Amendment_2_SOL-611-14-000005_IMPACT.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

1 12

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO.

3. EFFECTIVE DATE 4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO 5. PROJECT NO. (If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY CODE 7. ADMINISTERED BY (IF OTHER THAN ITEM 6) CODE

Office of Acquisition and Assistance USAID Zambia

Subdivision 694/Stand 100 Lusaka Zambia

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street, County, State, and Zip Code)

All Prospective Offerors

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO. SOL-

SOL-611-14-000005

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11) 11/17/2014

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

CODE: FACILITY CODE: 10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

The above numbered, solicitation is amended as set forth in item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers is extended is not extended.

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

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning 1 copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted; or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers, FAILURE OF YOUR

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

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If Required)

N/A

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS,

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO., AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14

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

ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43,103 (b).

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

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is NOT is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

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

The purpose of this amendment is to provided answers to questions received.

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER 16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER

ADAM COX, CONTRACTING OFFICER

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR 15C. DATE

SIGNED

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 16C. DATE

SIGNED

(Signature of person authorized to sign) (Signature of Contracting Officer)

NSN 7540-01-152-8070 STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 10-83)

Previous Edition Unusable Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

RFP No. SOL-611-14-000005, Amendment #2 Improving Prevention and Adherence to Care and Treatment (IMPACT)

Questions and Answers - SOL-611-14-000005 - Amendment 2

1. Question: Page 20 of the RFP states “PEPFAR Country Operation Plans, and PMI Malaria Operational targets are set annually, and the Contractor is expected to put forth its best effort to attain established targets.” Please clarify these targets will apply to specific task orders.

Answer: USAID/Zambia anticipates issuing one task order for the technical assistance/capacity building work and multiple task orders for the actual campaigns. There will only be one contractor executing all of the work laid out in all task orders, USAID will require ONE M&E plan.

2. Question: Please define at-risk-populations’ (HIV/AIDS) and ‘key and priority populations’ (Cross Cutting).

Answer:

• Key populations - “Key populations (sex workers, men who have sex with men, transgender persons, and people who inject drugs).”

http://www.pepfar.gov/documents/organization/217765.pdf

• At-risk population – Persons/groups at highest risk of contracting HIV.

For example; OVCs, youth, persons with disabilities, etc.

• Priority population – Persons/groups critical to the success of an intervention to which IMPACT must prioritize project activities and target interventions to ensure that they reach, for example; adolescent women, youth, pregnant women, clients of sex workers, military and other uniformed services, Incarcerated persons, mobile populations (e.g.

migrant workers, truck drivers), non-injecting drug users, etc.

3. Question: In regard to SBCC campaign deliverables on page 34, would USAID change the order to combine HIV/AIDS with FP, rather than nutrition, due within 120 days to facilitate the HIV/FP integration required on page 21? This would result in nutrition being combined with malaria and MCH (due in 150 days).

Answer: USAID is agreeable to this request, and the change can be negotiated into the SBCC planning and design task order 2, which will be awarded to the Contractor soon after award.

4. Question: The learning agenda questions listed on page 16 include one very specific reference to improving the dietary diversity of key populations, and reduction of stunting, while the others are quite broad. Please confirm that these nutrition indicators should be focused on this level of detail.

http://www.pepfar.gov/documents/organization/217765.pdf

Answer: Confirmed. For further clarification, “key” populations in this section refer to “target” populations, and not the PEPFAR definition referenced above.

5. Question: The RFP indicates importance of achieving measurable behavior change and indicates that relevant national, provincial and district level reporting systems will be used. What percentage of the budget may be attributed to strengthening existing GRZ reporting systems verses consideration of innovative ways to capture necessary data?

Answer: Offerors will propose this allocation based upon their design and approach.

Capacity building and innovative data collection must be done in an integrative manner.

6. Question: The RFP states on p.21 that an independent third party will conduct an impact evaluation of selected project campaigns to measure “higher level impact on health outcomes in target populations.” Please define higher level.

Answer: “Higher level” would be defined as improved health outcomes at the population level directly attributable to project activities, for example; reduced stunting by X%, reduced HIV incidence in target population by X%, reduced number of pregnancies in women under 20 by X%, etc.

