SOL-611-17-000001_AGIS_Questions_and_Answers.docx_(1).pdf

Prospective Offerors Questions and USAID/Zambia Answers to the Accountable Governance for Improved Service Delivery (AGIS) solicitation. RFP No. SOL-611-17-000001

Note: All required changes have been incorporated into the RFP and take precedence over any response in this document.

GENERAL

1. Given the Christmas and New Year’s holidays in December and January, and the fact that many public and private sector partners in Zambia may be closed or have limited availability during the holiday period, would the Mission consider granting a two-week extension to the proposal due date? Limited availability of partners during the holiday period could otherwise negatively impact the quality of technical submissions and personnel recruitment.

USAID extends the proposal due date by 21 calendar days, from January 6, 2017 to January 27

2017, See RFP amendment #1.

2. The cover letter on page 1 of the RFP indicates that USAID anticipates a single cost plus fixed fee contract award. However, on page 106 of 129 “(f) Contract Award” USAID indicates that they could award multiple CPFF contracts. Please clarify – does USAID intend to award a single cost plus fixed fee contract or multiple contracts?

USAID intends to award a single cost plus fixed fee completion contract.

3. Can USAID share the most recent Country Development Cooperation Strategy for Zambia?

The current CDCS (2011-2015) is available on the USAID/Zambia website.

https://www.usaid.gov/zambia/newsroom/key-documents. USAID/Zambia is designing the next

CDCS for the period 2017-2022 and it will be made available on the website once complete.

4. What is the anticipated start date for the project?

USAID cannot provide an anticipated start date at this point.

5. Deadline: Due to the upcoming holidays in Zambia, we request an extension of the deadline by 1 week (to Friday January 13 th

Refer to response question # 1 above.

6. Would USAID and the Government of Zambia be willing to share the PFMRAF assessments prepared for relevant health and education stakeholders with interested bidders based on an agreement to confidentiality, as was done for the recent Nepal PFM proposal? We understand that one of the competitors for this bid was involved in the preparation of prior

PFMRAF assessments of key stakeholders for this project, and sharing of this information would help to ensure equal competition.

USAID/Zambia is may share the PFMRAF assessments for the Health and Education Ministries and is currently in discussion with the Government of the Republic of Zambia on making the assessment available. The assessment should be available on or/by January 9, 2017. Offerors interested in accessing the PFMRAF assessments would have send a request to oaa-solicit-lusaka@usaid.gov and copy agarceau@usaid.gov.and will be required to sign non-disclosure agreements that will be furnished by USAID, this will also apply to potential sub-contractors.

7. Can USAID confirm that the USAID/Zambia Country Development Cooperation Strategy

2011-2015 is the most recent CDCS available? If not, can USAID provide the most recent

CDCS?

Confirmed. Refer to response to question # 3 above.

8. Can USAID provide relevant reports from the FACT project?

https://www.usaid.gov/zambia/newsroom/key-documents mailto:oaa-solicit-lusaka@usaid.gov mailto:oaa-solicit-lusaka@usaid.gov mailto:agarceau@usaid.gov

No. USAID has determined that access to the FACT project reports is not essential for proposal submission.

9. Does the U.S. Government have a Memorandum of Understanding with the Government of the Republic of Zambia regarding taxes?

USAID has a Development Assistance Agreement with the Government of the Republic of

Zambia that covers among other things taxation of Assistance.

10. We respectfully request an extension of the submission deadline due to the Christmas and

New Year’s Holidays, the need for USAID to give full consideration to the questions from

Offerors, and for Offerors to incorporate USAID’s answers into their proposals.

Refer to response to question #1 above

11. Does USAID anticipate the contractor will have access to GRZ government information systems for the use of monitoring and evaluation?

Typically, assistance programs have access to relevant information products or sources of data, however, depending on the nature of the work and the relationship with the government. USAID cannot guarantee nor can it compel the GRZ to provide access to information systems for monitoring and evaluation purposes.

12. Due to the upcoming holidays in Zambia, we request an extension of the deadline by 1 week

(to Friday January 13th).

Refer to response to question #1 above

SECTION B

13. Under Section B.9, page 7, the RFP mentions that this is a multiyear contract, and that

“…the contractor will not incur any costs which would have been amortized over the life of the contract…” Can USAID confirm that we cannot hire anyone for the project for more than a year? In other words, we will have to enter into a ‘fixed term’ contract for 1 year, and renew that every year (even if this means paying severance money every year as per the local law). Same for the office space leasing and LQA? Is this a correct understanding?”

