Answers_to_questions_on_SIPED_II_RFP.pdf

Answers to questions regarding RFP SOL-663-14-000014

1. On page 108, there is a comment that section M.6. This might be excluded from this RFP. Is Section M.6 still valid?

Section M. 6. is still valid. Ignore the last sentence. See amendment

2. The RFP states that this will be a Cost Plus Fixed-Fee Completion Contract, based on deliverables. Can USAID confirm that payment of fee is based on LOE (proportion of labor) as per Section B.7 on page 8?

No. See amendment

3. Can USAID clarify the distinction between the two budget categories of “Travel” and “Transportation”? (E and F on page 99). Can transportation costs be included in the Travel section?

No. Read the RFP

4. On page 20, the RFP states that “The contractor must comply with host country environmental regulations unless otherwise directed in writing by USAID. In case of conflict between host country and USAID regulations, the latter shall govern.” Can USAID verify that it is not USAID’s intention to expect the Contractor to violate host government laws, and that any conflict would be mitigated in a way to avoid disregard for host government regulations?

Yes

5. It is our understanding that the “overseas recruitment incentive” listed on page 42, clause

H.9 (b), is the difficult to post incentive (DSSR). Please confirm that this is correct.

Yes

6. On page 43, section H.10 (d), the RFP states that “One annual salary increase not more than TBD% (includes promotional increase) may be granted after the employee's completion of each twelve month period of satisfactory services under the contract.” We assume that we may propose a rate based on market indices and historical data including inflation. Please confirm that this is correct. In the same clause, we request that promotional increases be considered separately from annual increases.

See amendment

7. On page 93 under Section a, the RFP indicates that the email subject line for submissions should include the name of the offeror and the solicitation number; on the same page under Section b, it indicates the subject line should state the RFP number and title of the project.

Can USAID confirm which is correct?

The subject line should be in the following sample:

“ABCD, Inc - RFP No. SOL-663-14-000014, SIPED II” See amendment

8. Can USAID confirm that the 8 MB limit on attachments is per email, and not for the total submission?

The 8 MB limit on attachments is per email.

9. Per the cover letter to the RFP, USAID states that “USAID will select the offerors proposal that demonstrates the technical understanding required to achieve the project objectives at the most reasonable cost to the United States Government.” Section M.5 of the RFP mentions that award will be made according to best value. Will USAID please clarify the evaluative factor for cost?

Best value determination depends on the technical acceptance of the proposal. Please refer to the amendment in section M.3. F

10. P. 106. The RFP states that “The qualifications and relevant professional experience of all key personnel in implementing programs of this kind…” This sentence appears incomplete.

Are there additional evaluation factors for Key Personnel that offerors should consider when preparing their proposal?

Just add period at the end and this sentence will appear complete. See amendment

11. In Section M.3.B, page 106, it seems as though the final sentence regarding key personnel was cut off. Is there more information that USAID wishes to communicate regarding key personnel?

Just add period at the end and this sentence will appear complete. See amendment

12. In Section B.2, page 7, it is stated that the contract is a cost-plus-fixed-fee (CPFF), completion type contract. However, in Section B.7, page 8, the language regarding the payment of fixed fee reflects a CPFF term type contract. Can USAID kindly clarify whether this is a completion type contract or a term type contract?

This is a completion type contract. See Amendment

13. RFP Section M.3, page 106, lists five general evaluation factors in their order of importance

(1-technical, 2-personnel, 3-management/staffing, 4-PMP, 5-past performance). However, according to Section L.8 (a) 1, page 94, the technical proposal must be organized in a different order (1-technical, 2-PMP, 3-management/personnel, 4-past performance). Kindly confirm that offerors are required to follow the section order and abide by the page limits specified in Section L.8 (1).

14. Does USAID intend to include a local compensation plan with this RFP?

No

15. P.100. Will USAID confirm that the base period of the project will be 18 months, followed by three 12-month option years and one 6-month option year?

Confirmed

16. Can USAID clarify the geographic code for procurement of goods and services under this contract? On page 39 the code is indicated as 937, while on page 49 it is 935.

The section on page 39 states “unless it is specified” and it is specified on page 49.

17. In the evaluation criteria, only the total number of points is provided. Can USAID provide the breakdown of points for each of the evaluation factors?

Breakdown of points is provided with amendment. See Amendment

18. Will USAID please provide a breakdown of how the 100 evaluative points will be assigned to each of the five Technical Evaluative Criteria listed on page 106 of the RFP?

19. In the evaluation criteria, only the total number of points is provided. Can USAID provide the breakdown of points for each of the evaluation factors?

20. P.107. The RFP includes 100 total points for evaluation criteria. Will USAID provide point values for each of the evaluation criteria (technical understanding and approach, key personnel, program management and staffing plan, performance monitoring and evaluation plan, past performance, and cost)?

