Amendment_01_-_SOL-621-15-000014.pdf

RFP No. SOL‐621‐15‐000014, Amendment #1 Tusome Pamoja Program

b. Under SECTION C-DESCRIPTION /SPECIFICATIONS /STATEMENT OF WORK, sub-section C.4 STATEMENT OF WORK, in the table in row Component No. 1 under column entitled “Numerical Targets” delete the cell content and insert:

“3000 schools (900 in Zanzibar and Mtwara, and 2100 in three other regions)” See question No. 58 under the question and answer section below.

c. Under SECTION C-DESCRIPTION /SPECIFICATIONS /STATEMENT OF WORK, sub-section C.4 STATEMENT OF WORK, Component 1.1, delete the last sentence in paragraph 4 and insert:

“See Attachment 7 for the unit costs of materials that the MoEVT has previously found cost effective to produce.”

d. Under SECTION C-DESCRIPTION /SPECIFICATIONS /STATEMENT OF WORK, sub-section C.4 STATEMENT OF WORK, Component 1.1, delete the last bullet and insert:

“• Develop accompanying teachers’ guides for arithmetic.”

e. Under SECTION C-DESCRIPTION /SPECIFICATIONS /STATEMENT OF WORK, sub-section C.4 STATEMENT OF WORK, Component 2.3, delete the first sentence in the last paragraph and insert:

“The contractor must conduct a student assessment at least three times in each of the five regions during the Tusome Pamoja program.”

f. Under SECTION C-DESCRIPTION /SPECIFICATIONS /STATEMENT OF WORK, sub-section C.4 STATEMENT OF WORK, Component 2.4, delete the 7th bullet and insert:

“• Implement the USAID/Tanzania-approved plan and measure its effectiveness using selected indicators and benchmarks; and”

g. Under SECTION C-DESCRIPTION /SPECIFICATIONS /STATEMENT OF WORK, sub-section C.5 PERFORMANCE MONITORING AND EVALUATION, in A. Performance Monitoring delete the last sentence of the last paragraph.

h. Under SECTION F- DELIVERIES OF PERFORMANCE, in F.6 REPORTS AND DELIVERABLES OR OUTPUTS, A. Technical Deliverables. Delete the contents of the cell under Component 1.4, second row in column entitled “Anticipated Outcome” and insert:

“Students in pre-primary demonstrate better reading and writing outcomes than peers in control groups.”

i. Under SECTION F- DELIVERIES OF PERFORMANCE, in F.7 PERSONNEL, A. Key Personnel, Qualifications of Key Personnel, Senior Reading Specialist, Skills and Experience, delete the first sentence and insert:

“At least 6 years of experience in programs in sub-Saharan Africa that work specifically to improve early grade reading is required.”

j. Under SECTION I – CONTRACT CLAUSES, delete the following clauses included by reference: 52.203-

14; 52.204-2; 52.204-14.

k. At the end of SECTION J- LIST OF ATTACHMENTS add:

“ATTACHMENT 6 - FSN LOCAL COMPENSATION PLAN

ATTACHMENT 7 – UNIT COST PER BOOK FOR ZANZIBAR AND MTWARA SCHOOLS”

l. Under SECTION L – INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS, delete the following clause included by reference: 52.232-38.

m. Clarification Questions to USAID:

1. QUESTION: Page 22 of the RFP states that offerors should refer to “Attachment 5, item 7, for the unit costs of materials that the MoEVT has previously found cost effective to produce. Item seven of Attachment 5 is listed as “Mtaala wa Elimu ya Msingi 1&2 (Only available in Kiswahili: Standard 1&2 Primary school Curriculum) PDF”, and does not appear to include unit material costs. Can USAID please provide the unit costs for materials that the MoEVT found to be cost-effective to produce?

ANSWER: See Amendment No. 1 to the solicitation. the chart was added as attachment No. 7.

2. QUESTION: “Unit Costs of Materials produced under TZ-21” is listed as item 15 in Attachment 5, but the link to reference documents provided in Attachment 5 (https://sites.google.com/site/tusomepamoja/cdcs) does not appear to include a 15th item. Can USAID please provide the unit costs of materials produced under TZ21?

ANSWER: See response to question No. 1.