No, that is not the correct understanding. The offeror has to follow their own policies regarding how to manage the risk of USAID cancelling this award sooner than the five year period of performance as it enters into contracts. Section B.9 does not prevent contractor from entering into multi-year contracts.

14. Regarding Section B.5 on pages 5-6, may offerors propose alternate or additional deliverables for the fee table?

Offerors may propose additional but not alternate deliverables for the fee table

15. Section B.7, page 6, of the RFP requests Ceiling on Indirect Rates for Prime and Major

Subcontractors and Section L.8 on page 120 states that only the offeror must propose ceilings on their final indirect cost rates. Will USAID please clarify which partners must provide ceilings on Indirect Rates as part of Section B?

Both the Prime and major subcontractors must propose ceilings on their indirect rates. See

Section L.8 (e)(iii)of RFP amendment #1

16. Section B.6 on page 6 states, “Indirect costs shall not be allowed for organizations that do not have a NICRA. All costs for organizations without a NICRA shall be budgeted and billed as direct costs.” Would USAID consider permitting indirect costs for organizations with audited indirect rates that have an established record of managing subcontracts with indirect rates for USAID projects?

No. If the contractor does not have a NICRA, all costs must be budgeted and billed as direct costs, but must comply with requirements in Section L.8 (e)(ii) for purposes of cost realism.

SECTION C

17. The deliverables on page 21 include “New or revised templates and protocols for streamlining and improving identified transparency and accountability functions of district level health and education service delivery entities.” Will USAID please clarify if these entities are limited to the district offices of the two target ministries (MoH and MoGE) as stated on pg. 14?

Yes, the deliverables on page 21 refer to the targeted district offices under MOH and MoGE

18. Page 14 of the RFP notes that selection criteria for the beneficiary districts will include

“high volume/yield sites identified under Zambia’s PEPFAR initiative” as well as ones where the USAID/FACT project is working. We have been unable to definitively identify these potential sites through research and would kindly appreciate USAID’s assistance as part of the tender process.

The following are the current FACT focus districts: Lusaka Province: Kafue, Shibuyunji, Lusaka, Eastern: Petauke, Nyimba, Chipata, Lundazi, Mambwe. Final target districts, including the PEPFAR districts, will be considered with the contractor, government and USAID.

19. Can USAID please provide an illustrative breakdown of the expected use of AGIS’s technical assistance efforts between the national government level and subnational entities?

Capacity gaps and needs across the national and subnational level are endless. Offerors must use existing resources to present their best understanding of what is required at the various levels to meet the objectives of the activity. USAID anticipates that the level of effort will be further informed by the situational analysis to be undertaken by the contractor.

20. Section C.5 on page 21 it states, “The contractor must complete and provide the following deliverables: Six district level capacity development plans detailing concrete, measurable results to be achieved to improve the transparency and accountability functions of district level health and service delivery entities.” Can you confirm this is for both health and also education?

Confirmed. See Section C.5 of the RFP amendment #1 for clarifying language

21. On page 23, Section C.7, the RFP states “[w]here practical, the Contractor will be expected to incorporate relevant health and education indicators, including those mandated by

PEPFAR reporting requirements.” As AGIS will focus on building capacity to address public financial management drivers that affect service delivery, but not necessarily remedy service delivery challenges directly (p.14), achievement of standard USAID health (including

PEPFAR) and education indicators may not be possible within the life of the project. Could

USAID confirm that bidders are not expected to include service delivery level indicators and instead include indicators that focus on institutional strengthening of the MoH and MoGE at the national and district levels?

No change to the RFP. Offerors must include a broad range of indicators as appropriate.

Activities must contribute to increased transparency and accountability, with priority placed on interventions that have a clear causal links to either health or education outcomes. The extent to which Offerors propose feasible, cost-effective ways through which AGIS will demonstrate support to cross-sectoral outcomes (health and education) is part of the evaluation criteria.

SECTION F

22. Under Section F.6, page 31, the RFP states that “the first draft annual work plan will be submitted with the proposal…” Can USAID advise where in the proposal the offeror should submit the draft annual work plan? Can USAID confirm that the Annual Work Plan referenced on page 31 does not count against a page limit? Is there a template for the

Annual Work Plan?

