SOL-656-16-000012_IMaP_Amendment_01.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT 1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES 1 27

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO.

Amendment 01

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

6. ISSUED BY CODE 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6) CODE

OFFICE OF ACQUISITION AND ASSISTANCE

USAID MAPUTO, MOZAMBIQUE

JAT COMPLEX, RUA 1231, NO.41

MAPUTO, MOZAMBIQUE

Same as #6

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., street, county, State and ZIP Code) (X) 9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION

NO.

SOL-656-16-000012

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

CODE FACILITY CODE

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

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

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

(a) By completing items 8 and 15, and returning copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

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

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

13. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO MODIFICATION OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS.

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

CHECK ONE A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN

ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(b).

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

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

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

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

The purpose of this amendment is to:

1. In Section I insert the following Clause I.12 AIDAR 752.7038 Nondiscrimination against End-Users of Supplies or

Services as described in Attachment 1 – New Clause

2. Provide answers to the questions as described in Attachment 2 – Question and Answers

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

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print) 16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of person authorized to sign)

15C. DATE SIGNED 16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

16C. DATE SIGNED

NSN 7540-01-152-8070

Previous edition unusable

STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 10-83)

Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

SOL-656-16-000012 Integrated Malaria Program (IMaP) Amendment 01

ATTACHMENT 1 – NEW CLAUSE

In Section I Insert the following Clause:

I.12 AIDAR 752.7038 Nondiscrimination against End-Users of Supplies or Services.

(a) USAID policy requires that the contractor not discriminate against any end-user of the contract supplies or services (i.e., the beneficiaries of the supplies or services) in implementation of this award, such as, but not limited to, by withholding, adversely impacting, or denying equitable access to the supplies or services (benefits) provided through this contract on the basis of any factor not expressly stated in the award. This may include, for example, race, color, religion, sex (including gender identity, sexual orientation, and pregnancy), national origin, disability, age, genetic information, marital status, parental status, political affiliation, or veteran's status. Nothing in this clause is intended to limit the ability of a contractor to target activities toward the assistance needs of certain populations as defined in the contract.

(b) The Contractor must insert this clause, including this paragraph, in all subcontracts under this contract.

- END OF ATTACHMENT 1 -

ATTACHMENT 2 - QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

Question 1: Section H.15 (d), page 56, limits offerors to annual salary increases of no more than 5 percent. This restriction may preclude offerors from complying with AIDAR 752.7007, incorporated by reference in Section H.14, which states that “Direct compensation of the Contractor’s personnel will be in accordance with the Contractor’s established policies, procedures, and practices, and the cost principles applicable to this contract.” Specifying the annual salary increase offerors can provide their staff may result in offerors deviating from AIDAR 752.7007. We respectfully request that USAID revise the annual salary increase percentage to state “to be determined,” thereby allowing offerors to submit cost proposals in accordance with their established policies, procedures, and practice.

Response to Question 1:

(a) Direct compensation of the contractor‘s personnel will be in accordance with the contractor‘s established policies, procedures, and practices, and the cost principles applicable to this contract.

(b) Reimbursement of the employee‘s base annual salary plus overseas recruitment incentive, if any, which exceed the USAID contractor Salary Threshold (USAID CST) stated in USAID Automated Directives System (ADS) Chapter 302 USAID Direct Contracting, must be approved in writing by the Contracting Officer, as prescribed in 731.205-6(b) or 731.371(b), as applicable.

Question 2: Regarding Grants Under Contract within Section L.9 (b), page113, please confirm that USAID will authorize the use of a Letter of Credit.

Response to Question 2: Letter of credit will not be authorized.

Question 3: Section I.1, page 64, includes FAR 52.237-8, Restrictions on Severance Payments to Foreign Nationals. Consistent with the guidance in FAR 37.113-1 and considering that the anticipated contract will be performed entirely overseas, we respectfully request that USAID include FAR 52.237-9, Waiver of Limitation on Severance Payments to Foreign Nationals, to prevent conflict with applicable local employment laws.

Response to Question 3: FAR 52.237-9 Waiver of Limitation on Severance Payments to Foreign Nationals will be included in the contract.

Question 4: Section L.9 (b), page 113, states that offerors must create a separate worksheet to “highlight and summarize all anticipated costs attributed to Branding & Marking activities and Monitoring & Evaluation activities. The detailed budget will not include separate line items for Branding & Marking and Monitoring & Evaluation activities.” The RFP further states on page 113 that all “costs of data collection, analysis, and reporting” should be included as a separate line item to ensure that adequate resources are available. Please confirm that Monitoring & Evaluation costs should be included as a separate line item.