7. Question: As per Section F.6. Reporting and Delivery Schedule, it is stated that:

“Contractor must submit for USAID approval Annual Workplans...” In light of the potential task orders, would USAID elaborate on how this requirement should reflect any future task order? Can USAID provide a timeframe as to when and/or often these task orders will be issued?

Answer: The CPIF/FP Task Order 1 (for IR 2, IR3, and IR4 activities) will be issued with the contract award for the life of project. The first SBCC campaign task order milestones will focus on the completion of formative research, campaign (including materials) designs for each of the health streams, and the launch of IPC activities to achieve the annual PEPFAR targets as referenced in Attachment 1 of the solicitation. The Contractor will be responsible for submitting one annual workplan that covers activities outlined in any/all task orders.

8. Question: When during the project cycle do you envision issuing the TOs for the campaigns? Will they overlap? Will they run during the whole five years of the project?

Answer: USAID anticipates issuing one CPIF task order to cover all technical assistance and capacity building activities for five years simultaneously when the contract is awarded. One task order for 120-150 days will be issued shortly after the award is made for campaign designs. USAID will work closely with the Contractor to determine the number, timing, and period of performance for task orders for formative research, campaign designs, and IPC activities. Some task orders may overlap and USAID anticipates the period of performance lasting at least 24 months.

9. Question: Page 2 of the RFP states “This is a single-award Indefinite Quantity Contract

(IQC) with an overall ceiling price of US $40,000,000. Please clarify how much of this will be under Cost-Plus Incentive Fee.

Answer: ADS 302.3.5.7 states “The Contracting Officer (CO) must not include the Government cost estimate in a competitive solicitation…” Offerors must budget for a five year period of performance encompassing all work under IR2, IR3, and IR4 in accordance with their technical approach and the instructions outlined in Section L.

10. Question: We are concerned that issuance of multiple task orders may undermine the contractor’s ability to achieve the desired results for IR 3 and 4, which demand focus on long term capacity building of GRZ institutions. Capacity building requires long-term focus, as does achieving the desired research results outlined under IR 2. The solicitation seems to suggest task orders of various durations; short term (< 2 year TOs) which may affect the desired results. How does USAID envision balancing the multiple task orders with stated expectations and results?

Answer: USAID anticipates only 1 five-year CPIF/FP task order for all items in IR 2, IR 3, and IR 4. Fixed price task orders for IR 1 activities with duration from two years to two years-six months are envisioned." to state Multiple FFP task orders for IR1 activities are envisioned and USAID will work closely with the contractor to determine the appropriate number, period of performance, and timing of each task order (excluding the first planning task order, and special projects/initiatives)

11. Question: Further to question [10] above, how will USAID sequence the task orders to allow the contractor to leverage investments and create synergies across the IRs?

Answer: Please response to Question #10 above.

12. Question: Please confirm that the assumed start date is June 8th, 2015 (as June 6th 2015 is a Saturday)?

Answer: No this is not the assumed start date, per section L.5.d., which states “Offerors’ proposed costs must be valid for 180 days from the proposal due date indicated on the cover letter of this RFP.” and does not reflect the anticipated start date of the contract.

13. Question: Page 4 of the RFP B.7. a Minimum Fee-CPIF Task Orders: “For each CPIF task order issued under this IDIQ, the Task Order Contracting Officer (TOCO) and Contractor agree to negotiate a target cost, minimum fee, target fee, maximum fee, and proposed share ration.” Please clarify if the TOCO will utilize tradeoffs for the determination of the incentive and what are the tradeoffs.

Answer: The Contracting Officer will simultaneously issue the one anticipated CPIF task order when the award is issued. The CO will consider technical, past performance, and cost (including proposed minimum and maximum fees, share ratio, and the target cost) when making the best value determination to select a contractor. Cost control is the only incentive that will be used in the CPIF task order.

14. Question: Per B.7 Minimum Fee – CPIF Task Order (page 4)

• “For each CPIF Task Order issued under this IDIQ, the Task Order Contracting Officer (TOCO) and the Contractor agree to negotiate a Target Cost, Minimum Fee, Target Fee, Maximum Fee and Proposed Share Ratio. Minimum Fee cannot be less than 3.5% of the Cost excluding Fee.”