3. QUESTION: We understand that Tusome Pamoja will only pay for the production and distribution of read and writing kits listed in Table 3: Minimum required materials per grade and subject, “additional student materials justified by evidence, research, and sustainability consideration,” and teachers’ guides with scripted lessons to accompany the materials, while student textbooks will be printed and distributed by the Government of Tanzania and Government of Zanzibar. Can USAID please clarify that this is correct?

ANSWER: A student textbook for grade one and two in Tanzania Mainland is currently under development by the Tanzania Institute for Education. It will be printed and distributed by the Government of Tanzania Mainland.

4. QUESTION: Could USAID indicate its anticipated date of award, and/or its anticipated date of project start, in order to better enable offerors to develop accurate Year 1 Work Plans?

ANSWER: The start date for this activity is estimated to be on first quarter of fiscal year 2016.

5. QUESTION: Under Component 2.3, the RFP indicates that "The contractor must conduct a student assessment at least twice in each of the five regions during the Tusome Pamoja program." Could USAID confirm that these assessments (at least two) are different from those conducted by the decentralized actors described in Component 2.3?

ANSWER: Please see Amendment No. 1 to the Solicitation. The number of assessments was changed to at least three.

6. QUESTION: Could USAID indicate how many assessments will be conducted by an external evaluator (if any), and whether the information collected will be shared with the implementer?

ANSWER: USAID anticipates supporting a national Early Grade Reading Assessment (EGRA) every two years. This EGRA would sample schools across the entire country, including the Tusome Pamoja regions.

In addition, USAID may conduct independent, third party external evaluations of Tusome Pamoja. The timing, frequency and focus of these evaluations would be discussed with the Tusome Pamoja contractor to ensure maximum benefit. Results would be shared widely.

7. QUESTION: Clause H.4 of the RFP notes Geocode 935, while clause H.2 notes Geocode 937. Can

USAID please clarify the authorized geographic code for this solicitation?

ANSWER: Geographic code 935 is authorized for this procurement.

8. QUESTION: Can USAID clarify if FAR 52.203-14 is applicable to this contract, as place of performance is outside of the United States?

ANSWER: Please see Amendment No. 1 to the solicitation. Clause was deleted.

9. QUESTION: USAID has incorporated by reference FAR 52.204-2; can USAID please clarify if the performance of this contract entails access to classified information? If not, can USAID kindly incorporate AIDAR 752.204-2 for clarity in order to further define information as “Sensitive But Unclassified” or strike FAR 52.204-2 from the solicitation?

10. QUESTION: Can USAID confirm that AIDAR 752.7031 is not applicable to CCNs, and that the incorporated sick leave in Attachment 4, which exceeds that allowable per AIDAR 752.7031, is allowable for pricing and cost reimbursement if incurred during implementation?

ANSWER: The clause is applicable; see also Attachment 4 which shows the benefits and allowances authorized for FSN employees.

11. QUESTION: Pages 20 of the RFP states that approximately 60% of total cost is to be dedicated to component one, 25% of total cost dedicated to component two, and 15% of total cost dedicated to component three. Page 115 of the RFP state that “Other direct costs that can be directly attributed to a specific component must be included in the component budget line item. Those other direct costs that cannot be directly attributed to a specific component must be in the Other Direct Costs budget line item.”

Can USAID confirm that the percentage distribution of costs across components refers to allocations of directly attributable costs, rather than total project cost?

ANSWER: Yes, the percentage distribution of costs across components refers to allocations of directly attributable costs, rather than total project cost.

12. QUESTION: [The contractor’s] hardcopy subcontracting reports, SF-294s, for the past year total more than

200 pages and comprise more than 10 MB. In addition to the hardcopy SF-294s for projects not registered in the eSRS, we have also submitted individual subcontracting reports through the eSRS for registered projects. Instead of submitting the electronic files totaling over 10 MB with 200 pages of SF-294s, may we submit only 10 relevant SF-294 forms that are not duplicated on the eSRS?

ANSWER: Please submit no more than 10 relevant SF-294.

13. QUESTION: Page 15 of the RFP states that there will be “an estimated 1.5 million children directly benefitting over the five years of the program”. However, in section C.4 on page 18 the RFP states that “the program is expected to reach approximately 1.4 million students.” Please clarify the number of children/students that are to be reached.

ANSWER: Please see Amendment No. 1 to the Solicitation. The estimated amount is change to read 1.4 million.