Response to Question 4: on page 113 the following statement has been removed: “Monitoring and Evaluation Costs: Per ADS 203.3.5 include costs of data collection, analysis, and reporting as a separate line item to ensure that adequate resources are available.”

And replaced with: “Monitoring and Evaluation Costs: Per ADS 203.3.5, include costs of data collection, analysis, and reporting as a separate line item, in the separate worksheet mentioned above, to ensure that adequate resources are available.”

Question 5: Regarding Section L.8.5.d(3)(B), page 109, our hardcopy subcontracting reports (SF-294s) for the past year total 200 pages and comprise 15 MB and we have also submitted individual subcontracting reports through the online eSRS for registered projects. Instead of submitting the electronic files totaling 15 MB with 200 pages of SF-294s and eSRS, may we submit only a list of 10 relevant eSRS reports and a copy of 10 SF-294 forms that are not duplicated on the eSRS?

Response to Question 5: Yes, Offeror may submit a list of 10 relevant eSRS reports a copy of 10 SF-294 forms that are not duplicated on the eSRS.

Question 6: Section F.2, page 33Page 33, Section F.2 Past Performance states that the estimated period of performance for this project is five years. Would USAID please consider providing an anticipated start date for the performance under this task order to inform the development of the cost proposal?

Response to Question 6: Anticipated start date for the performance under this contract is October 2017.

Question 7: Section F.7 Page 41Consistent with ADS 302.3.5.4, the number of key personnel designated for any contract should not be more than five individuals or five percent of the contractor employees working under the contract. Can USAID please confirm the number of key personnel required for this opportunity?

Response to Question 7: USAID removed the position of Behavior Change Communication (BCC) Technical Advisor (TA). The new total Number of key personnel is 5, as follows: Section F.7 has been updated and it now includes the following five key personnel positions: (1) Chief of Party; (2) Technical Director; (3) Clinical Senior Technical Advisor; (4) Surveillance and Monitoring and Evaluation Senior Technical Advisor; and (5) Operations and Finance Director.

Question 8: Section H.6 Page 53Section H.6 of the RFP indicates that the award Authorized Geographic Code is 935 defined as the United States, the Cooperating Country (Maputo, Mozambique), and developing countries other than advanced developing countries, and excluding prohibited sources. Please clarify and confirm that the Authorized Geographic Code for this procurement is 935 defined as any area or country including the cooperating country, but excluding the foreign policy restricted countries.

Response to Question 8: Yes, the Authorized Geographic Code for this procurement is 935.

Question 9: Section H.15(h) Page 56 This section indicates that salaries and wages for TCNs and CCNs employees shall not exceed, without justification, the prevailing grade under the USAID/Mozambique salary survey scale for CCNs. Please provide a copy of the current local compensation plan for Mozambique?

Response to Question 9: Please see following table, which provides the Local Compensation Plan range:

American Embassy Maputo, Mozambique Local Employee Compensation Ranges

Grade: Range*:

from - to - 1 $8,600 $12,000 2 $9,400 $13,200 3 $10,700 $15,000 4 $12,500 $17,400 5 $14,000 $19,700 6 $17,800 $24,900 7 $22,900 $32,000 8 $26,100 $36,500 9 $33,200 $46,500 10 $40,300 $56,400 11 $49,500 $69,300 12 $65,000 $91,000

* rounded to 100s

Question 10: Section I.9 Page 75 Please confirm if this RFP and resultant contract will be exempted from local taxes and duties and advise on tax implications under the current bilateral agreement between the US Government and the Government of Mozambique.

Response to Question 10: The tax provisions of the bilateral agreement presently apply to USAID only, and not USAID's implementing partners. As such, the awardee will be required to submit reports to USAID on taxes paid, and USAID will receive any refunds directly. The awardee should have no expectation that any refunded taxes will be returned to their award. In certain cases, the U.S. government may facilitate the tax free importation of goods.

Therefore, the awardee will not generally be exempt from local taxes. Taxes paid may be approved as allowable costs under the award subject to a normal review of their allowability, allocability and reasonableness.

Question 11: Sections L.8.3 and L.8.4, Pages 105 & 106 In Section L, the requirements for L.8.3: Management and Staffing Plan and L.8.4: Technical Understanding and Approach – Management Approach appear to overlap in several respects. For example, both required sections are to contain information regarding the proposed management structure, staffing plan, reporting lines, and rationale. Could USAID further clarify the information to be presented in these two sections?

Response to Question 11: Section L.8.3: Management and Staffing Plan (included in the page limit) have been deleted.