• The proposed Share Ratio for each CPIF Task Order is 80/20, 80% for Zambia and 20% for the Contractor. However, the final ratio will be negotiated between the TOCO and the Contractor.

i. Is the Government expecting a Minimum Fee of 3.5% as the competitive Minimum Fee?

Answer: Yes, the minimum fee of 3.5% is the competitive minimum fee.

The CPIF total cost will be negotiated as part of the final contract is negotiated since the task order will be issued simultaneously.

ii. Is the successful Contractor expected to submit proposals for each individual task/work orders and then negotiate a Final Price?

Answer: The offeror should follow closely the instructions in Section L.8 of the solicitation at the proposal phase. Upon award, the Contract must submit proposals for each of the task orders, and then negotiate firm fixed price agreements with USAID for items under IR 1. The IDIQ ceiling value, of all combined task orders cannot exceed $40,000,000.

15. Question: Can you please clarify that the seven deliverables required on page fall under

TO1 separately costed as FFP activities or should we expect individual TOs for these deliverables.

Answer: As defined in Section L.8, the 7 deliverables will be included in Task Order 1, a combined CPIF/FP award for all activities and deliverables under IR 2, IR 3, and IR 4.

There will not be a separate task order awarded for these 7 items.

16. Question: Should we assume that all major activities not related to specific campaigns are included in TO1 – which should be budgeted as a CPIF?

Answer: Yes, as defined in Section C of the RFP all major activities in IR 2, IR 3, and IR 4 will be including in TO1. Task Order 1 is combined CPIF/FP. According to the instructions in Section L.8 (page 117-118), offerors will submit a CPIF cost proposal for all activities in IR 2, IR 3, and IR 4, EXCEPT for the following 7 firm fixed price items:

(1) SBCC Mapping and Gap Analysis Report, (2) SBCC Strengthening Milestone Development Plan, (3) Capacity Strengthening Assessment Report, (4) SBCC Strategic Plan deliverables, (5) Grants under Contract Manual, (6) Key populations health needs and Integration report, and the (7) Gender Integration Strategy deliverables. Offerers will submit a separate FFP cost proposal for these seven fixed price activities in accordance to the instructions in section L.8 (page 118-119).

17. Question: How would USAID like potential offerors to reflect the $20 million task order ceiling in their technical strategy?

Answer: There is no longer a $20 million dollar task order ceiling; this was deleted in Amendment 1 posted on November 3, 2014. Per section I.7, no single task order may exceed $20 million dollars. Cost proposal information should be kept separate to the technical proposal per Section L.5.a of the RFP.

18. Question: Why is capacity building being incentivized? What are the deliverables that will be measured? Is cost the only incentive factor?

Answer: Capacity building is not being incentivized. USAID/Zambia's acquisition team determined that cost control can and should be incentivized for the activities covered in the CPIF task order based on extensive market research. Cost will be the only incentive.

19. Question: How many task orders are anticipated under CLIN0002? (One or multiple?)

Answer: USAID deleted CLINS in the Amendment 1 posted on November 3, 2014.

20. Question: Can we budget all office costs, vehicles and salaries for key personnel and other long-term staff under CLIN0002? If not, what % should be in CLIN0001?

Answer: CLINS were deleted in Amendment 1 posted on November 3, 2014. Key personnel and their directly associated costs can be budgeted 100% to task order 1.

Only office and staffing costs (for non-key personnel) directly proportionate to the activities defined in IR 2, IR3, and IR 4 can be budgeted against task order 1 (CPIF/FP) by the percentage determined in the offerors technical approach. Expenses proportionate to IR 1 activities should be budgeted in future fixed price task orders for SBCC campaigns by the percentage of LOE needed to complete the activity. Offerors cannot budget all of the office costs, vehicles, and other salaries for long-term staff executing activities associated with IR 1 to task order 1 (which only for IR 2, IR 3, and IR 4 activities).

21. Question: Would you consider creating a CLIN for Project

Management/Administration?

Answer: CLINS were deleted in Amendment 1; USAID will not create a separate task order for project management/administration, as these expenses should be included in the fixed price task orders (for IR 1 campaigns), or included in the CPIF/FP task order 1 for activities under IR 2, IR 3, and IR 4.