14. QUESTION: Page 16 of the RFP states that USAID/Tanzania will identify “three additional regions, containing approximately 2,100 public primary schools”, in addition to Mtwara and Zanzibar. However, on page 18 of the RFP the chart cites numerical targets that for Mtwara, Zanzibar and “two other regions” with 2,100 schools. Please clarify how many additional regions and schools will USAID be adding.

ANSWER: Please see Amendment No. 1 to the Solicitation. The number of regions was changed to three.

See also the answer to question No. 58.

15. QUESTION: Page 18 of the RFP states that the “At least 75% of classrooms participating in Tusome

Pamoja must demonstrate statistically significant improvement in reading outcomes over the life of the project.” Could USAID provide clarity with respect to (a) what it considers statistical significance, (b) its perspective on individual gains in reading improvement vis-à-vis collective classroom improvement, which appears to be the main outcome measure, as well as the basis for the estimation of 1.4 million (assuming 3,000 schools)?

ANSWER: USAID expects the contractor to propose a sound sampling plan that will enable the contractor to demonstrate that at least 75% of the classrooms assisted by Tusome Pamoja demonstrate statistically significant improvements in reading outcomes.

16. QUESTION: Page 21 of the RFP mentions the prototype “learning kit prototype for distribution to 3Rs classrooms.” Is information available on the status of the prototype and its alignment/nonalignment with emerging reading standards and curriculum?

ANSWER: The Tanzania Institute for Education has reviewed and approved a series of supplementary readers and mathematics materials for use in classroom. Materials were often developed in collaboration with international technical assistance. The contractor must review the materials to determine if the content will lead to improved reading targets, and revise if needed.

17. QUESTION: Page 22 of the RFP references $500,000 per year for arithmetic support. Can USAID clarify how this money should be used? Can non-USG resources be generated by the contractor for math support?

TEC

ANSWER: The contractor must determine how to use the limited USAID funds to achieve maximum results in math outcomes. USAID has received assurances that the Global Partnership for Education LANES Program will assist materials production and distribution. USAID welcomes non-USG resources to supplement the contractor’s efforts.

18. QUESTION: Page 22 of the RFP, Table 3 refers to “minimum required materials”. Please confirm that bidders are free to propose materials per grade beyond the minimum.

ANSWER: Bidders are free to propose materials per grade beyond the minimum.

19. QUESTION: Page 23 of the RFP, it appears that either the sentence in the last bullet is incomplete or a final bullet is missing. Please provide the missing text.

ANSWER: Please see Amendment No. 1 to the Solicitation.

20. QUESTION: Page 24 of the RFP, under component 1.2, states that “the contractor must submit teacher training materials and a training plan that is coordinated with MoEVT for USAID/Tanzania review prior to conducting any training under this component.” Please clarify the following:

a. Are training materials reviewed in Swahili or will they need to be translated to English for USAID’s review?

b. Is it possible to indicate how much time USAID will need to review training materials?

ANSWER: The key training materials must be translated into English. In most circumstances, USAID will provide comments or approve within 10 working days.

21. QUESTION: Page 24 of the RFP, please clarify the term “residential face-to-face training”.

ANSWER: “Residential” training is training that takes place away from an official’s own work station and might require additional costs (travel, lodging, etc.) consistent with Government of Tanzania and USAID regulations.

22. QUESTION: Page 24 of the RFP mentions teacher trainings. Please clarify whether 72 hours of teacher training, even if face-to-face by knowledgeable trainers, must be “residential,” i.e. accommodations provided to teachers at the training site.

ANSWER: The 72 hours does not need to be residential with accommodation provided at a training site.

Training, for example, could consist of coaching and mentoring provided by a second individual within the same school or nearby school within the catchment area.

23. QUESTION: Page 26 of the RFP, bullet point 4, please clarify whether rollout of the pre-primary program must be “phased” or whether it could be done at one time (i.e. 75 schools per targeted region).

ANSWER: Pre-primary implementation could be phased or done at one time.

24. QUESTION: Page 28 of the RFP, please confirm whether the four required operation research topics listed include, or are in addition to, those listed in the bullets (optimal class time, cost assessment, teacher absenteeism, materials availability).

ANSWER: The contractor must undertake four operation research topics over the life of the activity that prioritizes the bulleted themes listed in the RFP. USAID must approve the research topic before work commences.