21. On page 20 the RFP indicates that the period of performance shall be a maximum of five years, from March 2014 through February 2019. Can USAID provide an updated estimated start date?

Estimated period of performance for this contract is October 2014 through September 2019 Exact start date and end date will be specified in the contract. See amendment

22. P. 20. The RFP states that the period of performance will be March 2014 through February 2019. Does USAID have an updated start date for the project?

23. In Section C.VIII, page 20, the period of performance is listed as March 2014 through February 2019. Could USAID kindly clarify the anticipated period of performance?

24. Under Section L.8 (1) b, Attachment J.1 is referenced as the SOO. However, Attachment J.1 is actually the Identification of Principal Geographic Code Numbers. Can USAID clarify whether or not the SOO is the same as that listed in Section C.III, page 13? If not, can USAID kindly provide the referenced SOO?

The SOO is referred as Attachment J.1 by mistake. SOO is in the RFP in Section C.III, page

13. See amendment.

25. In several instances the RFP refers to the Statement of Objective (SOO) in Attachment J-1;

however attachment J-1 is the Identification of Principal Geographic Code Numbers. Can USAID confirm that the SOO is located in Section C and that there is no additional information that was intended to be provided in an Attachment?

The SOO is referred as Attachment J.1 by mistake. See amendment.

26. On page 105 of the RFP, in the Section M Evaluation Factors for Award, the following sentence is listed “The following four general factors, which are further described below, provide a scale of importance of each factor.” However there are no four general factors neither listed nor further described below. Will USAID please provide additional information or clarification?

“The following four general factors, which are further described below, provide a scale of importance of each factor.” is a mistake and should read “The following six general factors, which are further described below, provide a scale of importance of each factor.” See amendment.

27. In Section L8 on page 94, the RFP indicates that proposals must be submitted in three parts: Technical Proposal, Cost Proposal, and Past Performance. However, past performance is listed as a section of the technical proposal. Can USAID clarify if Section e of the proposal (Institutional Past Performance) is the third part of the proposal?

No, Past Performance is not part of the technical proposal. It is separate and should be submitted as annex H. Past Performance should not exceed 3 pages. See amendment

28. Page 94 of the RFP lists page limits for the various sections of the technical proposal. No page limit is given for institutional past performance. Will USAID please confirm that institutional past performance can be included as an annex and not count towards the page limit of the technical proposal?

Past Performance (not to exceed 3 pages) should be submitted as annex H and will not count towards the page limit listed under technical proposal section. See amendment

29. P. 94. Section L.8 lists the sections of the Technical Proposal (1.a-e). The Institutional Past

Performance heading does not have page allocations listed next to it as the other headings

do. Would USAID please clarify whether this is part of the technical narrative, and if so, please indicate if there is a page limit to this section, or does this Institutional Past Performance section correspond with instructions for a third volume or annex (see Q 7 below)?

30. P. 94. Section L.8 indicates that the Past Performance Section will be submitted as a third volume. Please clarify if Past Performance is to be presented as a third volume or as an annex to the technical proposal (as is mentioned in L.8 (1) e, p. 96). Please also indicate whether there is a page limit to this volume or annex.

31. RFP Section L.8 (1) e requires submission of past performance references. Since no annex is specified, can USAID confirm that offerors can include them in the annex designated for corporate capabilities information (Annex G)?

32. P. 93. The RFP states that, “a draft Performance Management Plan (PMP), a critical tool for planning, managing, and documenting performance against set indicators, shall also be included as an annex.” However, page 94 of the RFP requests the illustrative performance monitoring plan as part of the technical proposal. Would USAID confirm that the draft PMP is to be included as an annex?

The Performance Monitoring Plan must be submitted as part of the Technical Proposal and not exceed 5 pages. See amendment

33. On page 93, the RFP states that a draft Performance Management Plan (PMP) shall also be included as an annex, while on page 94 it is listed as part of the main technical proposal.

Can USAID clarify if the PMP is an annex?

34. RFP Section L.6 (g), page 93, requires submission of a draft performance management plan

(PMP) as an annex. However, in Section L.8 (a), page 94, the PMP is listed under the technical proposal and not as an annex. Can USAID kindly confirm that offerors can submit the PMP as an annex that does not count against the page limits?

35. P. 95. Instructions for Annexes include an Annex for SF-294. We respectfully request the option of selecting 10-15 recent and relevant SF 294 forms for USAID’s review.

Submit SF- 294 for the past three years. See amendment

36. Is there a particular format for the PMEP that USAID would like offerors to use?

37. Will USAID please clarify what is the “Coping Strategy Index” referenced on page 14 of the

RFP?