22. Question: Are funds for the Government-to-government (G2G) mechanism described in the solicitation flowing through the Grants Under Contract, sub grants program (page 18) or will the funds be provided from a different mechanism and not through IMPACT? On page 11 it states, “Separate USAID government-to-government (G2G) mechanisms will provide funds directly to the government to further the SBCC objectives outlined in this project and will commence during the life of the IMPACT contract.” On page 16 it states, “The Learning Agenda must also generate evidence to test the causal pathway between USAID investments in SBCC (IMPACT and G2G).”

Answer: No, they are two separate approaches. There will be a direct Grants Under Contracts (GUC) program as referenced in C.8. between the Contractor and the GRZ for some activities, and another G2G mechanism between USAID and the GRZ for other activities as referenced in C.5. At this time, PEPFAR funding cannot be used for direct G2G agreements with the GRZ.

23. Question: Can USAID clarify the funding ceiling for the grants under contract program?

Answer: USAID is not mandating a GUC program ceiling or minimum. The funding levels will be proposed by offerors based upon their technical approach.

24. Question: Page 18, C.8 Grants Under Contracts states “The Contractor must award grants on behalf of USAID to eligible recipients to further the aim of the contract.

Subgrants are intended for local entities.” As these subawards will be issued under incentive fee orders, please clarify if the actual award signature will be considered a completed deliverable.

Answer: The issuance of grants is not considered a deliverable. The deliverables are listed in section F of the RFP.

25. Question: Can USAID please advise whether there is a size limitation on any given grant awarded under the program?

Answer: Grants under contracts should adhere to the limitations set forth under ADS 302.3.4.13.

26. Question: Will we be expected to subgrant directly to the Zambian government?

Answer: Yes, Contractors are expected to subgrant directly to the Zambian government as indicated in Section C.8.

SUBMISSION QUESTIONS:

27. Question: Would USAID consider an extension given the different mechanisms as used as per FAR 16.102(b)?

Answer: No, USAID is comfortable with the timeline as referenced in the solicitation, and will maintain December 8, 2014 as the proposal due date. USAID posted on FedBizOpps its intent to use the different contracting mechanisms on June 24, 2014, with updates on August 7, 2014, and October 21, 2014.

28. Question: As per Section C.2. Key Personnel, four key staff positions are suggested. It is stated: “A minimum of three out of the four key personnel positions must be Zambian.”

Even though, potential offerors understand the need for country ownership, shouldn’t USAID be getting the best and qualified personnel (regardless their citizenship). This approach would also allow to include a transitional phase during the project implementation and phase out any TCN and/or expat key personnel proposed personnel.

In addition to this questions, would USAID indicate the regulation(s) that would make this requirement a must?

Answer: The USG has implemented several health promotion, prevention, and SBCC related projects in Zambia throughout the years, and based upon extensive market research understands that there are a sufficient number of highly-qualified Zambians available to assume Key Personnel roles on IMPACT. The requirement that three out of the four key personnel be Zambian allows USAID to get the “best and qualified” personnel that are very knowledgeable about the needs and context of implementing SBCC activities in Zambia.

Local ownership and leadership of the IMPACT project is a major cornerstone of the project design, and based upon those priorities USAID determined the minimum professional qualifications for key personnel, and that three out of the four must be Zambian. There is no regulation that requires or prohibits USAID from requiring 3/4 key personnel to be local hires but in accordance with FAR Part 1.602-2 Contracting Officers are allowed wide latitude to exercise business judgment.

29. Question: Page 114, Sub-Factor 3, Key personnel, mentions that “Key Personnel past performance references strongly support the candidate’s ability to accomplish the requirements of the position.”

a. Please confirm that you only want contact information for references included with Key Personnel CVs, or if you would like a summary of our own due diligence? Similarly can these references be listed on a separate page, or do they count against the page limit of the CVs per page 114?

Answer: Confirmed, offerors should only include the contact information for references.

Yes, references can be listed on a separate page, and will not count against the page limit of CV’s per page 114.

30. Question: As per Section L.8. Cost Proposal Instructions. Factor 5: Contract/Cost/Price, it is required that: “(a) Budget narrative submitted in MS Word with Times New Roman minimum 11 font size...” Would USAID accept the incorporation of this part of the cost proposal in a PDF format instead of the MS Word requirement? This would allow USAID’s reviewers to have all the cost proposal pieces in one single file. Please advise.