25. QUESTION: Page 30 of the RFP indicates that “the contractor must conduct a student assessment at least twice.” However, page 35 the RFP indicates “baseline, midline, and endline measurement of all progress towards all targets.” Please clarify the number of times the contractor must conduct student assessments in the regions.

ANSWER: Please refer to response to question No. 5.

26. QUESTION: Page 30 of the RFP specifies that indicator reporting must allow measurement of “impact” of actions to reinforce reading and writing implementation. Impact typically denotes a counterfactual or control group. Please clarify that the RFP intends the contractor to conduct measurements in comparison schools where reading and writing reinforcement effort are not being conducted.

ANSWER: USAID expects the contractor to establish a counterfactual from among schools that are not receiving the Tusome Pamoja intervention as a way of judging the value added of the intervention.

27. QUESTION: Please clarify whether page 31 of the RFP intends that the contractor measure “effectiveness” of the capacity building efforts, rather than “impact” with a control group.

ANSWER: Please see Amendment No. 1 to the Solicitation. The wording was changed to effectiveness.

28. QUESTION: Page 34 of the RFP, please confirm that the offeror may restate some of the indicators listed so that the concepts they present are more feasible for measurement.

ANSWER: The contractor may restate some of the listed indicators, but the high level indicators for the number and percent of children reading must remain. The contractor is welcome to suggest additional custom indicators.

29. QUESTION: Please specify the sub-component on page 35 of the RFP under Component 2 that requires

MOUs for use of USG resources to support GoT offices in monitoring.

ANSWER: Please see Amendment No. 1 to the Solicitation. The reference to MOU was deleted.

30. QUESTION: Page 41 of the RFP, Section F, Technical Deliverables table includes a deliverable for component 1.1 “Grade one student materials, teachers guide and distribution plan within 6 months after award”. Does USAID foresee that interventions should be ready before the start of the 2016 school year?

ANSWER: The six month deadline would occur after the 2016 school year has started (see question response #4 for estimated award date). USAID acknowledges the tight deadline, but recognizes that the contractor will benefit from existing materials and momentum within the Ministry of Education.

31. QUESTION: On page 43 of the RFP, the table under 2.4 indicates that three capacity assessments, three capacity assistance plans, and three capacity building reports will be prepared. However, page 31 of the RFP states that USAID and the contractor will agree on a target institution and outcome measures on an annual basis. Please clarify whether assessment, plans and measurement will take place three times over the project life or annually.

ANSWER: Three assessments, plans and measurements will take place over the life of the activity.

32. QUESTION: Page 56 of the RFP states that the authorized geographic code is 937, however page 58 of the

RFP states that the authorized geographic code is 935. Please clarify.

ANSWER: Please refer to response to question No. 7

33. QUESTION: Page 109 of the RFP lists items that are not included in the page limitation. Would USAID please confirm that a cover letter would not be included in the 35 page limitation?

ANSWER: As per the RFP the cover page is not included in the page limit.

34. QUESTION: Pages 109-110, Section L.5 of the RFP lists Past Performance References as an annex.

However, page 113 of the RFP states, “Offerors should not resubmit PPRs with the full technical proposal.”

Please confirm that offerors do not need to resubmit Past Performance References in their proposal.

ANSWER: Please refer to Section L.5 Past Performance (a) (1) States that Past Performance is counted as an annex. The RFP requires offerors to submit PPRs ahead of the proposal due date; therefore it is not necessary to resubmit the information.

35. QUESTION: Page 110 of the RFP references the Draft Year 1 Work Plan. Is there a particular 12-month period that should be used for this?

ANSWER: The reporting period must correspond to the USAID fiscal year, beginning October 1 and ending September 30.

36. QUESTION: Page 112 of the RFP states, “List in an annex to the technical proposal up to four of the most recent (in the last 3 years) and relevant contracts for efforts similar to the work in the subject proposal for the offeror and up to two for each major subcontractor.” Please confirm that offerors may submit both contracts and cooperative agreements for past performance references.

ANSWER: The most relevant indicators of performance are contracts of similar scope, size, and geographic context. and/or other performance management activities.

37. QUESTION: Would USAID allow offerors to provide CVs for non-key personnel that would not count towards the page limit?

ANSWER: Offerors must provide resumes (not counted in the page limit) for each candidate proposed as key personnel. Resumes for non-key personnel are not required.

38. QUESTION: Will USAID authorize grants under contract for local grassroots organizations, PTAs, etc.?

ANSWER: Grants under contracts are not authorized under the Tusome Pamoja program.

