RFP-_LEDS_Amend_01_Q A.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION / MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

1. CONTRACT ID CODE

PAGE OF PAGES

2 2

SOL-674-14-000022

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO

5. PROJECT NO.

(If applicable)

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

1. Section C.5.: Delete #9 in its entirety.

2. F.5 (a) LEVEL OF EFFORT: DELETE “4,440 days” and REPLACE with “6,160 days” of Professional Technical Labor

3. Section G.1 ADD line item “0003” with description “Fixed Fee for line item 0003” to form 1034.

4. Section H.11: Delete reference to Geographic Code “937” and replace with Geographic Code “935”.

5. Section L.6.D, Technical Proposal section 4 Contractor Past Performance Information; DELETE “b.

Use of Small Business Concerns”

6. Section L.6.D: ADD ANNEX 10 “Branding Implementation Plan and Marking Plan”

7. L.11 (b) (4), “Fixed Amounts For the Cost Proposal”: DELETE “4,440 days” and REPLACE with “6,160 days” of Professional Technical Labor.

8. M.6(d) DELETE the sentence “Major subcontractors are those that receive more than 5% of the proposed price (level of effort).” And REPLACE with “Major subcontractors are those that receive 20% or more of the proposed price (level of effort).”

9. Questions and Answers are provided in Attachment 1 to this Amendment.

(end of Amendment 01)

1 11

Attachment 1 to Amendment No. 01

SOL-674-14-000022

ATTACHMENT 1 – QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

Some questions have been rephrased to remove proprietary information or the identity of submitting organizations. Where multiple questions were submitted regarding the same issue only one question is presented.

1. Would USAID consider extending the closing time for submission of the proposal after submitting the responses to the questions? We need sufficient time after receiving the responses to the questions in order to prepare a comprehensive technical proposal.

ANSWER: NO. THE CLOSING DATE FOR SUBMISSION IS AS PER THE SOLICITATION.

2. With reference to page C-2(a)(3-4); the technical services to be delivered include: “Development of at least one (1) LED project proposal and associated analyses completed within twelve (12) months of award” and “Development of at least three (3) LED project proposals and associated analyses completed within 36 months of award.” In relation to these requirements, could the bid team expand on what they understand proposal and analysis “completeness” to mean?

ANSWER: ‘PROPOSAL AND ANALYSIS COMPLETENESS’ MEANS THAT THE PROJECT

PROPOSAL IS COMPLETED IN TERMS OF ALL TECHNICAL, FINANCIAL,

CARBON/EMISSIONS ANALYSIS ETC. AND IS THUS READY TO BE SUBMITTED FOR

IMPLEMENTATION FUNDING (I.E. BANKABLE).

3. Page C-2., Section C.3 Sub-section a. Technical Services: “Signed memorandum of agreement for the development of at least one (1) LED project in South Africa within the first nine (9) months of the award.” With whom must the memorandum of agreement be signed?

ANSWER: THE MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT SHOULD BE SIGNED WITH THE

MUNICIPALITY OR RELEVANT ENTITY THAT WILL ESSENTIALLY BE THE PROJECT

OWNER. A MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT IS A COMMITMENT TO PARTNER WITH

THAT ENTITY IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF A PROJECT/PROJECT PROPOSAL. A

MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT IS NOT ABSOLUTELY REQUIRED TO DEVELOP A

PROJECT PROPOSAL. THIS IS DEPENDENT ON THE MODALITIES THAT THE

IMPLEMENTING PARTNER USES IN COLLABORATION WITH OTHER ENTITIES. AT

LEAST ONE PROJECT PROPOSAL AND ASSOCIATED ANALYSES MUST BE COMPLETED

WITHIN TWELVE (12) MONTHS OF THE AWARD.

4. Would USAID please elaborate on the distinction made on page C-2 between a “signed memorandum of agreement for the development of at least one (1) LED project in South Africa within the first nine (9) months of the award,” and the “development of at least one (1) LED project proposal and associated analyses completed within twelve (12) months of award?” Is the former a pre-condition for the latter?