Answer: Yes, part of the cost proposal can be submitted in PDF format.

31. Question: As per Section L.8. Cost Proposal Instructions. It is required that potential offerors should provide ‘a copy of personnel and travel policies...” Usually, this requirement applies to potential offerors that have not received any U.S. Gov’t funding.

Would USAID rephrase this requirement and make it only mandatory for such organizations?

Answer: USAID would like “a copy of personnel and travel policies” from ALL offerors, regardless of their previous experience in receiving U.S. Government funding.

USAID declines the request to rephrase this requirement.

32. Question: Under the Section L.8, CPIF Proposal Instruction – Detailed/itemized budget

(page 117), two of the budget items are: Branding and Marking Activities, Monitoring and Evaluation Activities, However, on page 118 in bold there is direction to submit detailed budget for these two activities and states not to include this line item in the detailed budget. Could you please clarify?

Answer: Offerors must include the Branding and Marking Activities and Monitoring and Evaluation Activities on separate tabs highlighting the cost of these activities, and should not include them as separate line items in the detailed budget.

33. Question: As per Section L.8. Cost Proposal Instructions. It is indicated that: “In addition to the detailed budget, Offerors must create a separate worksheet to highlight and summarize all anticipated costs attributable to Branding & Marking activities and M&E activities. The detailed budget will not include separate line items for Branding & Marking or M&E activities.” Would USAID confirm that this separate tab of costs will not be added to any totals and that it should be only of ‘illustrative nature’?

Answer: Yes, the totals for Branding & Marking and M&E should not to be added to the total detailed budget, but pulled out to illustrate how much of the budget is going toward these activities.

34. Question: Per page 119 of the RFP, please confirm for the cost application one firm fixed price budget is required and the seven deliverables are the following: 1) SBCC mapping and gap analysis report, 2) SBCC strengthening milestone development plan, 3) capacity strengthening assessment report, 4) SBCC strategic plan deliverables, 5) Grants under contract manual, 6) Key populations health needs and integration report, and the 7) Gender integration strategy deliverables.

Answer: Yes, offerers must submit one budget for all seven deliverables as outlined in section L.8 of the RFP under Firm Fixed Price Cost Proposal. Each of the seven deliverables should be considered a milestone that USAID will pay upon completion and approval of the deliverable by the CO and COR.

35. Question: Per Attachment 6: CSH Assets for IMPACT there is a ‘fixed assets register’ with equipment and conditions listed. According to our experience in Africa in general and in particular Zambia, useful life of equipment such as, vehicle, suitability of computers etc. is 5 years although listed as Fair or Excellent. Could you please clarify if USAID is expecting the successful contractor to not budget for any of the items listed?

Answer: USAID expects the offerer to budget for items they foresee the project requiring in order to fully execute the terms of the contract. The items from the CSH project dispositioned to IMPACT are to support the launch of IMPACT activities and for the project to use until they are no longer “of useful life.”

36. Question:On page 118 for the Firm Fixed Price Cost Proposal, it does not state that the amount for the Fixed Price should be included with the CPIF (SF) 33 submission. Should we submit a separate (SF) 33 for the Firm Fixed Price proposal?

Answer: No, offerors do not need to submit a separate SF33. Task order 1 will be combination CPIF/FFP task order because of the 7 FFP deliverables.

37. Please confirm that per the directions for the Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity

Proposal (on page 119) - we are asked not to submit any pricing for the SBCC Campaigns IDIQ FFP Task Order /for the IR1 activity under Section C.7 Tasks on page 14 and 15.

Answer: Per Section L.8, offerors are to submit pricing data for the CPIF/FP task order 1 activities under IR 2, IR 3, and IR 4 only.

38. Question: Please clarify how USAID proposes we cost out the LOE for Key Personnel

(and other personnel) to show that they will be working across all IRs, including IR 1, which is 55% – 60% of the activities, when USAID is not asking offerers to submit a budget for IR 1 Task Orders. For example, are we to propose full time equivalent LOE between the CPIF and FFP budgets for these staff? Or, as would be more representative of our implementation approaches, are we to propose only 40% – 45% LOE between the

CPIF and FFP submissions covering technical assistance for IR 2 -4 as well as deliverables across IR 3 and 4?