Requirement for draft annual workplan to be submitted with proposal has been removed. See

Section F.A a) of RFP Amendment #1.

23. Section F.6.A.a. on page 31 includes the sentence “The first draft annual work plan will be submitted with the proposal, and a final revised version must be submitted 60 days after contract award.” The proposal instructions in Section L do not mention the requirement to submit a draft of the first annual work plan with the proposal. Please confirm that no draft first annual work plan is required as part of our proposal submission.

Refer to response to question 22, above.

24. Regarding F.5 on pages 30-31, could USAID clarify whether six-day workweeks are authorized for all international short-term assignments, with no overtime or premium pay?

Yes. See Section F.5 of RFP amendment #1.

25. On Page 31, Section F.6(A)(a), the RFP states “[t]he first draft of the annual workplan will be submitted with the proposal.” Should offerors submit this as an additional annex to the technical proposal narrative? Will this be evaluated in accordance with the Technical

Evaluation Factors listed in Section M.2 of the RFP?

Refer to question 22.

26. On Page 31, Section F.6(A)(f), the RFP states “[i]f the Contractor is other than a small business, it must submit a Subcontracting Plan using the Model Template included as

Attachment J.30 of this RFP.” This is also listed in the guidance for Annex 2 on page 109 at part of the Management and Staffing Plan. As this document includes cost information, please confirm that this should be submitted only with the cost proposal and that this will not be included in Annex 2 of the Technical Proposal, nor evaluated as part of the technical evaluation factors.

The Small Business Subcontracting Plan should be included with the cost proposal and the performance information narrative on small business concerns referenced in the technical proposal Factor 4 should be included as a separate annex in the technical proposal.

SECTION H

27. May additional years of experience be substituted for the education qualifications for key personnel?

No.

28. In Section H.2 Key Personnel, the third bullet point for the Chief of Party states: “Minimum seven years of experience in public financial management reform; institutional capacity building of government systems; crosssectoral work for example in health or education or other relevant sector.” Does USAID require that the candidate has seven years of experience in each of the areas listed, or seven years’ experience in one area or a combination of those areas?

See RFP amendment # 1 for clarifying language

29. Would USAID please confirm that proposed non-key local experts are required to be non-exclusive?

This question is not very clear. However, if the query is about restrictions on non-key personnel positions, the response is that there are no restrictions to locally hired non-key personnel positions, if this is the query.

SECTION L

30. In Section L.7, Factor 4, #5, page 112, the RFP requests that offerors submit the PPI Data

Sheet “14 days prior to the proposal due date indicated on the cover page.” Would the

Mission consider changing this to allow past performance references to be submitted as a technical annex with the rest of the proposal submission by the proposal due date?

No. This is to help prevent further delays in the award of the contract.

31. In Section L.8 Cost Proposal Instructions, on page 116, the RFP requests that offerors

“create a separate worksheet to highlight and summarize all anticipated costs attributed to

Branding & Marketing activities and Monitoring & Evaluation activities. The detailed budget will not include separate line items for Branding & Marking or Monitoring &

Evaluation activities.” Could the Mission please confirm that this separate worksheet should not contain additional expenses to those contained in the detailed/itemized proposal budget?

Confirmed. 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 cost categories in the detailed budget, but as line items under other direct costs (ODC) cost category.

32. Under Section L.8 Cost Proposal Instructions, page 117 states under (d) (i) that the Offeror shall provide “additional supporting budget documentation to substantiate all proposed costs.” On the same page, under section (d) (vii), the RFP goes on to request that “other supporting documentation should be submitted as necessary to substantiate and support costs proposed.”

We appreciate the importance of cost realism in developing and evaluating project budgets and plan to develop our project budget based on actual quotes, receipts and past invoices for all proposed costs. In the interest of submitting a concise and easily reviewed proposal, would the Mission allow Offerors to omit these supporting documents from the cost proposal submission, and rather request additional supporting documentation from Offers in the competitive range on an as-needed basis?

No change to the RFP.