ANSWER: PLEASE REFER TO THE ANSWER TO QUESTION 3.

5. Section C.3.a defines the following project requirement: “Development of at least three (3) LED project proposals and associated analyses completed within 36 months of award.” Section C.3.b states that the following result ought to be achieved under Objective 1: “Preparation and development of up to 20 innovative low emissions projects across South Africa during the first three years of the project.” Can the Government please clarify the relationship between these two results?

ANSWER: IT IS A REQUIREMENT THAT THREE (3) LED PROJECT PROPOSALS AND

ASSOCIATED ANALYSIS ARE COMPLETED WITHIN 36 MONTHS OF AWARD. THE

PROJECT OBJECTIVE IS THAT UP TO 20 INNOVATIVE LED PROJECTS ARE DEVELOPED

DURING THIS TIME.

6. Some of the LEDS projects identified by this work will be more commercially attractive whilst others will need to be funded by public sector finance. In some cases public-private-partnerships (PPPs) will be viable. Does the bid team have any preference with regards to the proportional split in the pipeline of projects between commercially funded vs. publicly funded vs. PPPs?

ANSWER: NO. USAID EXPECTS PARTNERS TO EXPLORE AND PROPOSE ALL

RELEVANT POTENTIAL FUNDING MECHANISMS AND SOURCES.

7. Do any existing Development Credit Authority (DCA) programs in place in Africa (including South Africa) have elements that may be applicable to this project?

Is it possible to use DCA for enabling some of the potential work to accomplish goals and, if so, are there associated DCA management and implementation program requirements?

ANSWER: IF RELEVANT DCA’S EXIST THEY MAY BE USED FOR ENABLING SOME OF

THE POTENTIAL WORK TO ACCOMPLISH GOALS. WE REFER YOU TO THE USAID

WEBSITE (WWW.USAID.GOV) FOR MORE INFORMATION.

8. Smaller municipalities in South Africa often have fairly dire energy development needs which will push up their carbon footprints in the medium term. This can be done in conjunction with efficiency (and other mitigation measures) in order to ensure that emissions are not as high as they would have been if no action were taken. Can suppress demand methodologies (of the likes approved under the UNFCCC CDM) be used to calculate emission reductions of projects considered?

ANSWER: YES.

9. To what extent can significant project resources be allocated to developing the enabling environment? For example, good transport projects need to be contextualized in, and arise from, appropriate and well-coordinated Spatial Development Frameworks and Integrated Transport Plans.

http://www.usaid.gov/

If these are not in place or are unsupportive of LED (not uncommon), can the project spend resources in supporting the development of this enabling framework? Note that developing such a framework can take 2 years or more. Would this be regarded as a “project”?

ANSWER: THE DEVELOPMENT OF AN ENABLING ENVIRONMENT MAY BE SUPPORTED

BUT THIS IN ITSELF WILL NOT COUNT AS A PROJECT.

10. Page C-2., Section C.3 Sub-section a. Technical Services: “Establishment of a Project Management Office (PMO) within 90 days of award. The PMO will be overseen by the Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA), Department of Science and Technology (DST) and USAID and will comprise certain key personnel (see Section F) that will facilitate the identification and development of LED projects in South Africa to feed into the SA-LED project.” Will the PMO be located within the DEA or any other Governmental institution or does USAID expect the Offeror to establish a separate project office?

ANSWER: USAID EXPECTS THE OFFEROR TO ESTABLISH A SEPARATE PROJECT

OFFICE.