Answer: Only 100% of the LOE and associated expenses for the Key Personnel can be budgeted for under the CPIF/FP Task Order 1; all other proposed staff should be budgeted to only the proportion of their LOE and associated expenses, that will be expended on IR2, IR 3 and IR4 activities based upon the offerors implementation approach.

39. Question: Per page 113 of the RFP, please confirm the Management/Staffing section should only appear in the annex and not in the main body of the technical narrative.

Answer: Yes, per the instructions in Section L.7 the Management/Staffing should only appear in Annex II.

40. Question: Per page 114 of the RFP, please confirm the Organizational Capacity section should only appear in the annex and not in the main body of the technical narrative.

Answer: Yes, confirmed Organizational Capacity should only appear in Annex III per section L.7.

41. Question: Please clarify the order of Factor/Annex 3 and 4 – which comes first, Past Performance or Organizational Capacity? (pages 114 and 124-125)

Answer: In the ordering of the annexes in Section L.7. Organizational Capacity comes first (Annex III), and Past Performance (Annex IV) primarily for readability. Although in Section M.2. Past Performance (Factor 3) is more important than Organizational Capacity (Factor 4).

42. Question: Would USAID allow text box content to be in a font smaller than Times New Roman 12? (page 111)

Answer: USAID prefers texts boxes to be presented in Times New Roman 12.

43. Question: Please clarify if you would prefer that our technical response be organized by the sub-factors in Section L.7 (pages 110-115) or to align with section C specifically, the Sub IRs in Section C 7 through C.12 Key Personnel.

Answer: The technical response must respond to the technical requirements in section C and the submission requirements in Section L. USAID does not have a preference on the organization of a offerors proposals other than what is stated in the solicitation.

44. Question: Please confirm that we do not need to include a Branding and Marking plan at this time, per page 119, and can wait until the clarification stage.

Answer: Confirmed

45. Question: Please confirm a branding strategy and marking plan is not required at the time of proposal submission.

Answer: Confirmed

46. Question: Can you please clarify that the Strategy to integrate key population and persons living with disabilities priority health needs in the table on page 34, is this the same as the key populations health needs integration report on page 118.

Answer: Yes, the two are the same

47. Question: For the PPRs mentioned on Page 114, do you require only past contracts or can we include projects funded by other mechanisms such as cooperative agreements or grants?

Answer: Offerors may submit relevant acquisition and/or assistance awards (contracts, grants, and cooperative agreements).

48. Question: Given the emphasis on local capacity building within the RFP, can USAID confirm that the dollar amount for the PPRs is requirement only for prime organizations and not sub-partner organizations?

Answer: USAID expects partners to provide past performance information (including dollar amounts, as applicable) for sub-contractors that will have a major role in implementing the proposed technical approach.

49. Question: Page 114 and 115, (points 1&2) each refer to relevant “contracts” for Past

Performance Information.

a. Does this mean that cooperative agreements covering relevant SBCC programming cannot be submitted?

Answer: Offerors may submit relevant acquisition and/or assistance awards (contracts, grants, and cooperative agreements).

b. The lowest program budget referenced is $15M-$25M.

i. Is this minimum budget range for subcontractors as well as the prime?

Answer: USAID will evaluate past performance of the whole prime and subcontractor team to determine the relevancy of past performance. It is not necessary for a subcontractor to have managed an award for $15M - $25M if the prime contractor has experience managing an award of this size.

ii. Are these amounts in reference to the total program budget managed by the prime or subcontractor, or the total value of the award (for example, a subrecipient or subcontractor may have a $9M budget under a $30M award held by another prime)?

Answer: If the subrecipient or subcontractor managed a $9M budget under a $30M award held by another prime, then subcontractor/subrecipient should include $9M on the Past Performance Information data sheet as that is the amount that was directly managed by the organization. If the prime offeror managed a relevant award of $60M previously, the prime should include $60M on the PPI data sheet even if a subpartner managed $12M of that $60M.

c. Please clarify that contracts for which we present PPIDs can demonstrate leadership and capacity building in areas other than BCC or in M&E of areas other than SBCC.

Answer: Projects presented in PPIDS should only demonstrate leadership and capacity building specifically in SBCC and in M&E for SBCC, not in other areas.

SUBMISSION QUESTIONS: