Responses_to_Questions_Regarding_RFP-SOL-660-14-000006.docx

Responses to Questions Regarding RFP #Sol-660-14-000006 Orphans and Vulnerable Children (OVC) Program - ELIKIA

1. Page 13, Section C.2 states that funds will be allocated from PEPFAR HKID “with possible funds from HBHC, PDCS and HSS budget codes” and that the "successful offeror will be required to track expenditures and results according to each funding source”. Will USAID share reporting requirements (amounts or percentages) during the proposal phase or will the information be communicated at the time of award?

Response: PEPFAR Democratic Republic of Congo programs will report expenditures analysis by budget codes. Tools and requirements will be shared once the implementing partners are trained. The awardee will be notified through future country operational plans. The level of effort will then be defined yearly.

2. Please confirm the Geographic Code of this contract. Section H.2 notes that the geographic code is 935 but section H.3 states that the code is 937 except for procurement of approved Anti-Retroviral pharmaceuticals for HIV/AIDS Programs, the authorized geographic code is 937.

Response: We confirm that the geographic code is 937.

3. Please confirm if there is a limit on the number of pages for Resumes in the Annex. Section L.6 on page 87 notes that resumes provided in the annex have no page limit. However Section L6.A. Personnel (page 89) states that “Resumes of these staff, not to exceed 3 pages…” Response: We confirm that there is no page limit for resumes provided in the annex.

4. Please confirm that the bio data sheets (AID 1420-17) should be included in the appendix for the Technical proposal, along with the resumes, rather than in the Cost Proposal.

Response: We confirm that the bio data sheets (AID 1420-17) should be included in cost proposal.

5. Does USAID expect or look favorably upon provision of consumption support such as cash transfers, vouchers, school block grants or scholarships?

Response: Yes. USAID published a statement of objectives to allow prospective offerors the opportunity to provide innovative solutions and is opened to all efficient, sustainable and effective interventions which are relevant to the DRC context

6. Considering the Ministry’s significant budget limitations, will USAID allow provision of material assistance such as furniture and equipment to MINAS and DIVAS as part of the project’s capacity building objective?

Response: USAID encourages partners to provide material assistance (e.g. furniture, equipment) as part of meeting capacity-building objectives to respective provincial Divisions/Ministries of Social Affairs.

7. Are offerers allowed to modify the Budget Template (add rows, columns or categories)?

Response: In order to ensure that all offerors are evaluated fairly, USAID requires adherence to the provided budget template. Offerors may add rows under the given categories, but may not add categories or deviate from the template.

8. Is a subcontracting plan required as part of the submission?

Response: No; however, any information (within the guidelines of this solicitation) that will contribute to the Technical Evaluation Committee’s understanding of the proposed activity will be accepted.

9. Please confirm that documents in Microsoft version 2010 are acceptable.

Response: Yes; confirmed.

10. Please confirm that the cost proposal can be sent as a PDF with the budgets in excel.

Response: Yes; confirmed.

11. Is there a limit on the number of attachments (per email) for the electronic submission?

Response: No; however, please see page 86 of the RFP stating the following: “Total email size cannot exceed 5 MB. Multiple emails may be sent to accommodate the proposal size and content. All attachments must be in MS Word, Adobe PDF, and MS Excel in unprotected readable format. OFFERORS MUST NOT SUBMIT ZIPPED FILES.

12. What is the CFDA number for this program?

Response: 98.001

13. Page 87 of the RFP states that resumes have no page limit, while page 89 states the resumes should be limited to 3 pages. Can USAID please clarify the page limit for resumes?

Response: We confirm that there is no page limit for resumes provided in the annex. The page numbers were only provided as estimates and not definitive numbers; therefore, there is some flexibility within each section, as long as the total number of pages does not exceed 35.Offerors may determine how to distribute the total number of pages among the sections.

14. The RFP does not state an expected total number of OVC and households to be reached through the ELIKIA program. Would USAID/DRC please provide the OVC and household targets?

Response: As a Statement of Objectives, this requires competing contractors to develop the statement of work, performance metrics and measurement plan, and quality assurance plan... all of which will be evaluated before contract award.

15. Page 87 of the RFP notes that, “The annexes are limited to: Draft Work Plan; Draft Performance Monitoring Plan, Resumes (no page limit), references, and tables that summarize qualifications for proposed personnel; Statement of Intention and Availability for Key Personnel; Past performance references; and SF 294 Subcontracting Reports” Can USAID please confirm that offerors can provide letters of commitment from local partners in an additional annex?

Response: Yes. We confirm that offerors may provide letters of commitment from local partners in an additional annex to the Technical Proposal?

16. Page 87 notes that the executive summary must not exceed 5 pages. Will USAID please allow any of the 5 pages not used in the executive summary to be used as additional pages in the 15 page technical volume approach?

Response: Yes. The page numbers were only provided as estimates and not definitive numbers; therefore, there is some flexibility within each section, as long as the total number of pages does not exceed 35.Offerors may determine how to distribute the total number of pages among the sections.

17. Could USAID please make available a current list of all the health zones that PEPFAR is currently supporting, as well as which agencies are active in which health zones?

Response: The health zone list is attached. Please be advised Katanga is PEPFAR first priority, then Orientale and Kinshasa regardless of the current footprint.

18. Can USAID please provide the most recent FSN scale /Local Compensation Plan for DRC?

Response: USAID expects salaries to be based on the offeror’s own market research; however, the highest salary may not exceed Grad 12, Step 18 base salary of $79,104.00.

19. The RFP mentions external mid-term and final evaluations that will be procured and funded by USAID. Can USAID please confirm that these funds will be from a source outside of the contract and therefore do not need to be budgeted by the offeror?

Response: Yes. USAID confirms that the funds being used to procure the mid-term and final evaluations will be budgeted in a different procurement mechanism; not in the OVC-ELIKIA procurement resulting from this solicitation.

20. Should the ELIKIA budget include funding for a baseline evaluation or is this provided by external funding?

Response: The baseline evaluation is budgeted in a different procurement mechanism. However, USAID encourages partners to conduct their own needs assessment.

21. Please confirm that CLIN 01 should include all implementation costs, including indirect costs? Please also confirm that contract years 2-5 be represented as CLIN 02-05?

Response: Confirmed. CLIN 01 should include all implementation costs, including indirect costs for all contract years.

22. In the mandatory template provided, Consultants appears under ODCs. Please confirm what is meant by Direct Short Term Labor?

Response: Consultant (See the Glossary of ADS terms, version 04 30 2014): A person serving as an advisor to an officer or instrumentality of the Government, as distinguished from an officer or employee carrying out an agency's duties and responsibilities. Ordinarily, consultants are expert in the field in which they advise, but need not be specialists. In addition, a Consultant is an independent hired contractor.

Direct Short-Term-Labor: an employee of the contractor that will only dedicate part of his/her time in a prospective project

23. Does USAID have a mission waiver in place to pay CCNs in USD?

Response: Yes.

24. RFP section L.6.A.2a., p. 87 states that “Offerors must limit Technical Proposals to 35 pages, excluding the authorized annexes listed below.” It then states the Executive Summary, Technical Approach, Monitoring and Evaluation Plan, Management Approach, and Personnel are 5, 15, 3, 5, and 3 pages respectively for a total of 31 pages. However, the RFP does not stipulate page limits for the Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan or Alignment with the Country Development Cooperation Strategy (CDCS), PEPFAR OVC Guidance, and the PEPFAR OVC DRC Strategy. Please clarify the pages limits for the five proposal sections or advise as to whether offerors may determine how to allocate the remaining four pages.

Response: The page numbers were only provided as estimates and not definitive numbers; therefore, there is some flexibility within each section, as long as the total number of pages does not exceed 35.Offerors may determine how to distribute the total number of pages among the sections.

25. RFP section L.6.2., p. 88-89 “1. Performance Work Statement (PWS)” states “The PWS must refer to the offeror as ‘the contractor’ and not the organization’s name. Non-committal words such as ‘will’, ‘should’, or ‘may’ must not be utilized. Only concrete language such as ‘must’ can be utilized to describe the offeror’s actions in the PWS.” Please clarify this requirement.

Response: In the Performance Work Statement that offerors will submit in response to this RFP’s Statement of Objectives, the offeror may refer to themselves as “the contractor” or refer to the name of their organization; this point is flexible. USG common practice is to use “the contractor” for neutrality’s sake. However, since this will be a contract, USAID would like to ensure a commitment from the contractor by using accepted contractual, concrete language such as “The contractor, ABC Foundation, must write x report;” not “The contractor, ABC Foundation, may write x report,” for example. According to Webster’s Dictionary, one of the meanings of the word ‘will’ is used to express a command, exhortation, or injunction; “you will do as I say, at once,” therefore, the offeror may use the word ‘will.’

26. The RFP states that past performance references can be included as an annex in the technical proposal and must be included in the cost volume. Please clarify in which volume the past performance references should be included. In addition, p. 91 of the RFP states that “offerors must use the past performance information sheet (included as an attachment to the FBO notice) to submit this information.” As we were unable to locate this sheet in the FBO notice, could USAID please provide offerors with this sheet when possible?

Response: Please include the past performance references in the Technical Proposal Annex. The Past Performance Information Sheet is included as an attachment to these responses.

27. Per RFP Section L.6.A.2), SF-294s are to be included in an annex. Could USAID please verify whether it is acceptable to provide a list of the last three years contracts for which we submitted subcontract reports to eSRS (FAR 52.219-9(d)(10) and a copy of 10-15 similarly recent subcontracting reports that were not submitted to eSRS?

Response: Yes, it is acceptable to provide a copy of 10 similarly recent subcontracting reports that were not submitted to eSRS in addition to a list of the last three years contracts for which the offeror submitted subcontract reports to eSRS.

28. RFP Section C.7, p. 26 lists “No less than 5 years of experience in a range of child protection interventions/approaches for vulnerable children in francophone Africa”. This requirement greatly limits the pool of potential candidates and as emphasis is placed on child protection qualifications, can the candidate have 5 years of experience working in a range of child protection interventions/approaches for vulnerable children in francophone Africa or similar contexts?

Response: This point is flexible; the candidate may have francophone Africa or similar contextual experience, as long as the candidate has the French language requirements stated.

29. RFP Section C.7, p. 27 states that required qualifications for the DCOP/Household Economic Strengthening Director include both “At least 10 years of experience in the design, management, monitoring, and evaluation of comprehensive community-based OVC programming, social services system strengthening, and household economic strengthening,” as well as “At least 7 years of demonstrated experience in household economic strengthening interventions.” In our experience, specialists who have 10+ years of expertise in comprehensive community-based OVC programming typically have not worked exclusively in the area of household economic strengthening for seven years or more. To provide USAID with the broadest pool of candidates for this position, we respectfully recommend that USAID modify the second requirement as follows: “At least 10 years of experience in the design, management, monitoring, and evaluation of comprehensive, community-based OVC programming, social services system strengthening, or household economic strengthening.”

Response: We accept this suggestion, but please note that household strengthening is the core approach through this activity. The required experience in community-based OVC programming is negotiable while the household strengthening background is a must.

30. RFP p.25 lists “HES specialist” twice on the minimal proposed staffing for the Country (Lubumbashi) office. Please clarify if two HES specialists are required or whether one of these should read as “F&A specialist” to mirror the structure from the two provincial offices.

Response: Corrected. One of the “HES Specialists” for the Country office should read as “F&A Specialist”.

31. RFP Section C.1., p. 10 states that the period of performance for this project is anticipated from October 2014 to September 2019. However, the activities are meant to coincide with the school year. Please clarify the anticipated timing of project start up.

Response: It is correct that certain activities coincide with the school year. The proposed period is an estimate. The period of performance for this contract is five years effective the date of the contracting officer’s signature is on the cover page. At this time, award is anticipated to be made in 2015.

32. RFP Section L.6.A., p. 89 states that offerors should include bio data sheets (AID 1420-17) in the appendix of the technical proposal. However, as bio data sheets include salary information, historically they have been provided in the cost volume. Please clarify where the offeror should include bio data sheets.

Response: Please include the bio data sheets in the cost proposal.

33. In Special Notice No.: OAA-660-121613, the Special Notice for ELIKIA, expected outcomes with specific targets were included for each intermediate result. In RFP SOL 660-14-000006, expected results are included for each intermediate result/objective, however specific targets were not included for intermediate result/objectives 1 and 2. In order to ensure that offerors are allocating resources adequately to achieve desired results, could USAID provide targets for these two objectives or advise as to whether the targets listed in the Special Notice referenced above are still applicable?

Response: RFP SOL# 660-14-000006 revised and replaced the Special Notice. There are some changes from the notice No.: OAA-660-121613 as USAID adopted the performance-based acquisition. As a Statement of Objectives, this requires competing contractors to develop the statement of work, performance metrics and measurement plan, and quality assurance plan... all of which will be evaluated before contract award.

34. RFP p. 91 states that international travel costs should be included under Other Direct Costs, however Travel and Other Direct Costs are listed as separate line items on page 90 and in the provided budget template. Please clarify how offerors should present travel costs.

Response: USAID confirms that while travel is an ‘other direct cost,’ to please follow the budget template and list travel in the separate line given.

