Evaluation_Criteria_Submission_Requirements_Malaria_Control.docx

1. EVALUATION FACTORS

a. Factor Identification – This evaluation will evaluate the offerors by the proposals received in response to the Program for Advancement of Malaria Outcomes Request for Proposals (RFP) SOL-611-14-000006 using the following factors:

Factor 1 – Technical Factors Sub-factor 1 – Strategic Approach Sub-factor 2 – Capacity Development and Sustainability Sub-factor 3 – Performance Monitoring Approach Sub-factor 4 – Approach to Collaboration

Factor 2 – Management Factors Sub-factor 1 – Staffing Plan Sub-factor 2 – Key Personnel

Factor 3 – Past Performance

Order of Importance – The Technical factors are more important than Management and Past Performance factors. Management factors are more important than Past Performance. Sub-factors under Technical and Management Factors are listed in descending order of importance.

1.1 Factor 1: Technical Factors

1.1.1 Sub-factor 1: Strategic Approach

a. Submission Requirements:

The Offeror must present a comprehensive strategy, methodology and a clear workplan to meet the objectives and expected results described in the SOW. The strategy must demonstrate the Offeror’s thorough knowledge of the context, including systems within the MOH and MCDMCH, in which the work will be carried out. Further, it must include an approach to malaria control with all stakeholders at national, province, district and community levels.

b. Evaluation Criteria:

· The extent to which the Offeror presents an evidence-based, clear and feasible strategy that demonstrates how the suggested approach will achieve the objectives set in the SOW

· The extent to which the proposed strategy clearly articulates how the Offeror proposes to engage the MOH, MCDMCH and key stakeholders in malaria control at all levels

1.1.2 Sub-factor 2: Capacity Strengthening and Sustainability Approach

a. Submission Requirements:

The Offeror must present a comprehensive approach to strengthening capacity for malaria programming within the MOH and MCDMCH, at the province, district and community levels in order to consolidate and sustain an integrated malaria control program. The approach must also include proposed interventions for involving communities in malaria control efforts.

b. Evaluation Criteria:

· The extent to which the proposed approach and activities speaks to the capacity strengthening needs at province, district and community levels.

· The extent to which the proposed approach is based on proven practices in capacity strengthening and uses a systematic approach; balanced development of technical and operational capacity; caters to the needs of different capacity strengthening beneficiaries; and utilizes multi-method, blended learning-based approaches.

1.1.3 Sub-factor 3: Performance Monitoring Approach

a. Submission Requirements:

The Offeror must present an illustrative monitoring and evaluation plan clearly tied to the proposed strategy as an attachment to the proposal, disaggregating indicator data by gender, where appropriate.

b. Evaluation Criteria:

Source Selection Information - See FAR 2.101 and 3.104

The degree to which the Offerors must propose a comprehensive system to collect, analyze, track, and report on indicator and performance data, as well as a feasible strategy for disseminating timely information to the MOH, MCDMCH and to PMI.

1.1.4 Sub-factor 3: Approach to Collaboration

c. Submission Requirements:

The Offeror must present an approach to engaging, collaborating, and working with other PMI and USG health sector partners, government institutions and key stakeholders in the implementation of the activity

d. Evaluation Criteria:

Source Selection Information - See FAR 2.101 and 3.104

· The degree to which the approach articulates how the Offeror proposes to collaborate with the different stakeholders to plan and implement malaria control interventions

· The extent to which the approach reflects an in-depth understanding of the need to engage key stakeholders in a substantive manner, in order to ensure MOH and MCDMCH leadership at all levels in malaria programming

1.2 Factor 2: Management Factors

1.2.1 Sub-factor 2: Key Personnel

a. Submission Requirements:

The Offeror shall present resumes of the proposed qualified Key Personnel in accordance with the Statement of Work. The resumes should not exceed four pages and shall include three professional references with their telephone number and email for each proposed key personnel

b. Evaluation Criteria:

· The proposed key personnel should have at a minimum the skill, education and qualifications, capability and experience requirements stated in the Key Personnel Section of the statement of work

· The proposed key personnel mix represents qualified local Zambian staff to the maximum extent practicable or a convincing rationale for why this is not met

1.2.2 Sub-factor 1: Staffing Plan

a. Submission Requirements:

The offeror must present a draft comprehensive staffing plan with a level of effort chart that includes key personnel, other long-term staff, short-term staff, professional staff, administrative staff and reporting relationships. The plan must discuss the division of responsibilities between in-country project staff, home office support (if applicable), and all proposed sub-contractors. Further, it must articulate the extent to which the Offeror intends to utilize local, well-qualified Zambian professionals in leadership positions. CVs should also be submitted for other proposed project staff members considered critical to the success of the project

b. Evaluation Criteria:

The extent to which the plan demonstrates a rational, efficient use of resources and provides for a reporting, implementation, and operational support structure that will facilitate successful achievement of the desired programmatic results

1.2.2 Sub-factor 3: Past Performance

a. Submission Requirements:

Offerors shall provide detailed past performance information using the PPI Data Sheet included in the RFP for the eight most relevant current or previous awards performed within the last three years that are similar to what is described in the Statement of Work two weeks before the closing date for proposals. Offerors must include the awards performed in sequential order and not select those awards with the best past performance information. Past performance information must be submitted for all sub-contractors. Each Offeror should submit no more than 8 past performance information data sheets for the entire prime/sub-contractor team. Offerors shall not provide assessments of their performance on any referenced award.