In Section L.8.4: Technical Understanding and Approach the Management Approach has been deleted and replaced with:

Management Approach Offerors must provide a narrative section which demonstrates management and technical expertise. This management plan should include cost-effective use of technology for project management, and describe how the proposed management structure will carry out the proposed activities. Offerors must demonstrate the organization’s capability and capacity to move quickly and effectively to establish a presence in country, as required, and move immediately towards project implementation. This should include an organizational strategy for delivering cost-effective technical assistance and training in the provinces, while balancing requirements for central-level activities.

Proposals must include a comprehensive draft staffing plan that includes specific position titles and level of effort for each key personnel, other long-term staff, short-term staff, professional staff, and administrative staff and that depicts the their reporting relationships of these personnel.

The draft staffing plan must demonstrate an appropriate balance of skills and accountability. The plan should include core technical staff, with underlying rationale, including an organizational chart demonstrating lines of authority and staff responsibility by position descriptions.

The organizational chart (not counted in the page limit) must list all staff positions, show lines of authority, and indicate where the positions sit (i.e. home office, field office, regional office, etc.

as applicable). Accompanying narrative for the organizational chart must be included in the staffing plan.

The Offeror must propose personnel that meet the minimum requirements specified in Section F.7. “Key Personnel” for all key personnel positions listed in Section F.7. Offerors must provide resumes (not counted in the page limit) for each candidate proposed as key personnel. Resumes must be limited to a maximum of three pages for each individual and use a standardized format.

Resumes must clearly demonstrate that the proposed key personnel possess the required skills and knowledge as indicated in Section F.7 to function as proposed on the project team. In addition, for each key personnel proposed, Offerors must provide a minimum of three references

(not counted in the page limit), including the relationship between the individual proposed and the reference and the email address and phone number of each reference. Further, the Offeror must provide contacts for each candidate’s supervisors of their most recent three employers.

Offerors must include as part of their proposal a letter of commitment signed by each person proposed as key personnel confirming their present intention to serve in the stated position upon award and their present availability to serve for the term of the proposed contract. Individuals proposed as Key Personnel may be proposed in more than one Offer; Offerors should not require exclusivity agreements from Key Personnel.

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 Mozambican professionals in leadership positions. CVs should also be submitted for other proposed project staff members considered critical to the success of the project.

The staffing plan must also discuss the Contractor’s ability and plans to recruit, mobilize, retain and manage highly qualified technical staff in Mozambique

Offerors may propose other key personnel positions if they choose. For each additional "key" personnel proposed, the offeror should provide a proposed short job description.

Job descriptions may be included as annex and do not count toward to technical proposal page limit.”

Question 12: Sections L.8.3, Page 105 The narrative describing Section L.8.3:

Management and Staffing Plan refers throughout to the staffing plan. The only reference with respect to the management plan is a requirement to describe availability of technical experts. Could USAID further describe the distinction between the staffing plan and the management plan?

Response to Question 12: Please see response to question 11.

Question 13: Section L.8.4, Page 107 The narrative describing Section L.8.4:

Performance Monitoring Approach states that “Offeror will include in an annex an illustrative monitoring and evaluation plan for this contract”. Can USAID further clarify if they expect the monitoring and evaluation plan to be also part of the 20-page Technical Approach or just an Annex?

Response to Question 13: The monitoring and evaluation plan must be presented as an annex. It is not to be included in the 20-page limit of the Technical Approach.

Question 14: L.9 (e) Page 114 Does Section K, Representations and Certifications of the RFP needs to be completed by contractors who are currently registered in SAM given that their Representation and Certifications are completed and updated electronically in SAM?

Response to Question 14: Representations and Certifications are required via the System for Award Administration (SAM) from offerors and their major subcontractors.

Question 15: Sections L.8 and L.8.5, Pages 105 & 109 In section L.8, the list of allowable annexes includes a draft Branding Marking and Implementation Plan. However, section L.8.5 states that offerors should only submit this plan upon receiving notification of competitive range. Please confirm that a draft Branding Implementation and Marking Plan is not required as part of the proposal submission.

Response to Question 15: The submission of a draft branding Implementation and Marking Plan is not required as part of the proposal submission. However, the costs associated with Branding and Marking must be included in the proposal submission.

Question 16: Section L.8.5, Page 108 On page 108 of the procurement, USAID stated that Offerors should “list in an annex to the technical proposal up to five of the most relevant contracts performed within the last three years…” Will USAID consider accepting past performance references that represent contracts and cooperative agreements?

Response to Question 16: Yes, USAID will accept past performance references that represent contracts and cooperative agreements.