35. The provided budget template lists consultants under Other Direct Costs. Please confirm that it would be acceptable to USAID for offerors to present consultant costs under Labor rather than Other Direct Costs.

Response: Please follow the budget template provided.

36. RFP Section H.26., p. 57 states that “The Contractor must subcontract $TBD of the work.” Can USAID clarify if there is a subcontracting estimate that will be provided or if USAID anticipates using the proposed subcontracting estimates from the offeror as a contractual requirement?

Response: USAID will use the proposed subcontracting estimates from the offeror as a contractual requirement as this is a SOO.

37. The RFP mentions the use of grants under contract and sub-grants in several instances. In order to allow all offerors to accurately account for the volume of sub-grants USAID anticipates, could USAID provide an estimate for the grants fund?

Response: As this is a SOO, this matter will be up to the offeror to decide. USAID also allows sub-contracts.

38. On p.91, Section L.6.B.c., the RFP states that “For contracts not in PPIRS, offerors must submit past performance information on all contracts above $10,000,000 with a period of performance falling within the last three years which involves any of the services listed in Section C. For major subcontractors (those representing more than 10% of the total estimated cost), offerors must submit information on all contracts over $1,000,000 with a period of performance falling within the last three years which involve any of the services listed in Section C.” Please clarify: If a list of those included in the PPIRS system, but meeting the requirements above should be submitted on behalf of the offeror and any major subcontractors?

Response: THERE IS NO NEED TO SUBMIT INFORMATION ON ANY CONTRACT MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS ABOVE IF IT IS IN PPIRS (www.ppirs.gov).

39. Page 10 – C.1.A. Programmatic Approaches, Geographic Scope Would USAID please provide a list of current PEPFAR-support clinical sites by health zone in the three targeted program provinces?

Response: The health zone list is attached. Please be advised Katanga is PEPFAR first priority, then Orientale and Kinshasa regardless of the current footprint.

40. Page 11 – Section C.1.A Programmatic Approaches, Beneficiary Targeting Would USAID please provide guidance on the proportion of clients that are expected to be drawn from facility-based targeting vs. community-based targeting? Should offerors prioritize enrolling HIV-affected households that are already linked to facilities over households caring for vulnerable children that are not linked to facilities for HIV services?

Response: This is up to the offeror. USAID places the OVC programming within the HIV/AIDS continuum of response. This guidance, however, is not a “how to” instruction for offerors.

41. Page 11 – Section C.1.A Programmatic Approaches, Beneficiary Targeting To what extent is the successful offeror intended to integrate or assume support for OVC who were supported under the ProVic project?

Response: While the successful offeror should assume support for OVC who were supported under ProVIC project, there is no target. The successful offeror should do its own assessment on who should continue to benefit from USG assistance.

42. If taking over OVCs under ProVic, is there a database of these children and a description of location and support received?

Response: This will be shared with the successful offeror.

43. If taking over OVCs under ProVic, are these children prioritized regardless of whether they fall under the category of families attending HIV services at a facility, or if they are simply households with vulnerable children? Or, should there be a subset of ProVic recipients included, using the proportions described to determine inclusion?

Response: The successful offeror should do its own assessment on who should continue to benefit from USG assistance.

44. Is this project expected to continue to use the assessment form that was used by ProVic to determine eligibility for program services? Or, can a new form adapted for this scope of work be developed and tested?

Response: The successful offeror will use relevant tools which are aligned with PEPFAR guidance.

45. Page 11 – Section C.1.A Programmatic Approaches, Beneficiary Targeting The RFP states that “The Contractor shall implement multiple identification and targeting strategies at different levels to maximize outreach and synergies with the broader continuum of care.” Would USAID please clarify if ‘different levels’ refers to different levels of the provincial system or different levels of the continuum of care?

Response: This refers to different levels of continuum of response: clinical and community settings..

46. Page 11 – Section C.1.A Programmatic Approaches, Beneficiary Targeting Given the request for a proposed plan for facility-based targeting and roll-out, would USAID please share data of the number of pregnant women receiving anti-retrovirals to prevent transmission of HIV to their infants (and/or PEPFAR supported health facilities) within the three target provinces? While some of this data exists in various locations, it does not appear to be publicly available and would be useful in assisting targeting for this program.