33. Could the Mission please confirm that Offerors may submit up to 3 of the most relevant contracts performed within the last three years for efforts similar to the work in the subject proposal for each major subcontractor, as well as for the Offeror? (Section L.7, Factor 4, Past Performance, #1, page 112) If this is permissible, please confirm that the limit of 8 Past

Performance data sheets for the entire prime/sub-contractor team (Factor 4, Past

Performance, #5, page 113) would also increase accordingly.

Each Offeror should submit no more than 8 past performance information data sheets for the entire prime/sub-Contractor team.

34. Please confirm that the work plan mentioned in Section F.6.A.a of the RFP (page 31) is not required as part of the proposal submission, per the instructions in Section L.

Refer to response to question # 22 above

35. P. 121 of 129 part “(l) Consolidated Budget” indicates that the offeror must provide a separate budget for each sub-offerors. Given the cost plus fixed fee contract type, will subcontractors be allowed to provide unsanitized budgets directly to USAID for price evaluation with the prime’s proposal in order to protect proprietary pricing information?

Budgets must be consolidated in one excel workbook and submitted by the prime offeror.

36. On page 112 of the RFP in “Factor 4 – Past Performance,” USAID asks Offerors to supply past performance references for previously awarded relevant contracts. Would USAID accept relevant cooperative agreements performed within the last 3 years in lieu of contracts?

Offerors may submit information about the most relevant contracts and/or assistance instruments that the Offerors have performed within the last five years. See Section L.7, of RFP

Amendment #1 for clarifying language.

37. : Section L.7, Factor 4, Part 5 on pg. 115 asks offerors to “submit PPI Data Sheets 14 calendar days prior to the proposal due date.” Given that the response to the above question may change the projects used for past performance references, and that the response to questions may be released less than 14 calendar days before the proposal due date, would the government consider allowing Offerors to submit PPI Data Sheets to the government on the proposal due date?

Refer to response to question #30. Also see RFP amendment #1 for revised proposal due date.

38. The proposed Subcontracting Plan is referenced in the instructions for the technical proposal (pages 111 and 123) and cost proposal (page 119). Since the proposed

Subcontracting Plan contains cost information, please confirm it should only be provided in the Cost Proposal.

Refer to response to question #26.

39. : Per page 108 of the RFP, the 20 page technical proposal narrative limit excludes the cover page, table of contents, acronym list, and annexes. Will USAID accept a cover letter and exclude it from the 20 page limit?

No.

40. Page 8 of the RFP, Section B.6 Indirect Costs, states the following: “The Contractor is allowed to recover applicable indirect costs (i.e. overhead, G&A, etc.) on other direct costs

(ODCs), if it is part of the Contractor’s usual accounting procedures, consistent with FAR

Part 31, and the Negotiated Indirect Cost Rate Agreement (NICRA). Indirect costs shall not be allowed for organizations that do not have a NICRA. All costs for organizations without a

NICRA shall be budgeted and billed as direct costs.”

Section L.8 (e) Indirect Cost Information, page 120, provides the following instructions:

“(i) The Offeror and each proposed subcontractors must include a complete copy of its most current Negotiated Indirect Cost Rate Agreement (NICRA) or other documentation from its cognizant Government Audit Agency, if any, stating the most recent final indirect cost rates.

The proposal must also include the name and address of the Government Audit Agency, and the name and telephone number of the auditor.

(ii) If the Offeror or any subcontractor(s) do not have a cognizant Government Audit Agency, audited balance sheets and profit and loss statements for the last two complete years, and the current year-to-date statements (or such lesser period of time if the Offeror is a newly-formed organization), must be included in the proposal. The profit and loss statements must include detail of the total cost of goods and services sold, including a listing of the various indirect administrative costs, and be supplemented by information on the prime contractor’s customary indirect cost allocation method, together with supporting computations of the basis for the indirect cost rate(s) proposed. “

These two sections do not agree. Will USAID please clarify if offerors or subcontractors without a cognizant Government Audit Agency are allowed to budget for indirect rates providing the submission of audited balance sheets and profit and loss statements for the last two complete years, and the current year-to-date statements?

If the contractor or subcontractor does not have a NICRA, all costs must be budgeted and billed as direct costs. However L.8 (e)(ii) does not waive the need to budget and let alone bill the overheads as other direct costs, but provide basis for such costs for purposes of cost realism.

41. Is a six-day work week authorized for short-term technical assistance (STTA)?

Refer to response to question #24.

