems or build upon existing public systems like the SINIT (territorial information system) of Segeplan, or the one at the Ministry of Agriculture?

Yes, the contractor will design , establish and maintain an independent monitoring and information system but would be encouraged to incorporate or coordinate the development with existing systems including the ones cited above and new ones that may be developed.

82. Page 30, C.6 refers to “The advisor” responsible for technical aspects of contract performance. Please clarify if this advisor is designated USAID personnel or a member of the offeror’s team This is a member of the offeror’s team.

83. Page 130 requests that all personnel are available upon award. Could USAID share its expected timeframe for award and beginning of implementation?

USAID/Guatemala expects to award this contract by the end of the Fiscal Year 2012.

84. Please provide updated monitoring data from current Feed the Future implementation, if available, as well as any current data from monitoring of climate change activities.

Unfortunately these data are not available to be shared publically at this time.

85. The project will depend upon timely access to national data (such as INE or the household health surveys) that the project will not control but may depend upon for monitoring its progress. Can there be safeguards in the agreement that acknowledges that external delays in data access will not cause the project to be held accountable for delayed measures of its impact?

The ENCOVI 2011 was recently released and database is available to be purchased at INE. USAID is aware of delays that might be occasioned as a result of lack of timely access to national data and would not be unreasonable in holding an offeror responsible for matters outside their direct control but can not provide “safeguards” as such.

86. On page 130 of the RFP it states that “Resumes/curriculum vitae may not exceed two pages in length per individual.” Is the offeror to provide resumes/curriculum vitae for all proposed staff or just key personnel only? Should the resumes/CVs for all short-term and long-term technical assistance staff be included as well?

Resumes/curriculum vitae should be submitted for all the identified personnel (long term and short term)

87. In section L.9.(e), the RFP states, “These plans must contain small business subcontracting goals of at least 1 percent of total planned subcontracting. Should the small business goal be more in line with other recent USAID procurements with at least a 10 percent goal with the associated weightage from section M encouraging the use of US small businesses?

See answer to question No. 20.

88. Please confirm that local Guatemalan organizations should be non-exclusive to all offerors?

See answer to question 78.

89. Can you kindly provide a list of potential local partners approved by USAID?

No, there is not list of potential local partners available to be shared by USAID.

90. Section D, page 42 that requires that offerors should submit a Branding and Marking Implementation Plan and budget. Can USAID please explain what costs should be budgeted that pertain to the BMIP?

Per ADS 320.3.6.3, offerors should include in its proposals cost related to marking and branding materials (i.e. business cards, banners, stickers to mark equipment, etc)

91. Page 73. H.21. (a)(2).