Response: The list of PEPFAR-supported health zones is attached. The number of pregnant women receiving anti-retrovirals won’t help as USAID did not assume this activity will support all of them; however, from Oct 1, 2012 - March 30, 2014, approximately 2,531 HIV-positive pregnant women received ARVs to reduce risk of mother-to-child-transmission (MTCT) during pregnancy and delivery in the 3 target provinces.

47. Page 12 – C.1.A. Programmatic Approaches, Capacity-building approaches Would USAID please clarify the financial size or scope that offerors should allocate for the small grants program with local organizations?

Response: at least 25%

48. Page 19 – Section C.5.A. Objective 2 The RFP states that primary school scholarships are a priority service for OVCs. Illustrative output indicators provided on page 22 includes “Number of schools receiving block grants.” Would USAID please clarify if offerors should use school block grants or individual scholarships to provide primary school scholarships to OVCs?

Response: The indicator was simply illustrative. USAID published a statement of objectives to allow prospective offerors the opportunity to provide innovative solutions and is opened to all efficient, sustainable and effective interventions which are relevant to the DRC context

49. Page 19 – Section C.5.A Objective 1 The expected results for Objective 1 includes, “Increased numbers of families/households reached through HES Interventions.” Does USAID have a preferred set of output or outcome indicators in support of this outcome, besides those provided on pages 21-22?

Response: Offerors are expected to propose output/outcome indicators and expected results.

50. Page 21 – Section C.5.A Objective 3 Per the expected results for Objective 3, will USAID provide the successful offeror with baseline data related to these results?

Response: Yes.

51. Page 23 – Section C.6. Operating Constraints In the Results Framework provided in the RFP, IR 2 is shown as “OVC utilization of essential services increased.” However, in other sections of the RFP, there are also references to household utilization of services, with specific mention of pregnant women utilization of ANC. Are offerors expected to prioritize OVC utilization of essential services over other household members, or are these considered to be of equal importance?

Response: ELIKIA activity will support the medical goals of the HIV response in key and mutually beneficial ways. Therefore USAID clearly places the OVC programming within the HIV/AIDS continuum of response at the country level. Child-focused, family-centered interventions at the household level take precedence over handing out materials only to children identified as “OVC.”

52. Page 50 – Section H.8. Language Requirements The RFP states that “Contractor key personnel must have English language S/4 and R/4 proficiency and French language S/3 and R/3 proficiency to perform technical services.” However, proficiency in English and French are only included as a requirement for two Key Personnel positions on pages 26-27. Would USAID please clarify the language requirements for Key Personnel?

Response: The top 3 positions of Chief of Party, Deputy Chief of Party (DCOP)/Household Economic Strengthening Director, and Deputy Chief of Party for Finance, Administration, and Compliance all should have proficiency in English. That said, USAID encourages contractors to hire DRC citizens as key personnel.

53. Page 86 – Section L.6.A. Technical Proposal The RFP lists the organizational chart, draft PMP, and draft work plan as part of the Program Management Plan section. On the following page, the RFP lists the draft PMP and draft work plan as part of the annexes. Would USAID please confirm that the organizational chart, draft PMP, and draft work plan should be included as part of the annexes for the technical proposal?

Response: Confirmed. Please include the organizational chart, draft PMP, and draft work plan as part of the annexes for the technical proposal.

54. Page 86 – Section L.6.A. Technical Proposal The RFP provides the format for the technical proposal and states that the technical proposal must not exceed 35 pages. However, instructions provided in pages 87-89 on the format of the proposal, as well as page limitations, differ. Would USAID please clarify the format for the technical proposal and page limitations for each section?

Response: The page numbers were only provided as estimates and not definitive numbers; therefore, there is some flexibility within each section, as long as the total number of pages does not exceed 35. Offerors may determine how to distribute the total number of pages among the sections.

55. Page 87 – Section L.6.A. Technical Proposal, Cover Page The RFP states that the cover page should include the name of the proposed contract Activity Director. Would USAID please clarify who this individual is?

Response: Offeror’s proposed Chief of Party

56. Page 87 – Section L.6.A. Technical Proposal The RFP provides a list of technical annexes, which includes SF294 Subcontracting Reports. Would USAID please confirm that the SF294 Subcontracting Reports should be included as part of the cost proposal, rather than the technical proposal?

Response: Please include the SF 294 Subcontracting reports as part of the technical annexes of the technical proposal.

57. Page 88 – Section L.6.A. Technical Proposal, Monitoring and Evaluation Plan The RFP states that the Performance Work Statement should include a Monitoring and Evaluation Plan, which is a summary of the draft PMP. However, the draft PMP is also included as part of the Program Management Plan. Would USAID please clarify in which section offerors should include a summary of the draft PMP?