Question 19: Section M.2.Component 3, Page 119 On page 119 USAID lists “Component 3:

Past Performance” as part of the Technical Evaluation Criteria. Section L.8 lists this component under Annexes. Can USAID clarify if they expect Past Performance information to be also part of the 20-page Technical Approach or just an Annex?

Response to Question 19: Past Performance information should be included as an annex. It is not part of the 20-page of the Technical Approach.

Question 20: Section M.2.Component 4, Page 120 On page 120 USAID lists “Component 4:

Corporate Experience” as part of the Technical Evaluation Criteria. Section L.8 lists this component under Annexes. Can USAID clarify if they expect Corporate Experience information to be also part of the 20-page Technical Approach or just an Annex?

Response to Question 20: Corporate Experience information should be included as an annex. It is not part of the 20-page Technical Approach.

Question 21: [L.9 (m)] Can USAID please confirm that the cancellation ceilings should be the annual budgets for each year cited plus additional close-out costs if cancelled in that year?

Response to Question 21: For cancellation ceilings procedures please refer to FAR 17.106.1(c) Question 22: [H.15 (d)] Additional Requirements for Personnel Compensation – states that all initial salaries for staff and consultants must be approved by the Contracting Officer.

While all Key Personnel will be submitted for approval i n c l u s i v e of salary information, as salaries shall be in accordance with the Contractor’s established policies, procedures, and practices, and not to exceed the USAID CST, will USAID/Mozambique consider removing this requirement to ensure expediency during project start-up?

Response to Question 22: All initial salaries for staff and consultants must be included in the proposed budget. For Key personnel that are identified as to be determined (TBD) in the cost proposal, the successful offeror must request prior approval from the Contracting officer.

Question 23: [Page 21] Are there more details regarding the SBCC integrated activity envisioned by USAID? Are there specific coordination mechanisms planned to ensure coordination with IMaP? Would USAID/Mozambique consider conducting a Knowledge, Attitude and Practice (KAP) study in the four target districts?

Response to Question 23: The integrated SBCC activity, Communication for Improved Health Outcomes Activity, is a cooperative agreement. We expect that the integrated SBCC activity partner will coordinate with the IMaP Contractor to support the functioning of the existent central-level, malaria SBCC working group. This group’s responsibility includes development and harmonization of high-quality, evidence-based strategy and associated materials. The integrated activity partner is ultimately responsible for the central level malaria SBCC policy, planning and coordination while the IMaP Contractor is responsible for implementation of these SBCC activities in the targeted provinces. Both partners will participate in the malaria SBCC working group and are expected to regularly meet to ensure coordination of efforts. We anticipate that the baseline, mid-term and end-line evaluation will include Knowledge, Attitude and Practice (KAP) components. Additional KAP studies may be proposed as operations research. Any proposed operations research questions and their rationale must be included in the technical proposal.

Question 24: [Page 105] While listed annexes are not included in the technical proposal page limit, is there a page limitation for the annexes themselves?

Response to Question 24: There is no a required page limit for the annexes.

Question 25: [Page 117] The technical evaluation criteria are presented in descending order of importance. Will USAID/Mozambique consider sharing the percent weight of each one of the four components?

Response to Question 25: No percentage has been applied to each of the components.

Section M.2 Technical Proposal Evaluation Criteria has been deleted in its entirety and replaced with:

TECHNICAL PROPOSAL EVALUATION CRITERIA

The technical evaluation criteria set forth below will be used to evaluate proposals. The criteria are presented in descending order of importance, so that Offerors will know which areas require emphasis in the preparation of proposal.

Component 1: Technical Understanding and Approach

Technical understanding and approach will be evaluated on the extent to which (Sub-factors under Technical Understanding and Approach are presented in descending order of importance):

a) The proposed management and staffing plan, including personnel (the qualifications of key personnel, the mix of local and non-local, as well as short and long term) and organizational structure should clearly demonstrate an efficient, feasible, and effective approach for implementing Section C and successfully supporting USAID/Mozambique in meeting its IMaP requirements for CDCS implementation.

b) The proposed technical approach, including methodology and techniques, are clear, appropriate, collaborative and feasible to successfully implement each component as identified in Section C and for supporting USAID/Mozambique in meeting its IMaP requirements.

c) The M&E plan for this contract is clearly articulated; directly corresponds to the stated goals and objectives; provides an analytically sound, meaningful and feasible approach for reliable quantification of activity and project progress and impact; and demonstrates the Offeror understands on the technical requirements.

The following are the sub-factors that will be evaluated:

Sub-factor 1: Staffing Plan

• 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

Sub-factor 2: Key Personnel

• 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 Mozambican staff to the maximum extent possible or a convincing rationale for why this is not met.