11. There are multiple references to a hybrid reporting relationship between the contractor, USAID and GoSA agencies, such as on page C-2, “The PMO will be overseen by the Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA), Department of Science and Technology (DST) and USAID….” Page C-3 “The PMO will be overseen by the Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA), Department of Science and Technology (DST) and USAID jointly through collaborative project management.” Page C-4 “The PMO will report to USAID and to the DEA, through the Office of Climate Change Monitoring and Evaluation.” These statements, however, appear to contradict the principles laid out in Section G.6 Technical Directions/Relationship with USAID on page G-3. Would USAID please clarify the reporting relationships between the contractor and USAID and the contractor and GoSA agencies (specifically DEA and DST)?

ANSWER: THE CONTRACTUAL RELATIONSHIP WILL BE BETWEEN THE PMO AND

USAID. USAID WILL ESTABLISH A PROJECT MANAGEMENT UNIT THAT WILL

INCLUDE PARTNERS SUCH AS DEA, DST ETC. WHO WILL GUIDE AND INFORM USAID’S

TECHNICAL DIRECTION AS PART OF THE MANAGEMENT AND RELATIONSHIP WITH

THE PMO.

12. Page C-3 states that: “The PMO will be overseen by the Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA), Department of Science and Technology (DST) and USAID jointly through collaborative project management.” Page C-3 states that: “All activities undertaken by the PMO will be endorsed by relevant government department or public entity where necessary, with DEA acting as the overall champion and facilitator.” Page C-4 states that: “To facilitate coordination between DEA, USAID and potential funding mechanisms, SA-LED will incorporate lessons learned by DEA in the establishment of the Green Fund into the development and function of the PMO. The PMO will report to USAID and to the DEA, through the Office of Climate Change Monitoring and Evaluation.”

These individual quotations make ambiguous who ultimately has responsibility for programmatic activities, especially those that come out of the PMO. Therefore, can the Government please clarify:

• The PMO reporting structure

• The oversight responsibilities and authorities as relates to USAID, DEA, DST, and the PMO.

ANSWER: PLEASE REFER TO THE ANSWER TO QUESTION 11.

13. Section C.6.A states, “A traditional monitoring and evaluation framework in the form of a Performance Management Plan (PMP) will be provided by offerors during the proposal phase and will be a key consideration in the selection of a successful proposal.” Please confirm this refers to the Illustrative Life of Projects Results Framework, included as an Annex in the volume.

ANSWER: A PMP SHOULD BE SUBMITTED WITH THE TECHNICAL PROPOSAL USING

THE GUIDANCE PROVIDED UNDER SECTION C.6.A ON PAGE C11 USING THE

DEFINITIONS AND INDICATORS PROVIDED IN ANNEX 3.

14. Page C-11 states: “A copy of the results framework/logical framework for this project which will be included in the solicitation for the project contains illustrative indicators.” However, the project specific results framework does not appear to be attached to the solicitation. Can the Government please provide?

ANSWER: PLEASE USE GUIDANCE PROVIDED IN THE ANSWER TO QUESTION 13.

15. Page L-5, Section L.6 General Instructions for the Preparation of the Technical Proposal Sub-section A. General: “The technical proposal shall consist of the Technical Proposal Body with associated presentation and an annex.”

Will the organization of the associated presentation follow the same organization as the technical proposal body? Please clarify that the oral presentation slides do not need to be submitted with the electronic or hard copy submission.

ANSWER: USAID DOES NOT REQUIRE COPIES OF PRESENTATION SLIDES TO BE

SUBMITTED WITH THE TECHNICAL PROPOSAL. SELECT OFFERORS WILL BE

CONTACTED BY USAID IF AN ORAL PRESENTATION IS TO BE REQUESTED. USAID

PREFERS THAT THESE PRESENTATIONS TAKE PLACE IN PERSON AT

USAID/SOUTHERN AFRICA OFFICES IN PRETORIA, SOUTH AFRICA, BUT MAY

CONSIDER TECHNOLOGICAL OPTIONS ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS. THE

ORGANIZATION OF THE ORAL PRESENTATION WILL BE AT THE DISCRETION OF THE

OFFEROR.