Response: Within the Performance Work Statement (PWS), offerors must include two things; the Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) plan and the Management Approach. The M&E Plan in the PWS should include a summary of the draft Activity Monitoring and Evaluation Plan. Please refer to the revised Sections L and M of the RFP.

58. Page 89 – Section L.6.A. Technical Proposal, Personnel The RFP states that personnel should be included under the Program Management Plan. However, the RFP also includes a separate Key Personnel section following the Program Management Plan. Would USAID please clarify in which section offerors should discuss Key Personnel in the technical proposal?

Response: Please include Key Personnel as part of the separate, Key Personnel Section.

59. Regarding the Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan required in section L.6, it is our interpretation that the Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan describes USAID's methodology for monitoring contractor performance, as described in Section F.6, Page 36, "quality assurance". Can USAID please clarify that the Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan should describe the methodology by which USAID should monitor the ELIKIA program?

Response: The SOO approach does allow prospective offerors to propose their concepts of how best to reach the Government’s objectives and how the resulting performance-based contract should be structured. Upon selection of the Contractor, USAID must ensure that the negotiated PWS, performance standards and incentives conform to all Performance Based Acquisition regulatory requirements. In addition, a final Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) must be in place to monitor contract performance upon award. Therefore the offeror should include a draft of QASP which will be finalized upon contract award.

60. Please confirm that the references for each key personnel can be included on a separate page from the resumes.

Response: Yes, references for each key personnel may be included on a separate page from the resumes.

61. Would USAID please provide an exchange rate?

Response: Please consult http://www.oanda.com/ or similar site.

62. Can USAID please confirm that bullet 4 under the Performance Work Statement on Page 95 is included in the PWS section and not in the Management Approach and Experience Section? Bullet pasted below as a reference.

Ability of the Offeror to develop an in-country presence and ability to effectively manage efforts in country, including: ongoing coordination with the USG in-country PEPFAR team; training and capacity-building plans; depth of organizational experience in managing relevant large-scale activities, including the ability to transparently manage contract involving collaborative efforts drawing upon the full range of available skills and experience of the applicant, and maintain clear and effective lines of communication between and among clients, technical, administrative, and logistical activity staff.

Response: Confirmed. Bullet 4 should be included in the Performance Work Statement section.

63. Section L on Page 89 states: "Draft Work Plan: The offeror must provide a draft work plan for the five years that will also include a draft Year 1 work plan." Could USAID please confirm that, for the purposes of the proposal, only a draft Year 1 work plan is required and detailed annual work plans for subsequent years will be presented as project deliverables?

Response: Confirmed. Only Year 1 draft is required.

64. In Section F5 on Page 39, the Solicitation states: “The AWPs must also describe a plan and timeline for internal monitoring and evaluation that takes into account the PMP and the external monitoring and evaluation outlined in the Technical Annex." Please confirm the location of the external monitoring and evaluation within the Technical Annex.

Response: Confirmed. Evaluation will be conducted by a third party. The external monitoring and evaluation is not a requirement and is not part of the technical annex.

65. To help Offerors better align our responses with USAID’s priorities, could USAID please provide a breakdown of the points that will be allocated to each of the five scored technical evaluation criterion listed in Section M.2?

Response: Per this RFP, scoring is adjectival.

66. On Page 94, USAID states that “Key Personnel” is one of the five evaluation criterion. However, on Page 95, the description relates to “Quality of Personnel”. Can USAID please clarify that this evaluation criterion relates only to key personnel?

Response: Quality of personnel includes key personnel, but is not limited only to key personnel.

67. Page 86, Section L.6 provides a bulleted list that states: “The offeror must organize the Technical Proposal by the technical evaluation criteria contained in Section M using the following format:” However, the bulleted list that follows does not correlate to the bulleted list found in Section M.2 on Page 94. Would USAID please confirm that the bulleted list on Page 94 is the one Offerors should adhere to when organizing the Technical Proposal?

Response: Confirmed. The required format is described at Section L.6. However the offeror should ensure that the criteria/requirements listed in section M are met/addressed.

68. Would USAID please confirm that letters of commitment as indicated on Page 89 should be included only in the annex of the technical proposal as a direct reference to Page 87 “Statement of Intention and Availability for Key Personnel”?

Response: Yes, USAID confirms that the letters of commitment indicated on page 89 should be included only in the annex of the technical proposal as a direct reference to page 87, “Statement of Intention and Availability for key personnel.”