Sub-factor 3: Strategic Approach The proposal will be evaluated on 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 and is informed by lessons learned nationally and internationally

• The proposed strategy is responsive to the Mozambican context and clearly articulates how the Offeror proposes to engage the MOH and key stakeholders in malaria control at central, provincial, district and community levels

• The proposed timing of activities are feasible and logical

• The proposal demonstrates how the proposed activities will lead to meeting the programmatic objectives

Sub-factor 4: Capacity Strengthening and Sustainability Approach The proposal will be evaluated on the extent to which:

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

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

Sub-factor 5: Performance Monitoring Approach The degree to which the Offerors proposes 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 at all levels, and to PMI.

Sub-factor 6: Approach to Collaboration

• 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 leadership at all levels in malaria programming and facilitate effective collaboration with partners

Component 2: Past Performance

(a) Performance information will be used for both the responsibility determination and best value decision. USAID may use performance information obtained from other than the sources identified by the offeror/subcontractor. USAID will utilize existing databases of contractor performance information and solicit additional information from the references provided in Attachment 3 of this RFP and from other sources if and when the Contracting Officer finds the existing databases to be insufficient for evaluating an offeror’s performance.

(b) Adverse past performance information to which the offeror previously has not had an opportunity to respond will be addressed in accordance with the policies and procedures set forth in FAR 15.3.

(c) USAID will initially determine the relevance of similar performance information as a predictor of probable performance under the subject requirement. USAID may give more weight to performance information that is considered more relevant and/or more current.

(d) The contractor performance information determined to be relevant will be evaluated in accordance with the elements below, which are of equal weight:

(1) Quality of product or service, including consistency in meeting goals and targets.

(2) Cost control, including forecasting costs as well as accuracy in financial reporting.

(3) 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).

(4) Business relations, addressing the history of professional behavior and overall business-like concern for the interests of the customer, including the contractor’s history of reasonable and cooperative behavior (to include timely identification of issues in controversy), customer satisfaction, timely award and management of subcontracts, cooperative attitude in remedying problems, and timely completion of all administrative requirements.

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

(6) For prime offerors who are not small business concerns, their utilization of Small

Business concerns as subcontractors, including efforts in achieving small business participation goals.

(e) An offeror’s performance will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably when:

(1) The offeror lacks relevant performance history,

(2) Information on performance is not available, or

(3) The offeror is a member of a class of offerors where there is provision not to rate the class against a sub factor.

When this occurs, an offeror lacking relevant performance history is assigned a "neutral" rating.

Prior to assigning a "neutral" past performance rating, the contracting officer may take into account a broad range of information related to an Offeror's performance.

Component 3: Corporate Experience

Proposals will be evaluated on the extent to which the Offeror’s (and each major subcontractor’s, if applicable) demonstrated their experience and capacity to effectively manage and administer for similar and relevant programs as well as other experience successfully improving the quality of IMaP, including clear capacity in all relevant areas related to each component of this contract and the recruitment and management of long-term and short-term staff as described in Section L.5 of this solicitation, and consultants as well as subcontractors.

Question 26: Have district malaria focal points referenced on page 15 been established in all districts, are they operational? What competencies or qualifications (training) do they possess?

Response to Question 26: According to the National Malaria Control Program, malaria focal points have been established in all districts across the country, including in the four IMaP target provinces. However, it is not known whether they are fully operational in all districts. The district malaria focal point can be a nurse or a medical assistant. Their responsibility is to coordinate all malaria activities in the district.

Question 27: May we use IMaP funds to procure laboratory equipment and reagents to support fever diagnosis (i.e., equipment and reagents required for PCR, and LAMP)?

Response to Question 27: As stated on page 20 of the RFP, IMaP case management support will include “provision of technical assistance and of equipment, reagents, and supplies to support the implementation of the malaria laboratory quality assurance and quality control system at national and provincial levels”. However, IMaP should not use its funds to procure equipment and reagents required for PCR and LAMP.

Question 28: Has USAID/Mozambique conducted a preliminary identification of priority communities in the district? If yes, please provide.

Response to Question 28: USAID has not conducted any assessment to identify priority communities in the districts.

Question 29: Pertaining to Objective 1, Activity 1.5 will USAID provide a plug-in figure for small grant support to local civil society organizations and CBOs?

Response to Question 29: The summary budget presented on page 11, describes the maximum amount to be allocated to grants under contracts under this contract. There is no plug-in figure for small grant support to local civil society organizations and CBOs.