Past performance will be considered relevant if it is implemented in Zambia, Southern Africa, sub-Saharan Africa or South-East Asia and is comprised of experience in implementing malaria control projects with measurable health impacts. Past performance in Zambia and Southern Africa weighed equally and higher than sub-Saharan Africa and South-East Asia.

b. Evaluation Criteria:

The Offeror shall provide for each of the submitted awards in support of their past performance a list of contact names, job titles, mailing addresses, phone numbers, e-mail addresses, and a description of the performance to include:

Scope of work or complexity/diversity of tasks, primary location(s) of work, term of performance, skills or expertise required, dollar value, and contract type, i.e., fixed-price, cost reimbursement, etc. Further, the following elements will be considered when evaluating Offerors past performance:

· Quality of product or service, including consistency in meeting goals and targets

· Cost control, including forecasting costs as well as accuracy in financial reporting

· Schedule, including the timeliness against the completion of the contract, task orders, milestones, delivery schedules, and administrative requirements (e.g., efforts that contribute to or affect the schedule variance)

· Management of key personnel, including appropriateness of personnel for the job and prompt and satisfactory changes in personnel when problems with clients where identified

1.3 FACTOR 3: COST/PRICE

1.3.1 Contract Cost/Price

a. Submission Requirements The Offeror shall provide a workable (Excel) detailed budget (breakdown) with narratives explaining the basis for the estimate for each category of cost in sufficient detail to facilitate determination of cost reasonableness. All spreadsheets must be submitted in Excel format as unlocked spreadsheets with unlocked formulas – this means spreadsheets must not be password protected. The detailed narrative for the cost proposal must be written in English in Microsoft Word, be readable, and be text accessible.

The Cost Proposal must be provided in two formats:

· As a summary budget with the budget line items below, and

· The detailed budget provided through the use of spreadsheets, budget narratives and footnotes.

The guidance and format below is provided for the use of Offerors in developing these documents; however, Offerors should keep in mind that it is their responsibility to ensure that the information provided is sufficient to provide a basis for USAID to determine that the costs proposed are reasonable and realistic. Offerors must include an itemized budget detail and justification that supports the technical approach.

Applicants must include each line item listed below (as applicable to your technical application):

· Total Direct Labor

· Salary and Wages

· Fringe Benefits

· Consultants

· Travel, Transportation

· Equipment

· Supplies

· Branding and Marking Costs

· Monitoring and Evaluation Costs

· Sub-contracts

· Conferences and Training

· Allowances

· Other Direct Costs

· Indirect Costs

Direct Labor Salaries and Wages Direct labor salary and wages should be proposed in accordance with the Offeror’s personnel policies and must meet the regulatory requirements. Unit costs for each proposed position, key or not, should be expressed in an amount per work day with the corresponding level of effort required for the position (number of work days) and then calculated to a total cost for each cost period where the salary would be applicable.

Fringe Benefits Allowances and services provided by the contractor to its employees as compensation in addition to regular wages and salaries are allowable. If fringe benefits are provided for as part of a firm’s indirect cost rate structure, see FAR 42.700. If not part of an indirect cost rate, a detailed cost breakdown by benefits types should be provided.

Consultants Services rendered by persons who are members of a particular profession or possess a special skill and who are not officers or employees of the Offeror are allowable costs. Unit costs for each proposed position, key or not, should be expressed in an amount per work day with the corresponding level of effort required for the position (number of work days) and then calculated to a total cost for each cost period where the salary would be applicable. Completed biographical data sheets must be provided for all consultants.

Travel and Transportation Cost principles in the FAR and OMB circulars provide for costs for transportation, lodging, meals and incidental expenses. Costs should be broken down by the number of trips, domestic and international, and the estimated cost per trip, including airfare, per diem, and other related travel costs.

The origin and destination, purpose for each proposed trip, duration of travel, and number of individuals traveling must be specified. Per Diem should be based on the Offeror's normal travel policies; however, the rates cannot exceed those of the Federal Standardized Travel Regulations for cost estimates.

Equipment and Supplies FAR 2.101 provides for supplies as all property except land or interest in land. Costs should be broken down by types and units.

Branding and Marking Costs ADS 320.3.6.3 states the costs of branding and marking are eligible for financing in contracts, if the costs are reasonable, allocable, and allowable in accordance with applicable cost principles. Such costs should be included in the total estimated cost or bid/offer price of the implementing partner.

Monitoring and Evaluation CostsPer ADS 203.3.5, include costs of data collection, analysis, and reporting as a separate line item to ensure that adequate resources are available.

Subcontracts FAR 44.101 provides for any contract entered into by a subcontractor to furnish supplies or services for performance of a prime contract or a subcontract. Cost element breakdowns should include the same budget items as the prime as applicable. All vehicles need to be purchased by the prime contractor.

Subgrants Per the Statement of Work, Grants under Contracts will be a component of the resulting award. Include estimated costs of grants in the detailed budget.

Allowances AIDAR 752.7028 provides for differentials and allowances with further references to Standardized Regulations. Allowances should be broken down by specific type and by person, and should be in accordance with offeror’s policies and these regulations.

Conferences and Training AIDAR 752.7019 and ADS 253 provides for participant training and training in development. Costs should be broken down by types and participants.

Other Direct Costs Various types of direct costs and many cost elements are allowable. Costs should be broken down by types and units.

Indirect Costs FAR 31.203 and FAR 42.700 provides for those remaining costs (indirect) that are to be allocated to intermediate or two or more final cost objectives. The indirect costs and bases as provided for in an offeror’s indirect cost rate agreement with the Government, or if approved rates have not been previously established with the Government, a breakdown of bases, pools, method of determining the rates and description of costs.

b. Evaluation criteria Proposed costs shall be evaluated for price reasonableness, completeness, allowability, allocability and the competitiveness of the target cost, target fee, and maximum fee 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 will be determined and will be used as part of the tradeoff analysis in source selection determination.