39. QUESTION: Will USAID please provide the current FSN scale and Local Compensation Plan for

Tanzania?

ANSWER: A copy of USAID/Tanzania’s most current FSN pay scale is made available via attachment # J.6 to this solicitation.

40. QUESTION: Regarding the summary budget on page 114 of the RFP: Can offerors adjust the order of the listed line items and include additional line items such as Overhead in accordance with offeror's cost structure?

ANSWER: Please refer to page 114 of the solicitation, if a line item does not have a corresponding line item in the budget summary, offerors should note in which line of the summary line these costs are included.

41. QUESTION: Regarding Section B.4 "Budget and Ceiling Price", on page 10 of the RFP; and Budget by

Component, on page 115 of the RFP, can USAID confirm that all "Other Direct Costs" and "Indirect Costs" should be split accordingly across "Component 1 (60%)", "Component 2 25%)", and "Component 3 (15%)"?

ANSWER: Please follow the instruction in Section L.6 and also please refer to answer to question No.: 11

42. QUESTION: Page 115 of the RFP states that “the narrative for the cost proposal must be in Microsoft

Word, Times New Roman font size 12, text accessible.” Please confirm that it is acceptable to submit the cost proposal narrative in a Microsoft Word document as a separate attachment and a fully compiled cost proposal in Adobe PDF.

ANSWER: As specified in Section L.6 all spreadsheets must be submitted in Excel format with unlocked formulas. Adobe PDF will not be accepted.

43. QUESTION: What is USAID/Tanzania’s anticipated start date for Tusome Pamoja?

ANSWER: Please refer to the response to question No. 4

44. QUESTION: Would USAID consider extending the submission deadline by a week?

ANSWER: The submission deadline will not be extended.

45. QUESTION: How are the services for the contract classified (severable or non-severable)?

ANSWER: Severable

46. QUESTION: C2. Background, p. 15, the RFP states: “The materials and methodologies of the TZ21 contract are good examples for the lower primary education system, and mid-term evaluations of TZ21 indicate improvements in reading between participating and non-participating lower grades of comparable schools. Coordination of 3Rs support between USAID/Tanzania and the three-year, $94 million GPE LANES Program has been extensive; for example, GPE LANES is producing and distributing materials developed under TZ21. This model of USAID/Tanzania materials development, and GPE LANES production and distribution to schools is expected to continue, and will be particularly useful for the production and distribution of student learning materials for arithmetic.” Could USAID provide a list of the exact contents of the TZ21 materials?

ANSWER: Additional TZ21 materials are posted and available in the Development Experience Clearinghouse (DEC)

47. QUESTION: C.4 Statement of Work, p.18: the RFP states “At least 75% of classrooms participating in

Tusome Pamoja must demonstrate statistically significant improvement in reading outcomes over the life of the program”. To increase efficiencies across the board - given that classroom level assessment is a vast and expensive undertaking and is a level of validity that is not usually necessary - would USAID/Tanzania consider random sampling of the total population of G2 and G4 students in project supported schools which would be consistent with the data Tusome Pamoja will collect for those grades for the high level goals the RFP requires?

ANSWER: Please refer to response to question #15

48. QUESTION: Bottom of p. 21: Could USAID please specify what materials are included in the prototype kits?

ANSWER: Please refer to response to question No. 16

49. QUESTION: Under Attachment 5- List of References on page 136 of the RFP, it appears that No. 15, Unit

Costs of Materials produced under TZ-21, has not been posted to https://sites.google.com/site/tusomepamoja/cdcs. Could USAID kindly provide that information?

ANSWER: Please refer to response to question No.1

50. QUESTION: Is USAID/Tanzania amenable to repurposing content for program materials, rather than developing content from scratch? Furthermore, if repurposing is acceptable, would USAID/Tanzania require that a specific author relinquish copyright and license to their content under Creative Commons?

ANSWER: USAID/Tanzania will require the contractor to relinquish copyright and license as per FAR 27.404-3(a)(4)

51. QUESTION: Component 2.3, p. 29: do the assessments referenced in this section include math, or are they limited to reading and writing?

ANSWER: The contractor must strengthen assessment systems in reading and writing. The contractor may also strengthen assessment systems in mathematics.