42. Page 118, Section L.8 (b) Proposed Costs and Prices states the following:

“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

Monitoring & Evaluation activities. The detailed budget will not include separate line items for Branding & Marking or Monitoring & Evaluation activities.”

;However, page age 116 Section L.8 (b) Proposed Costs and Prices lists the detailed/itemized budget line items to be included:

● Salary and Wages

● Fringe Benefits

● Consultants

● Travel, Transportation, and Per Diem

● Equipment

● Supplies

● Subcontracts

● Other Direct Costs o Allowances o Participant Training o Branding and Marking Activities o ;Monitoring and Evaluation Activities

● Indirect Costs

● Profit/Fee

The Branding & Marking activities and Monitoring & Evaluation activities are listed as line items under this list therefore these two sections do not seem to be in agreement. Will USAID please clarify where Branding & Marking activities and Monitoring & Evaluation activities should be included in the budget?

Refer to response to question #31.

43. Will providing a detailed budget narrative with comprehensive explanation of costs listed in the budget be sufficient to meet the requirements listed on page 117 (d) Supporting

Documents (i) and (vii)?

No change to RFP. Supporting documentation should be provided as necessary and budget narrative are supposed to be detailed enough for USAID to make fair assessment of the proposed cost.

44. On page 114 Section L.8 (b) Proposed Cost/Prices Budget Line Item Definitions states

“Position descriptions briefly explaining what role each proposed person will perform on the project must be included.” Can USAID please clarify if these requested position descriptions correspond to the position descriptions required in Annex 3 of the Technical proposal?

The information in requested in Annex 3 is for the Key personnel positions that will be evaluated as part of the technical proposal, whereas the descriptions requested under section L.8(b) is required for evaluation of budget or cost proposal.

45. Will USAID please provide an exchange rate?

No. USAID will not provide an exchange rate, the prospective offeror will make own assumptions and use an exchange rate that is reflective of the obtaining exchange.

46. What exchange rate should we use for budgeting purposes?

Refer to response to question #45.

47. Pages 108 and 109 of the RFP state that the technical proposal narrative has a 20 page limit and the Activity Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning Plan (AMELP) is 40 pages. We kindly ask that USAID confirm these page limitations.

Confirmed.

48. Should the main body of the Technical Proposal (20 pages) only focus on Factor 1-Technical

Approach, and just mention that text addressing Factors 2-4 can be found in the respective annexes, or should we also spend some of the 20 pages providing highlights of our response to Factors 1-4 and then reference reader to the respective Annexes covering these factors in the required detail?

The technical proposal should not exclusively focus on the technical approach. As appropriate the other factors should highlighted and referenced accordingly.

49. We note that when the subcontracting plan is referenced on page 109, on page 111

(subfactor2.1) and on page 119, it appears to be requested for inclusion in the technical proposal as annex 2. As attachment J.30, USAID Small Business Subcontracting Plan

Template, provided with the RFP appears to include cost information that would typically be included in the cost proposal; would USAID consider moving this attachment to the cost proposal? If so, could USAID clarify how the subcontracting plan would figure into the evaluation of sub-factor 2.1?

Refer to response to question #26.

50. Under Section L.7, page 108, the RFP states “The page limit for the technical proposal narrative, including any executive summary, is twenty (20) pages.” Can USAID confirm that the technical proposal narrative should only address Sub Factor 1.1 and Sub Factor 1.2?

That is, should management, AMELP, staffing, personnel, past performance, and organizational capacity only be covered in the annexes, or should some write up of these issues also be included in the technical proposal narrative?

See response to question 48

51. Would USAID allow the offerors to include a short introduction in the key personnel annex

(Annex 3) that explains the overall qualifications of the key personnel and their complementarity to meet the technical and management needs of the project?

Offers may include a short introduction; however, the page restrictions remain the same.

52. Under Section L.2 (2), page 101, refers to the first page of the proposal. Is L.2 (2) referring to a cover page or a cover letter? If it refers to a cover letter, can USAID confirm that the cover letter is excluded from the twenty (20) page limit?

The first page is the cover page which is excluded from the 20 page limit.