The Coping Strategy Index is a tool for rapid measurement of household food security and the impact of food aid programs in humanitarian emergencies. Please note that this is not the only tool and offerors are encouraged to propose another tool or methodology of measuring improved capacity of beneficiary communities to cope with shocks to livelihoods.

38. P.96. The RFP requests resumes for key personnel. May offerors submit resumes in an annex to the technical proposal?

Yes, offerors may submit resumes in annex C along with key personnel letters of commitment. See amendment

39. Per RFP Section L.8 (1) d, can USAID please confirm that offerors can submit resumes in

Annex C along with key personnel letters of commitment?

40. Can USAID clarify if key personnel are to be submitted in an annex or if they should be included in Section d of the proposal (Technical Management and Key personnel)? If they are to be included in Section d, do they count towards the 10-page limit of that section?

41. Will USAID please release to offerors any external evaluations of the SIPED and CDI programs?

Attached is the final evaluation done of the SIPED program. No such external evaluation exists for CDI.

42. RFP Section C.X, page 21, requires submission of an approach to environmental compliance and management. Could USAID please confirm we can include this narrative in an annex?

Yes, offerors may submit an approach to environmental compliance and management narrative in an annex as annex I to the technical proposal. See amendment

43. Can USAID clarify which reports must be submitted in both English and Amharic, and which must be submitted in which format (electronic/CD/hard copy)? We request that all reports are submitted in electronic copy only in order to streamline reporting.

All reports must be submitted electronically in English.

44. On page 19 of the RFP, USAID lists a set of benchmarks to be achieved by 2015. Will

USAID please confirm that the estimated benchmarks are expected to be achieved by December 2015? Section L does not specify a font size for offerors to use in proposal preparation. Will USAID please confirm that offerors may use Times New Roman 12?

Proposed/accepted benchmarks are expected to be achieved by December 2015.

All proposals must use Times New Roman font size 12. See amendment

45. Will tables and charts in the technical proposal count towards the page limitations?

Yes, any tables and or charts in the technical proposal will count towards the page limitations.

46. P. 11. The RFP states: “The Support Objective of the USAID/Ethiopia’s Democracy and Governance Office is “Improved enabling environment for sustainable development.” This Support Objective is broken into three subsequent sub-intermediate results to guide program design.” Only two IRs are illustrated. Does USAID want the proposal to address all three intermediate results and if so, will USAID please provide the third IR?

This is a typo. There are only two IRs. See amendment

47. Can you tell me if there is an incumbent contractor currently performing work for this requirement? If so, could you please provide their company name and contract number?

No, there is not an incumbent contractor.

48. Is this a follow-on requirement? If so, could you please provide the incumbent contract number for this opportunity? If not, is this a new requirement?

49. Is this a follow-on requirement? If so, could you please provide the incumbent contract number for this opportunity? If not, is this a new requirement? ‘

50. P. 15. The RFP states that “WASH funds will be used in this program to provide water access to communities in the geographical focus area of the program.” Approximately what percentage of project funds will be WASH?

Over the 5-year course of the project life span at least $5.9 million will be WASH funds.

51. Under section C.III.b, page 15, it is mentioned that WASH funds will be used to provide water access to communities. To ensure that offerors are budgeting accurately, can USAID kindly provide a plug figure for these WASH funds?

Over the 5-year course of the project life span at least $5.9 million will be WASH funds.

52. Can USAID confirm that the offeror may allocate the small grant fund based on the proposed technical design and that there are no specific sectoral allocations (e.g. a certain portion of the funds that must go to WASH)?

With respect to WASH funds…over the 5-year course of the project life span at least $5.9 million will be WASH funds. Plan for at least that amount.

53. Can USAID kindly clarify whether the branding implementation plan (BIP) and marking plan (MP) should be annexed to the technical volume, as specified in Section L.8(1), page 95 or the cost volume, as specified in Section L.10, page 103?

Offerors will submit the branding implementation plan annexed to the Technical Proposal as specified under section L.8, page 95 - Annex F-Branding Implementation Plan. The language under Section L.10 is revised. See amendment

54. Section L.8 also lists the Branding Implementation Plan (BIP) as an annex to the technical proposal. However on pg. 103, in section L.10, it states that the BIP should be included as an annex to the cost proposal. Can USAID clarify whether this annex should be in the cost or the technical?

Offerors will submit the branding implementation plan annexed to the Technical Proposal as specified under section L.8, page 95 - Annex F-Branding Implementation Plan. The language under Section L.10 is revised. See amendment

55. The RFP indicates on page 94 that acceptable file formats for submission are Microsoft Office Suite applications (.DOC, .XLS, .MDB) or Adobe Acrobat (.PDF). On page 94, the instructions indicate that the technical part of the proposal should be submitted in Word format. Can USAID clarify which parts of the proposal may be submitted in .PDF?