Question 30: What is the anticipated legal mechanism to provide material support to the MOH at the provincial and district levels? Will IMaP receive a waiver for making grants under contract that applies for grants to local NGOs as well as provincial and district offices and/or health facilities?

Response to Question 30: C.7 Grants Under Contract (GUC), page 25 is deleted in its entirety and replaced with:

C.7 Grants Under Contract (GUC) USAID will authorize the contractor to award grants to local community-based organizations (CBOs) in order to strengthen their organizational and technical capacity and extend the reach of IMaP activities at the provincial, district and community level. These awards would fund the local CBOs to conduct provincial, district and community level malaria prevention and control activities. IMaP, in consultation with PMI and the Contracting Officer, would be expected to identify a strategic and manageable group of local organizations capable of undertaking this work, as appropriate. The local organizations would work in collaboration with district and community level structures, including local traditional leadership, with IMaP oversight of implementation of activities.

IMaP must provide capacity strengthening for implementation of malaria prevention and control activities at the district and community level. Furthermore, IMaP would provide capacity building for any grantees on financial and operations management related to the design and implementation of malaria control interventions at the community level.

Question 31: What is the difference between Management and Staffing Plan and Management Approach? How/where should each be included/highlighted in the proposal? Which aspects should be included in the 20 page “Technical Proposal”? Which aspects will be included in annexes?

Response to Question 31: Please see response to question 11.

Question 32: In the RFP Objective 2.4 says “IMaP will facilitate coordination between USG-funded malaria partners at the provincial level through at least quarterly meetings of all USG-funded malaria partners working in the province and assistance during field visits from PMI staff” and there is no mention of the government (provincial health department) is this meant only for USG partners or open for strategies to include host country government?

Response to Question 32: Objective 2.4 refers to the coordination between USG-funded malaria partners. The coordination and collaboration with host country government is covered under objective 2.5.

Question 33: With reference to IMaP Objective 3 and the need to support utilization of DHIS-2, it is expected that USAID (and stakeholders) will encourage the eventual contractor to collaborate with platform/service provider such as Jembi Health Systems. Please state if exclusive agreement/commitment between Jembi Health Systems and an IMaP applicant is required?

Response to Question 33: USAID does not require exclusive agreement/commitment between Offerors and Jembi Health Systems.

Question 34: It is difficult to organize submissions to highlight the most important criteria for USAID without having a sense of the scale of importance that USAID assigns to each criterion.

Can USAID provide more information on proportional quantification of the evaluation criteria?

Response to Question 34: Please see response to question 25.

Question 35: On page 1, the RFP says that submissions are due by electronic mail only to jcaetano@usaid.gov and to the attention of Eyole Luma, Contracting Officer. These appear to be two different people. Should Eyole Luma be copied on these submissions, and if so, what is Eyole Luma’s email address?

Response to Question 35: Yes, submissions should be sent to jcaetano@usaid.gov and to the attention of Eyole Luma, Contracting Officer.

Question 36: Illustrative activity 1.3 (page 20) includes “delivery of the full course of intermittent preventive treatment to pregnant women (IPTp) using sulphadoxine-pyrimethamine,” illustrative activity 2.2 (page 22) includes "coordination with the supply chain implementing partner," and illustrative activity 3.1 (page 23) includes "support for on-time and accurate data submission at each level." Will USAID hold the Contractor responsible if targets related to these activities are not met due to circumstances beyond the Contractor's control?

Response to Question 36: USAID will not old the Contractor responsible if targets related to these activities are not met due to circumstances beyond the Contractor's control.

Question 37: Pages 24 and 25 outline the mandatory and PMI indicators for inclusion in all quarterly and annual reporting. Many standard RBM household survey indicators are included in this list but show quarterly reporting. Can USAID clarify the reporting frequency for the indicators outlined on pages 24 and 25?

Response to Question 37: The indicators and associated reporting frequency from pages 24 and 25 are revised as follows:

• ·Malaria case management (quarterly) mailto:jcaetano@usaid.gov mailto:jcaetano@usaid.gov o Percent of children under five years old with fever *who attended health services* that have a finger or heel stick malaria test or malaria in targeted districts o Percent of children under five years old in targeted districts with malaria diagnosis who receive ACTs

• Malaria in pregnancy (quarterly) o Percent of pregnant women who receive two or more doses of IPTp during pregnancy in targeted districts o Social and behavior change communication (baseline, mid-term and end-line evaluation) o Percent increase in the percent of children under five years old in targeted districts who slept under an ITN the prior night o Percent of children under five years old with fever in the last two weeks who sought treatment from a facility/provider within 24 hours of onset of symptoms in targeted districts

• Management and supervision (quarterly) o Percent of targeted districts that implement management capacity development plans for malaria programming o Percent of planned case management mentoring visits that are conducted at health facilities in all targeted districts o Percent of follow-up actions determined during mentoring visits that are completed within 30 days of completion of visit

• Commodities (quarterly) o Percent of malaria commodities that are available at targeted health facilities at the time of routine supervision visits.

