RESPONSES_TO_COMMENTS_ON_PAMO_STATEMENT_OF_WORK.docx

RESPONSES TO COMMENTS ON PMAP STATEMENT OF WORK

1. In Section C.3, four separate objectives are listed, but only the first three objective areas are discussed in detail in Section C.4 with related tasks and targets in the SOW. It would be helpful if USAID could provide further clarity on the envisioned tasks and targets for “empowering communities to take ownership of the malaria problem and work with governmental and non-governmental entities to control malaria in their own communities,” or if USAID indicates that offerors should integrate the tasks and results of this objective area into the three detailed objectives.

To what extent is the community focus mentioned in C.3 point 4) in the SoW likely to feature as a measured result? This is not covered in the actual Program Objectives although it is referred to in the Evaluation Criteria Response – The extent of community focus is dealt with under C.4.1.1 task 2 relating to iCCM and task 4 on strengthening behavior change communication at community level.

2. On page 4, USAID states that the number of communities reached will depend on negotiations between the contractor and USAID/President’s Malaria Initiative, and on page 9, that every district will be reached by the end of Year 2. It would greatly assist offerors if USAID indicates its priorities for both phased implementation and the criteria it will use for selection of specific communities within each district, especially given the focus on universal insecticide-treated net coverage under Task C.4.1.1 Response – Offerors may suggest criteria for phased approach of implementation

3. C.4.1.2.5 – this gives the target for IPTp as 2 doses or more but in C.4.1.1.3 it is given as 3 doses or more. Which is the correct target?

Response - Corrected

4. Task 1, page 4: Given that Zambia is expected to achieve near universal coverage with insecticide treated nets (ITNs) following the 2013/2014 campaign, should the offeror assume that the next mass campaign would not occur until 2018 and that the focus on increasing ownership for the first years of the project will be on strengthening continuous distribution ?

Response – Yes. This information can be obtained from the NMCP in Lusaka

5. Task 1, page 4: As the contractor will be required to strengthen distribution of ITNs from district level to communities and households, can USAID please clarify who will have responsibility for the movement of nets from central level to the districts?

Response – The primary focus of the contractor for this SOW will be distribution of nets from district to health facilities and community

6. Task 2, page 4: The scope of work indicates that “although the primary focus is on malaria, an integrated approach is anticipated (e.g., IMCI, iCCM). Could USAID provide more detail on the anticipated role of the awardee in strengthening IMCI and iCCM?

C.4.1.1.2 - Do USAID envisage iCCM being provided by Community Health Assistants or voluntary Community Health Workers or a combination of both? It is also not clear if the support to be provided is to include iCCM training or to be rather ongoing support for CHWs that are already trained in iCCM – could this be clarified?

Response – The contractor will support training, supervision and mentorship for ICCM and IMCI focusing on hard to reach areas

7. Task 4, page 5: The RFP states that “the contractor must provide technical and material assistance to the DCMOs, health facilities and communities…” Could USAID clarify what is meant by “material assistance to the DCMOs, health facilities and communities?”

In several places, the SOW refers to the contractor providing “technical and material assistance” or “material support” to DCMOs, health facilities and communities. What is meant by “material assistance/support”? Is there any level of commodity procurement associated with this contract, and can this be more clearly described?

Response – USAID/Zambia intentionally included the broad term “material assistance” to ensure flexibility in the successful Contractor’s implementation approach. It may include funding, goods, and non-technical assistance services which will support DCMOs, health facilities, and communities implement malaria activities outlined in District Action Plans. The contractor will not procure malaria commodities i.e. ITNs, RDTs, antimalarial drugs.

8. Task 4, page 5: In the description of the same task, the RFP mentions acceptance of IRS as a goal of behavioral change communication. Given that IRS will be implemented through a separate contract, could USAID clarify the expected role of PMaP in increasing IRS acceptance?

Response – PMaP will be responsible for BCC around IRS. The IRS partner will be responsible for all other IRS activities.

9. Page 5: May offerors assume that the targets listed are illustrative and does USAID expect offerors to expand on this list in proposals and in development of the project monitoring and evaluation plan?

Response – Offerors may include additional targets.

10. Page 5: Most of the indicators for the targets listed under Objective 1 will require population-based data to measure. Will the contractor be expected to undertake baseline and endline surveys or will USAID rely on periodic Malaria Indicator Surveys or other data sources for measuring results? Will the contractor be expected to measure impact against the MIS data or will the contractor be expected to conduct baseline data collection on the percentage of women receiving three doses?

Response – The contractor will not be required to conduct baseline and endline surveys. The Malaria Indicator Surveys will be used for this purpose.

11. Deliverable # 8, page 7: Would USAID please clarify whether the Monitoring and Evaluation Plan will be part of the proposal submission or whether the selected contractor will be required to develop and finalize this plan during the award process?

Response – The successful offeror will be required to develop a monitoring and evaluation plan

12. Could USAID elaborate further on the roles/expected focus of the PMaP contractor and of the Health Communication Support Program and the expected collaboration between the two?