Offerors will submit all documents (expect the cost/business proposal) via PDF or Word format.

56. For ease of submission and to allow for letters of commitment and other documents that have signatures, can USAID please confirm that offerors can submit the technical narrative in Word and the full technical volume (including annexes) in PDF (as listed in Section L.7(c), page 94)?

Offerors will submit all documents (expect the cost/business proposal) via PDF or word

57. On page 17, the RFP states that The IEE is attached to the RFP and offerors need to incorporate IEE requirements into their proposals. However, the IEE was not included as an attachment to the RFP. Can USAID provide this document?

See number 3 on the RFP amendment #1 and refer to page 20, X. ENVIRONMENTAL

COMPLIANCE

58. P. 20. The RFP states “Key personnel, subject to review of offeror proposals, will include the

Chief of Party, Deputy Chief of Party and any other full time resident expatriate advisor(s).”

This seems to imply that USAID requires (1) the Chief of Party and Deputy Chief of Party to be expatriate staff and (2) that only expatriates may fill Key Personnel positions.

Ethiopians as well as expatriates/third country nationals may fill Key Personnel positions.

Question 58i: Would USAID please clarify its requirements for Key Personnel, including whether the Chief of Party and Deputy Chief of Party must be expatriate?

Question 58ii: Would USAID please clarify how many positions the Offeror may propose as Key Personnel? And if USAID allows additional (to the COP and DCOP) Key Personnel positions, would USAID allow the offeror to fill them with well qualified third country national or host country national staff?

The offeror may propose up to as many five (5) key personnel.

59. In Section C.IX, page 20, key personnel are listed as including the chief of party, deputy chief of party, and any other full-time resident expatriate advisors. In Section F.8, page 32, key personnel are listed to include all of the above and “Ethiopian national personnel functioning in positions deemed sensitive and critical to USAID.” Can USAID confirm that offerors are allowed to propose key personnel that best reflect the management and technical needs of their proposed approach in order to allow for the most efficient implementation of the project?

Offerors are allowed to propose key personnel that best reflect the management and technical needs of their proposed approach in order to allow for the most efficient implementation of the project. Ethiopians as well as expatriates/third country nationals may fill Key Personnel positions.

60. Can USAID clarify if the budget and work plan should be presented by year or by the schedule presented in the table on page 7 in section B.4 (e.g. 18 months, 12 months, 12 months, 12 months, 6 months)?

By schedule presented in the table on page 7 in section B.4

61. P. 95. The RFP requests a Branding Plan in a technical annex. However, page 103 of the

RFP states that “Offerors should submit a preliminary BIP and MP (not to exceed two pages) as a separate annex to the cost proposal.

BIP and MP should be submitted as annex to the technical proposal.

62. BIP and MP will not be part of the technical Questions on evaluation.” Will USAID please confirm whether the BIP and MP should be submitted as part of the technical or the cost proposal?

BIP and MP should be submitted as annex to the technical proposal. See amendment.

63. P. 94, L.8 The RFP states that “The technical part of the proposal should be submitted in

Word format. The cost part should be submitted in Excel format.” Also on P. 94, L.7.c, the RFP states “Acceptable native file formats are Microsoft Office Suite applications (.DOC, .XLS, .MDB) or Adobe Acrobat (.PDF). Please confirm that .PDF is an acceptable file format for submission, except for the budget portion of the cost proposal, which we understand must be submitted in an unprotected .XLS file.

Offerors will submit all documents (expect the cost/business proposal) via PDF or Word

64. On page 100, the RFP states says: “Grants under Contracts (GUCs): The GUCs cost which is expected to be part of this program. The anticipated figure is already contained in the budget.” However, there is no figure indicated in the budget. Can USAID either provide this figure or confirm that there is no maximum amount that may be allocated for GUCs?

The maximum amount for GUC is $3.5 million for the entire performance

65. RFP Section L.8 (a), page 95, requires submission of SF 294 forms. To fulfill this requirement, may we submit 10 recent and relevant SF 294 reports? Our electronic SF 294 records over a period of 3 or 5 years are very large files that exceed the file size limits specified in Section L.7(c).

Please submit SF 294 for the last three years. See amendment.

66. On page 65, the RFP lists Preliminary Personnel Requirements (e.g. security and background checks, medical and physical checks, country clearance, security training, etc.)

Can these expenses be included in the cost proposal

Yes as per the relevant AIDAR clauses incorporated in the solicitation in Section H.32. See amendment.

67. Given the extensive requirements of this proposal, including a 30-page technical narrative, and lack of a pre-solicitation notice to allow for adequate preparation, would USAID consider granting offerors a two-week extension for submission?

68. In order give applicants adequate time to incorporate the responses to questions into their proposals, we kindly request that USAID consider an extension of the proposal deadline.

No extension of the proposal deadline