· Data collection and use (quarterly) o Percent of health facilities in all targeted districts that report complete, on time HMIS data o Percent of targeted districts that have at least quarterly data use and supervision planning meetings o Number of targeted districts that completely transition to use of DHIS-2

· Gender indicators (definitions of the gender indicators may be found at http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/101761.pdf) (quarterly) o Proportion of female participants in IMaP trainings o Proportion of females who report increased self-efficacy at the conclusion of USG supported training/programming.

· Local capacity development (annual) o Number of civil society and community-based organizations receiving technical support to implement malaria control activities and facilitate provincial and district coordination o Number of civil society and community-based organizations receiving financial support to implement malaria control activities and facilitate provincial and district coordination o Number of local government entities with strengthened capacity to provide needed malaria-related services as a result of USG assistance.

http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/101761.pdf

Question 38: Please confirm the thresholds for the grants to be issued under the GUC component. It is our understanding that as per ADS 302.3.4.13 (c )(1), any grant issued to a US NGO as a GUC may not exceed $100,000, and for government entities, GUCs cannot exceed $300K in total. It is also our understanding that as per 2 CFR 200.332, Fixed Amount Subawards (formerly FOGs) may not exceed the Simplified Acquisition Threshold (currently $150,000).

Response to Question 38: As stated on page 25 of the solicitation “USAID may determine to authorize the contractor to award grants to local community-based organizations (CBOs)”.

USAID does not envision authorizing the contactor to award grants to US organizations through this contract. As per ADS 302.3.4.13 (c )(1), “The total value of an individual grant to a U.S.

organization must not exceed $100,000. This limitation does not apply to grants to non-U.S.

organizations.”

Question 39: In describing the baseline, mid-term and endline evaluations (pages 25 and 38), the objectives include “assess the malaria status” on page 38, but malaria status is not mentioned on page 25. Can USAID clarify whether they expect any population-based component to include malaria parasitemia?

Response to Question 39: We do not expect that the baseline, mid-term and end-line evaluations will include a population-based assessment of malaria parasitemia. It is anticipated that the evaluations will use a mixture of surveys, routine HMIS and programmatic data to evaluate program performance.

Question 40: On page 26, the RFP states: “The implementation of the transition will be monitored through comparison of baseline situational analysis with the strength of local governmental, NGO and community groups’ capacity at end of IMaP implementation.” Can USAID clarify whether this baseline/endline situational analysis is to be planned, budgeted and conducted by the Contractor, or will USAID run this independently?

Response to Question 40: The baseline / endline situational analysis referred on page 26 is to be planned, budgeted and conducted by the Contractor.

Question 41: On page 27, the RFP states that the Contractor must develop and provide an Environmental Mitigation and Monitoring plan for USAID approval. What is the timing for developing and submitting the EMMP?

Response to Question 41: The Environmental Mitigation and Monitoring plan must be submitted in conjunction with the Final Mobilization Plan/Annual Work Plan, which, as stated on page 34 of the solicitation, it must be submitted within 30 calendar days of award.

Question 42: On page 35, the RFP instructs Contractors preparing M&E plan indicators to use the format in Annex B: Targets. Could USAID please provide this format?

Response to Question 42: Offerors should develop and submit a table with proposed targets for all proposed indicators, to be submitted as an annex.

Question 43: The staffing matrix requested on page 44 of the guidance is not included in the annex list. In this case, where should it be inserted, and will it be included in the page limit? Is there a template for it? Can USAID clarify what “Functional Labor Category” means?

Response to Question 43: There is no standard staffing matrix. The Offeror should provide a matrix of proposed staff and consultants. This matrix should be included in the organizational chart annex.

The matrix is not included in the page limit. Functional Labor Category refers to the position occupied by the proposed staff. The word “Functional Labor Category” has been replaced by “position”.

Question 44: On page 105, the RFP lists a Branding and Marking Plan as one of the proposal annexes “when requested by the Contracting Officer.” Elsewhere in the guidance (pages 34- 35, 39) the RFP says that the Branding and Marking Plan is required after award. Can you confirm that Offerors do not need to submit a Branding and Marking plan as part of the proposal package? If it is requested after award, can you confirm that Offerors have 15 calendar days post award to submit a draft Branding and Marking Plan, and 30 calendar days post award to submit a final Branding and Marking plan?