52. QUESTION: Section F, p. 42 under component 1.2, the RFP requires the following anticipated outcomes:

all grade 1, 2, 3, 4 teachers will prove mastery of improved pedagogy. However, teacher learning is similar to student learning in that not ALL teachers benefitting from Tusome Pamoja interventions will prove mastery. Would USAID consider converting this into a percentage of teachers benefitting/trained that demonstrate improved pedagogy, with increasing numbers over time?

ANSWER: Tusome Pamoja aims to improve all teacher skills. USAID recognizes the challenges and effort required to achieve this aim, and will work with the Contractor to set realistic targets within the PMP.

53. QUESTION: Section F, p. 42, under component 1.4, the RFP states the following anticipated outcomes:

“Students in pre-primary demonstrate better reading, writing and math outcomes than peers in control groups”. Section C (SOW) does not call for math intervention at the pre-primary level. Could USAID please clarify?

ANSWER: Please see Amendment No. 1 to the Solicitation. The contractor does not need to demonstrate improvement in math at pre-primary level.

54. QUESTION: Branding and marking, D.2, pages 37-38: On several recent contracts, USAID has stated a preference for less prominent USAID branding on teacher and pupil books produced as ministry-owned materials. For example, USAID’s identity may be placed on the back cover or on the inside front cover.

Does USAID/Tanzania have a preference in this regard that should be accommodated in the branding/marking annex?

ANSWER: At this time there is no instructions on any preferences for less prominent USAID branding, the offeror must follow the instruction in section L.9.

55. QUESTION: Section 508 compliance, I.9, page 90: Could USAID clarify whether the teaching and learning materials developed under Component 1 are required to meet the US Government requirements for electronic accessibility, such that bidders should allow time and budget for conversion and quality control?

Are any of the materials named in Section F.6 (pages 41-48) exempt from Section 508 compliance?

ANSWER: The offeror should be compliant with Section 508.

56. QUESTION: Section L.6(g), page 116, Subcontracting Plan : In reference to PEB # 2014-05 (attached to this email), does the Contracting Officer reasonably anticipate that significant direct charges are likely to be incurred outside the United States and, if so, is the Contracting Officer not requiring a Small Business [subcontracting] Plan for the subject solicitation?

ANSWER: This is not applicable; subcontracting plan is not required for this solicitation.

57. QUESTION: In F.7, Key Personnel, the minimum requirements stated for the Chief of Party position relating to required experience levels are “At least 15 years of experience in relevant management, supervisory, technical experience working with programs that are of a similar scope and scale to this activity is required (at least 10 of these years must be in a management/leadership position)” and “At least ten years of experience in development in Sub-Saharan Africa is required.” For the Reading Specialist position, the RFP calls for “at least 8 years of experience in programs in sub-Saharan Africa that work specifically to improve early grade reading.” We have conducted recent market research and have found that the pool of candidates with these levels of experience is quite limited because the size of this proposed project is more than double the size of the majority of USAID and other donor funded education projects implemented in Sub-Saharan Africa over the last ten years. In addition, most donors have only been implementing programs specific to early grade reading in Sub-Saharan Africa for the past 5-7 years, so it is extremely difficult to find candidates who meet this requirement. However, our expertise in this area has repeatedly shown that individuals in these positions with less experience but possessing the requisite skills and knowledge base have consistently delivered outstanding results in project implementation while resulting in a cost savings to the government. We would therefore respectfully request that USAID consider broadening the Chief of Party requirements by removing the reference to experience with “programs that are similar scope and scale” or removing the requirement of “at least ten years of experience in development in Sub-Saharan Africa”. We also respectfully request that USAID consider revising the requirement for the Senior Reading Specialist of “at least 8 years of experience in programs in sub-Saharan Africa that work specifically to improve early grade reading” to 5 years.

ANSWER: Please see Amendment No. 1 to the Solicitation. The requirement for the Senior Reading Specialist is changed to 6 years of experience in programs.

58. QUESTION: When will USAID identify the three additional regions? Are there factors that should be taken into consideration when developing costing models for these regions (travel distance; infrastructure)?

(p. 16)

ANSWER: For modelling purposes, Offerors should consider the regions of Morogoro, Iringa, and Ruvuma. The final decision on the three regions requires additional consultation and approval by the Government Ministries.