16. Page L-5 of the RFP states “an oral presentation of up to two (2) hours by the proposed Chief of Party and at least one additional Key Personnel may be requested.” Will the oral presentation be completed by phone or in person, and if in person, where?

ANSWER: PLEASE REFER TO THE ANSWER TO QUESTION 15.

17. Page B-1., Section B.3: Estimated Cost, Fixed Fee and Obligated Amount. What is the estimated ceiling cost for the contract exclusive of fixed fee? Would the Contracting Officer consider providing prospective offerors with the government cost estimate or the price range?

ANSWER: OFFERORS’ BUDGETS SHOULD BE BASED ON THE LEVEL OF EFFORT

GUIDANCE IN THE RFP AND THEIR TECHNICAL APPROACH. UNDER USAID POLICY,

ADS 302.3.5.7, “THE CONTRACTING OFFICER (CO) MUST NOT INCLUDE THE GOVERNMENT COST

ESTIMATE IN A COMPETITIVE SOLICITATION…CO’S MAY NOT INCLUDE ESTIMATED PRICE

RANGES IN SOLICITATIONS FOR A COST-REIMBURSEMENT TERM (LOE) CONTRACT.” SINCE THE

CONTRACT CONTEMPLATED BY THE RFP IS A LEVEL OF EFFORT CONTRACT, NO

CEILING ESTIMATE OR RANGE WILL BE PROVIDED.

18. Can USAID please provide an estimated start date for the contract?

ANSWER: THE ESTIMATED START DATE IS MARCH 1, 2014

19. Will USAID confirm what exchange rate between USD and South African Rand should be used?

ANSWER: THE CONTRACTOR MUST OFFER IN US DOLLARS AND THE CONTRACT BUDGET

WILL BE AWARDED IN US DOLLARS. IT IS UP TO THE OFFERORS TO DETERMINE WHAT

EXCHANGE RATE THEY WILL USE KEEPING IN MIND THAT REIMBURSEMENT WILL BE FOR

ACTUAL COSTS AND WILL BE REIMBURSED AGAINST THE CONTRACT AT THE DOLLAR

EQUIVALENT AT THE TIME OF CLAIM. OFFERORS SHOULD USE A RATE (OR RATES)THAT

ENSURES ADEQUATE FUNDS WILL BE AVAILABLE TO COVER CURRENCY FLUCTUATIONS.

OFFERORS SHOULD INCLUDE THEIR EXCHANGE RATE ASSUMPTIONS IN THEIR COST

PROPOSAL NOTES.

20. Page C-11., Section C.5 Management and Administrative Services: 9. “Manage and administer a program of sub-awards intended to build local capacity, pursuant to Section L. and as discussed in section C.5 below (Local Capacity Development and Use of Host Country Systems). Sub-grants and sub-contracts to nonlocal organizations may be allowed in appropriate circumstances with USAID approval, and with a preference for regional organizations.” Section C.5 is Management and Administrative Services. There is no section on Local Capacity Development and Use of Host Country Systems. Could USAID please provide this section?

ANSWER: THERE WILL BE NO GRANTS UNDER CONTRACT/SUBAWARD PROGRAM

UNDER THIS CONTRACT. ANY REFERENCE TO SUBAWARD PROGRAM SHOULD BE

DISREGARDED. THE RFP HAS BEEN REVISED TO REFLECT THIS CHANGE (SEE

CHANGE #1). NOTE THIS DOES NOT APPLY TO SUBCONTRACTS. SUBCONTRACTS

ARE ALLOWED UNDER THIS RFP.

21. Is it an option to use grants for funding within the budget ceiling, or in addition to it, through other mechanisms (including cost share by grantee) and, if so, are there the associated grants management program requirements?

ANSWER: NO. THERE WILL BE NO GRANTS UNDER CONTRACT/SUBAWARD

PROGRAM UNDER THIS CONTRACT.