53. On page 112, the RFP states that the offeror should “list in an annex to the technical proposal up to {3} of the most relevant contracts performed within the last three years for efforts similar to the work in the subject proposal.” On page 113, the RFP states that “each offeror should submit no more than 8 past performance information data sheets for the entire prime/subcontractor team.” Can USAID confirm that the prime Contractor should submit up to 3 PPI data sheets for its qualifications and up to 3 PPI data sheets for each major subContractor, subject to an overall limit of 8 PPI data sheets?

Confirmed.

54. Would USAID like offerors to include either data quality assessment (DQA) questionnaires or performance indicator reference sheets (PIRS) for individual indicators as part of the 40 page AMELP?

The Offerors should determine what is most appropriate in response to the solicitation.

55. Under Section L.8, page 114, (a) Standard Form (SF) 33 says “This section of the Cost

Proposal should also contain a completed Section B with costs, fee, and rate information provided”. Do offerors have to complete Section B.5 Payment of Fixed Fee as well, or will this be negotiated postaward?

It will be negotiated pre-award with the apparent successful offeror.

56. Under Section L.8, page 118, (g) Policies and Procedures asks for submitting policies and procedures. Is this required for offerors who currently hold USAID projects as well? If this is required for all offerors, can USAID confirm if the personnel policies should be only from the prime contractor, or from each subcontractor as well?

USAID would like, copies of policies and procedures, from All offerors (Prime offerors and major subcontractors), regardless of their previous experience in receiving U.S. Government funding.

57. Under Section L.8, page 117, (c) says TCN and CCN employees should be within the local compensation plan. Can USAID confirm that this (LCP) is not applicable for short-term

“consultants” (who do not receive any social benefits from the project)?

Confirmed.

58. Section L.7 Factor 4, on pages 112-113, under point 5 it instructs the Offeror to submit no more than 8 PPI Data Sheets 14 calendar days prior to the proposal due date. Under point 1 it instructs the Offeror to list 3 PPI Data Sheets in the technical proposal annex. Does

USAID want the Offeror to submit up to 8 PPI Data Sheets 14 calendar days prior and additionally 3 PPI data sheets in the annex within the proposal submission? Can USAID please clarify the instructions on the submissions of the PPI Data Sheets?

Refer to responses to questions #30 & #33 above.

59. Section L.7 USAID requires an organogram. Will USAID allow this graphic to be excluded from the 10 page limitation for Annex 2?

No.

60. Section L.7 Factor 4, paragraph number 1 on page 112 requires that past performance contracts are those performed within the past 3 years. We suggest that for small firms who specialize in PFM, there may be relevant examples of past performance that are older than 3 years but that serve as good examples of the firm’s performance on similar projects. Limiting past performance examples to only those within the past 3 years may prevent USAID from having a full appreciation of a firm’s experience and could put smaller, more specialized firms at a disadvantage since we have fewer examples to choose from. We request that

USAID allow examples of past performance to include projects that were implemented within the past 7 years.

Refer to response to question #36.

61. Would USAID consider an Executive Summary section separately from the Technical

Approach and not included in the 20 page limitation?

No

62. For subcontractors without NICRA who charge only direct costs, would USAID remove the requirements in Section L.8 page 120 (ii) on submitting audited balance sheets and audited profit loss statements? Please confirm the USAID requirement that small businesses need only submit reviewed financial statements.

Refer to response to question #40. The requirement that small businesses submit only reviewed financial statements is confirmed.

63. Section L.8 on page 121 it states, “The Offeror and each proposed partner(s)/ subcontractor(s) must complete Section K” however Section L.9 page 122 says, “any proposed Major Subcontractors (Major Subcontractors are those subcontractors proposed at costs equivalent to 15% of the budget or more) must submit completed Representations, Certifications and Other Statements of Bidders per Section K”. Can USAID confirm that only major subcontractors should submit a signed Section K?

All partners must complete certifications and representations required in section K.

64. Does USAID have a standard template to provide Offerors for Annex 1 the AMELP?

There is no template for the AMELP.

65. Please confirm that the annexes to the technical proposal listed on page 109 (Section L.7), will be reviewed as part of the evaluation of the proposal and in accordance with the

Technical Evaluation Factors listed in Section M.2 of the RFP, namely Sub-factor 1.3, Factor 2, Factor 3, and Factor 4.