Would USAID clarify the expected collaboration and roles and responsibilities between PMaP and the Health Communication Support Program (HCSP) in the development and implementation of behavioral change communications (BCC) materials and training? In Section C.4.1.1, the contractor is asked to strengthen BCC implementation through the provision of technical and material assistance for BCC in districts. In Section C.6.1, however, it states that HCSP will take a leadership role in developing BCC strategies that PMaP must use.

Response - The renamed IMPROVING PREVENTION AND ADHERENCE TO CARE AND SUPPORT PROJECT (IMPACT) is USAID/Zambia’s flagship BCC project and will take a leadership role in developing BCC strategies and materials for malaria. The PMaP will collaborate closely with the NMCC and IMPACT to develop Information Education Communication materials when developing BCC campaign strategies (inclusive of materials and approaches to community level and interpersonal communications activities). PMaP will utilize these materials and implement the communications strategies at district and community. If the materials need further refinement to better reach a specific group or community, PMaP project may make the required revisions in collaboration with the NMCC and IMPACT if technical support is needed. IMPACT will conduct follow up operations research on the BCC materials and strategies throughout the implementation period to ensure efficacy, and make needed revisions.

13. The numbering and order of the “sub-factors” in this section differ from what is presented in the next sections. Will USAID be giving priority to the Staffing Plan over Key Personnel or will Key Personnel be the most important factor? This section lists Past Performance as “Factor 3,” whereas Cost/Price is listed as Factor 3 in the section below.

Response – Corrected

14. Please confirm that Deliverables 4 and 5 are due within 120 days of award Response – Confirmed

15. On page 6 the “Deliverables Table” refers to a Health System Gap Analysis exercise (6) to then inform a Malaria program management capacity strengthening plan (7), both are expected within 150 days. Can we suggest more time is given for (7) to be completed following (6)?

Response – the Health System Gap Analysis exercise/report may be conducted and concluded earlier allowing for the malaria program management capacity strengthening plan to be submitted within indicated time frame.

16. Page 6: targets C.4.2.2.2 and C.4.3.2 speak to the project’s goals and objectives; however, the contractor has limited ability to guarantee such outcomes. Thus, will the contractor be evaluated on the basis of meeting these defined targets?

Response – The limitations of the contractor are well understood. Discussions concerning this will be held with the successful offeror.

17. The PPI Data Sheet referenced in the instructions is not included as an attachment to the zip file provided by USAID. Would USAID consider providing this attachment to offerors in advance of the final RFP release so that we may prepare the documentation in advance?

Response – CECILIA?

18. Can USAID please clarify whether one project or multiple projects are to be presented in the PPI Data Sheets?

Section 1.2.2 Sub-factor 3: Past Performance, Evaluation Criteria Instructions, states that the "Offeror shall provide ...the five most relevant current or previous awards performed ...Each Offeror should submit no more than 8 past performance information data sheets for the entire prime/sub-contractor team." Would USAID confirm that at least 5 of the 8 past performance information data sheets must be for the prime contractor?

Response – The maximum number of past performance information data sheets for the prime/sub-contractor team is eight. USAID/Zambia is not imposing a minimum number of data sheets for the prime contractor.

19. Can USAID please clarify whether each consortium member (prime and subcontractors) is expected to present their five most recent, most relevant programs as evidence of past performance?

Response – The maximum number of past performance information data sheets for the entire prime/sub-contractor team is eight. This limit is cumulative and each consortium member should not present five.

20. The language in this section seems to imply that only contracts will be acceptable as indications of past performance. Will USAID also accept past performance references for grants and agreements?

Response – Yes, USAID will accept past performance references for assistance awards.

21. Could USAID please share relevant quarterly/annual reports, and other technical documents on its website or DEC from any current implementing partners that are conducting malaria-related activities?

Response – USAID/Zambia will work with the implementing partner for ZISSP to ensure that appropriate documentation is uploaded to the DEC in accordance with AIDAR 752.7005 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS FOR DEVELOPMENT EXPERIENCE DOCUMENTS (SEP 2013). We have already shared the mid-term evaluation for ZISSP several months ago.

22. Would USAID consider providing a numerical scoring of evaluation factors in order to facilitate the preparation of the response to this solicitation?

Response – No, USAID/Zambia is using an adjectival rating system for this acquisition.

23. Section 1.2.2 Sub-factor 3: Past Performance, Evaluation Criteria Instructions, states, "Offerors must include the awards performed in sequential order and not select those awards with the best past performance information." Would USAID clarify what is meant by "performed in sequential order"? Is the contractor required to select awards based on their sequential order? Is the contractor prohibited from selecting awards based on best past performance information or ratings?

Response – The answer to both questions is yes.

24. 1.2.2. Please confirm that past performance information will be required two weeks in advance of the submission of the proposal and will therefore not form part of the actual proposal submission.

Response – Past Performance information will be required two weeks in advance of the submission of the proposal and will be considered part of the offerors’ proposal submission. USAID/Zambia is requesting this information early in order to facilitate a faster review of proposals and final award decisions. The past performance information submitted prior to the technical and cost proposals will be used to help evaluate past performance.