22. Page F-1, Section F5 Level of Effort Sub-section A: Given the limited amount of level of effort – 4,440 days of professional technical labor, does this mean that subcontractor professional technical labor is not counted towards this level of effort ceiling? What about additional short term technical assistance (STTA)/consultants? The ceiling of 4,440 days of professional technical labor over five years appears to be low given the scope of work. Could we consider the level of effort ceiling as indicative or, if not, could USAID increase the level of effort ceiling?

ANSWER: THE NUMBER OF DAYS OF PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL LABOR HAS

BEEN REVISED FROM 4,440 TO 6,160 (SEE CHANGE #2 AND #7 OF THIS

AMENDMENT). THE 6,160 DAYS OF LEVEL OF EFFORT IS NOT AN

ILLUSTRATIVE FIGURE. IT DEFINES THE SCOPE OF THE CONTRACT AND

CANNOT BE EXCEEDED. HOWEVER, THIS LOE IS FOR PROFESSIONAL

TECHNICAL LABOR INCLUDING STTA/CONSULTANT LOE ONLY AND DOES NOT

INCLUDE ADMINISTRATIVE LABOR OR PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL LABOR

PROVIDED THROUGH SUBCONTRACTS.

23. On page B-1, Section B.4 Budget line items, will USAID please provide further clarification of what

Technical Services consists of and what Management and Administrative Services consists of?

ANSWER: TECHNICAL SERVICES ARE COSTS FOR IMPLEMENTATION.

ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES ARE COSTS FOR ADMINISTRATION. TECHNICAL

SERVICES LINE ITEM INCLUDES ALL COSTS THAT PROVIDE TECHNICAL SERVICES AS

SET OUT IN SECTION C.3.A. THIS INCLUDES PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL LABOR

(INCLUDING STTA/CONSULTANT LOE) AND OTHER COSTS SUCH AS SUBCONTRACTS,

IMPLEMENTATION RELATED TRAVEL ETC. THE MANAGEMENT AND

ADMINISTRATION LINE ITEM INCLUDES COSTS FOR ALL GENERAL MANAGEMENT

AND ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT NECESSARY TO PERFORM THE CONTRACT.

24. Given the days of LOE, can USAID clarify if it expects at least some project staff, including key personnel, will be committed to the project for less than the full term of the contract or only on a part-time basis? Can offerors propose key personnel at less than full time?

ANSWER: OFFERORS MAY PROPOSE KEY PERSONNEL AT LESS THAN FULL TIME, IF

THIS MAKES SENSE IN TERMS OF THE OFFERORS TECHNICAL PROPOSAL.

25. Can USAID provide a description of Professional Technical Labor versus Administrative Labor for the purposes of the LOE obligation, as discussed in section F.5? Can USAID clarify if each position must be committed completely to one category or the other? For example, if a role serves in part both a technical and operational role, would the LOE obligation be split between to the two categories, or would the Offeror have to make a designation of the LOE for that role to one category or the other?

ANSWER: EACH POSITION DOES NOT HAVE TO BE COMPLETELY COMMITTED TO ONE

CATEGORY OR THE OTHER. IF A ROLE SERVES BOTH TECHNICAL AND

OPERATIONAL ROLES THE LOE SHOULD BE SPLIT ACCORDINGLY.

26. Page M-7, Section M.6 Contractor Past Performance Information Factor Sub-Section D: “Major subcontractors are those that receive more than 5% of the proposed price.” Would USAID allow major subcontractors to be defined as those that receive more than 20% of the proposed price?

ANSWER: MAJOR SUBCONTRACTOR WILL BE DEFINED AS THOSE RECEIVING 20% OR

MORE OF THE PROPOSED PRICE. THE RFP HAS BEEN AMENDED TO REFLECT THIS

CHANGE (SEE CHANGE #8).