Confirmed

66. On page 112, Section L.7, Technical Proposal Instructions, Factor 4 Past Performance, item number 5 states “Offerors must submit PPI Data Sheets 14 calendar days prior to the proposal date indicated on the cover page of the RFP.” Please confirm that this deadline is

December 23, 2016 at 4:30 pm, Lusaka time. Additionally, are offerors also required to resubmit the PPI Data Sheets with their full proposals?

Refer to response to question #37. Offerors will not be required to resubmit the PPI data sheets with the full proposal.

67. On page, 112, Section L.7, Factor 4 Past Performance, item number 5 states, “Offerors must include the awards performed in sequential order and not select those awards with the best past performance information.” Please clarify the use of “sequential” in this case.

Sequential means the order in which the awards were performed, starting with the most recent.

68. On page 112, Section L.7, Technical Proposal Instructions, Factor 4 Past Performance, item number 1 states, “Using the PPI Data Sheet, list in an annex to the technical proposal up to

{3} of the most relevant contracts performed within the last three years for efforts similar to the work in the subject proposal. However, on the following page, item number 5 states, “Each Offeror should submit no more than 8 past performance information data sheets for the entire prime/subcontractor team.” Given this language, please confirm that each offeror can submit up to eight PPI Data Sheets to be evaluated for the entire prime/subcontractor team as an annex to the technical proposal.

Refer to response for question # 33.

69. On page 113, Section L.7, Technical Proposal Instructions, Factor 4 Past Performance, item number 5 states, “Offerors shall not provide assessments of their performance on any referenced award.” Please clarify what kind of assessments this refers to, and what sources are allowed within the description of quality awards and certifications that indicate exceptional capacity to provide the service or product described in the statement of work.

Offerors cannot provide own assessment of work they performed. Assessment has to come from references they worked with or another agency they worked with.

70. Section L.8(a) on page 114 indicates that the SF33 should include an “original signature”.

Considering that proposals will be delivered electronically via email, would USAID please confirm that offerors may submit an SF33 with a scanned or electronic signature?

Confirmed.

71. Section L.8(b)(ii) on page 114 states that the detailed itemized budget must include the following items as “Other Direct Costs”: Branding and Marking Activities and Monitoring and Evaluation Activities. Section L.8(b)(ii) on page 116 then states, “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 Monitoring &

Evaluation activities. The detailed budget will not include separate line items for Branding

& Marking or Monitoring & Evaluation activities.” Given this language, please advise as to whether offerors can include Branding & Marking activities and Monitoring & Evaluation activities as “Other Direct Costs” in their detailed budget as line items, or whether they should be budgeted only on a separate worksheet.

Refer to response to question 31.

72. Section L.8(d)(vii) on page 117 states, “Other supporting documentation should be submitted as necessary to substantiate and support costs proposed. Examples of other supporting documentation that would aid in the evaluation of the proposed costs include:

quotes, receipts/past invoices, documented market research performed, etc.” As this procurement will be conducted under full and open competition requirements under which adequate price competition should exist, would USAID consider removing this requirement?

No. Costs estimates have to be substantiated for USAID to make cost realism determination.

73. Regarding Section L.8(l) on page 119, we are unclear on the purpose of the “consolidation” of all subofferor costs, given that offerors will submit a standard summary budget plus detailed prime and sub-offeror budgets. Could USAID confirm that submission of a standard overall summary budget plus detailed budgets for themselves as prime and each subofferor will be sufficient? If so, would USAID consider removing this additional requirement?

No change to the RFP. Budget consolidation is not an additional requirement, it serves to emphasize that the budget should come in one excel workbook with separate tabs for detailed budgets for prime and subcontractors.

74. Regarding Section L.11 on page 120, could USAID confirm that offerors are not required to submit a TIP compliance plan certification as part of their proposals?

Confirmed. However, the apparent successful offeror will be required to submit a TIP prior award.

SECTION M

75. Under Section M.2, Sub Factor 2.2 Key Personnel on page 124, the evaluation criteria include “USAID-verified reference checks support the candidate’s stated skills.” Should

Offerors include reference contact information for each proposed key personnel, or will the reference checks be completed only for Offerors in the competitive range?

Offerors must include reference contact information for each proposed key personnel in the CVs.

76. Page 124, section M, states that USAID-verified reference checks support the candidate’s stated skills, section L does not include a requirement for key personnel reference information. Please clarify if references should be included in the CVs of each key personnel candidate.

Refer to response to question 75 above