59. QUESTION: How does USAID define the difference between the terms ‘reinforce’ and ‘support’ in this sentence (p. 16): “Under Tusome Pamoja, the contractor must reinforce basic skills of grade one and two students and support improved basic skills in the 3Rs in grades one to four.”

ANSWER: The use of the term “reinforce” in grades one and two is an acknowledgement of the prior work of TZ21 and GPE LANES. To date, less effort has been devoted to grades three and four, but will be a greater focus in some regions of Tusome Pamoja.

60. QUESTION: The numerical target for Component 1 (see chart on p. 18) reads two other regions. May we assume that this is a mistake and should read “three other regions”?

ANSWER: Please refer to response to question No. 14.

61. QUESTION: The statement of work calls for sharing data and findings from various studies and assessments (for example, “sharing data and results” of the comparative study listed on p. 26); reporting to others on the results of capacity assessments (p. 30-31). What are the implications of the new GoT Statistics Bill on USAID-funded research and data sharing activities?

ANSWER: The new GoT Statistics Bill continues to be revised within the current Parliament. USAID encourages and supports open sharing of data and findings.

62. QUESTION: Is the contractor responsible for reimbursing the costs of coaching and monitoring visits by trained ward education coordinators (and others), or only for developing the system for reimbursing these costs? (p. 29)

ANSWER: USAID looks forward to evaluating the best suggested approaches provided by Offerors.

63. QUESTION: What is the relationship between the student assessment described on p. 30 and the nation-wide assessment supported by USAID described on p. 36?

ANSWER: See question response No. 5; 25; and 31.

64. QUESTION: Are there specifications or requirements (other than sample size) for this student assessment?

Does USAID intend for this assessment to be generated from the item data banks described at the top of p.

30?

ANSWER: See question response No. 5.

65. QUESTION: On Page 25, the RFP states that the intervention [Component 1.4] will “serve as a model of best cost effective, scalable practice for 3Rs pre-primary …. of reading and writing instruction that the GoT can expand…” Is this model limited to materials and training?

ANSWER: The model is not limited to materials and training.

66. QUESTION: On page 15, the RFP states that the contractor will work in 5 regions, reaching 3000 schools and 1.5 million children. On page 18, the RFP states that the program will be expected to reach 1.4 million children. Please clarify which is correct.

ANSWER: See question response No. 13.

67. QUESTION: In section F.2, the period of performance is noted as 5 years; would USAID please share the envisioned start date for this program?

ANSWER: Please refer to response to question No. 4

68. QUESTION: In order to ensure compliance with Section H.11 and AIDAR 722.170, would USAID please share the LCP for Tanzania?

ANSWER: Please refer to response to question No. 39

69. QUESTION: Section I.1: As the purpose of the Tusome Pamoja activity is not to provide services under the Service Contract Act, would USAID please remove FAR 52.204-14, Service Contract Reporting Requirements?

ANSWER: Please see Amendment No. 1 to the solicitation. Clause was deleted..

70. QUESTION: Section L.1: As FAR 52.232-34 is not included in this RFP, would USAID please remove

FAR 52.232-38, Submission of Electronic Funds Transfer Information with Offer?

71. QUESTION: Section L.4(2): Is there a limit on the number of attachments (per email) for the submission?

ANSWER: There is no limit on the number of attachments per email. The limit is on the size of the email.

72. QUESTION: Section L.5.5(a)(1): Is it acceptable to submit information regarding Past Performance on assistance awards as well as contracts?

ANSWER: Please refer to the response to question No. 36

73. QUESTION: On pages 114-115, the RFP states “The percentages for each component are provided as guidance for the offeror in the budget preparation.” Please confirm that the offeror can propose different allocations.

ANSWER: Please refer to the response to question No. 11

74. QUESTION: Section L.6(f) states: “ Policies and Procedures. If the Offeror or a partner/subcontractor does not have approved personnel policies, please submit a copy of personnel policies, especially regarding salary and wage scales, fringe benefits, merit increases, promotions, leave, differentials, travel and per diem regulations, etc.” Please clarify by whom the personnel policies should be approved.

ANSWER: Approved by the offeror’s organization.

75. QUESTION: What is the CFDA number for this program?

ANSWER: 98.001 USAID Foreign Assistance for Programs Overseas

ATTACHMENT 6 - FSN LOCAL COMPENSATION PLAN

ATTACHMENT NO. 7 – UNIT COST PER BOOK FOR ZANZIBAR AND MTWARA SCHOOLS