Response to Question 44: Branding and Marking Plan must be submitted as one of the proposal annexes.

The statement “when requested by the Contracting Officer” on page 105 is deleted.

The final Branding and Marking Plan branding will be submitted 30 days after the award as stated on pages 34, 35 and 39.

Question 45: In regards to the minimum requirements for key personnel positions on pages 41-43, would USAID accept years of relevant professional experience in lieu of education for Chief of Party and other key personnel positions?

Response to Question 45: For each key personnel position, offerors must comply with the requirements as described in the solicitation.

Question 46: On page 105, the RFP outlines that the proposal narrative must include four major sections, including: 2. Management and Staffing Plan, and 4. Technical Approach. On page 107, the RFP states that the Offeror must include narrative on Management Approach under the Technical Approach section. Will USAID please explain the difference between the Management and Staffing plan section and the Management Approach subsection, and how the narrative information differs between them?

Response to Question 46: Please see response to question 11

Question 47: On page 106 in the Technical Approach section, the RFP mentions that the contractor must present a work plan. Can USAID provide additional information about what this work plan should include and the timeframe (one year or life of project)?

Response to Question 47: Offerors are not required to submit a work plan as part of this solicitation.

On page 106 of the solicitation, the following statement as been deleted:

“The Offeror must present a comprehensive strategy, methodology and a work plan with concrete activities that will lead to meeting the objectives and expected results described in the

SOW”

And replaced by:

“The Offeror must present a comprehensive strategy, methodology and concrete activities that will lead to meeting the objectives and expected results described in the SOW”.

Question 48: In describing the M&E Annex on pages 105 and 107, the RFP includes the phrases “indicators presented in a logical framework” and “and should include a causal model”.

Would USAID please explain the difference between the "logical framework" and the "causal model"? Can USAID clarify whether they are asking for both a matrix and visual representation of the program’s causal logic, or whether only one approach is required? If only one approach, which one?

Response to Question 48: The offeror is not required to submit both a matrix and a visual representation of the program’s logic. The Offeror is required to submit an M&E plan that includes outputs, associated indicators and anticipated results. Additionally, the plan should include a clear description of how the outputs are expected to contribute towards the desired outcomes. The Contractor may choose to include an image depicting the logic model for the program, but it is not expected.

Question 49: Regarding Section K –Representations, Certifications and Other Statements of Offerors (pages 83-95), will USAID please clarify if this is required for the prime only, or prime and major subcontractors, or prime and all subcontractors?

Response to Question 49: Representations and Certifications are required for the prime and their major subcontractors.

Question 50: On page 108, the RFP states that Offerors must provide Past Performance Information (PPIs) on up to five of the most relevant contracts performed within the past three years. Would USAID accept PPIs for cooperative agreements as well?

Response to Question 50: See response to question 16.

Question 51: Does USAID want Offerors to submit up to five PPIs total for both the prime and subcontractors combined, or does USAID want up to five PPIs for each prime and subcontractor separately (page 108)?

Response to Question 51: See response to question 16.

Question 52: For the purposes of this contract, does USAID require a certain percentage be earmarked for small businesses?

Response to Question 52: No, USAID does not require a certain percentage to be earmarked for small business. However, as stated on page 122, M.7, CONTRACTING WITH SMALL

BUSINESS CONCERNS AND DISADVANTAGED ENTERPRISES.

“USAID encourages the participation of small business concerns and disadvantaged enterprises in this activity, in accordance with FAR Par 19 (48 CFR Chapter 1), and AIDAR Part 726 (48 CFR Chapter 7). Accordingly, Offerors should make every reasonable effort to identify and offer opportunities to small business concerns and disadvantaged enterprises. In the event that proposals are deemed equal, the proposed participation of such organizations may become a determining factor for selection.”

Question 53: In what format should the Technical and Cost proposals be submitted? For example, is it acceptable to submit the Technical Proposal as a PDF and the Cost Proposal as an Excel spreadsheet?

Response to Question 53: The Technical Proposal can be submitted in PDF format and the Cost proposal must be submitted as an Excel spreadsheet, with unprotected and unlocked formulas.

Question 54: Regarding biographical data sheets (page 114), if the annual salary plus fringe for an employee is greater than $49,000 overall, but their Level of Effort (LOE) budgeted to IMaP is less than $49,000, does the Offeror still need to submit a biodata sheet for that employee?

Response to Question 54: The Offeror must submit biographical data sheets to support the proposed long term personnel cost of Key Personnel positions that are expected to exceed…