27. Page L-10 of the RFP states that “The Offerors ten (10) most relevant contracts, order and projects shall be summarized” and “In addition, the Offeror shall provide information sheets for the five contracts or orders with a value over $5 million that have been completed most recently…” Should the 10 relevant contracts also be submitted as information sheets?

ANSWER: YES

28. L.10.1 Page L-10The solicitation states, “In the Annex, the Offeror should provide an information sheet for contracts, orders or other projects that are similar to the scope of work in this solicitation.

The Offeror’s ten (10) most relevant contracts, orders and projects shall be summarized. In addition, the Offeror shall provide information sheets for the five contracts or orders with a value over $5 million that have been completed most recently, assuming that such contract or order was not already listed.” Can the Government confirm that this section should therefore include:

• Past Performance Information Sheets on up to 10 most relevant contracts.

• Past Performance Information Sheets on the 5 contracts over $5 million that have been most recently completed by the Offeror.

ANSWER: YES THAT IS CORRECT

29. L.10.1 Page L-10Please confirm that major subcontractors need to provide the following:

• Past Performance Information Sheets on up to 10 most relevant contracts.

• Past Performance Information Sheets on the 5 contracts over $5 million that have been most recently completed by the Offeror.

ANSWER: YES THAT IS CORRECT

30. Can USAID please specify what documents it requires for major subcontractors and what documents are required for non-major subcontractors?

ANSWER: FOR ALL SUBCONTRACTORS OFFEROR MUST SUBMIT "REPRESENTATIONS,

CERTIFICATIONS, AND OTHER STATEMENTS OF OFFEROR" AS PER SECTION K FOR

EVERY SUBCONTRACT THAT INVOLVES DEVELOPMENT SERVICES OR

DELIVERABLES AND IS NOT EXPECTED TO BE AWARDED ON A FIXED-PRICE BASIS,

SEPARATE SPREADSHEETS SHOULD BE SUBMITTED FOR EACH SUCH SUBCONTRACT

WITH THE SAME DETAIL, ORGANIZATION AND FORMAT SET FORTH ABOVE IN

SUBSECTION L.11(B)(2). FOR ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS REQUIRED FOR MAJOR

SUBCONTRACTORS SEE QUESTION 29 ABOVE.

31. Please confirm that USAID wants the listing of the subcontracts, subawards, and resource partners identified specifically for this proposal.

ANSWER: YES

32. On Page L-6 of the instructions, Section (4) Contractor Past Performance Information contains two sub-sections: (a) Overall Past Performance, and (b) Use of Small Business Concerns. However, on Page L-10, under “L.10 Contractor Past Performance Information,” no further details or instructions are provided on (b) Use of Small Business Concerns. Could USAID please provide further guidance?

ANSWER: USE OF SMALL BUSINESS CONCERNS AS AN EVALUATION FACTOR WAS

INCLUDED ON PAGE L-6 IN ERROR. THE RFP HAS BEEN REVISED TO CORRECT THIS

ERROR (SEE CHANGE #5).

33. Could USAID please confirm the geographic code for this contract? Page H-1 lists it as 935 and page H-8 lists it as 937.

ANSWER: THE GEOGRAPHIC CODE WILL BE 935 AND THE RFP HAS BEEN AMENDED

TO REFLECT THIS CHANGE (SEE CHANGE #4).

34. Can an entity be involved in more than one consortium and in what ways? or is this not possible with this call?

ANSWER: USAID DOES NOT ENCOURAGE OR DISCOURAGE PARTNERING AMONG

ORGANIZATIONS. PARTNERING DECISIONS ARE UP TO THE VARIOUS

ORGANIZATIONS. PROPOSALS WILL NOT BE DISQUALIFIED BASED ON AN

ORGANIZATION BEING A PARTNER ON MULTIPLE PROPOSALS.

EXCLUSIVITY CONTRACTS ARE DISCOURAGED SO AS NOT TO LIMIT THE POOL OF

CAPABLE PARTNER ORGANIZATIONS AVAILABLE TO IMPLEMENT THIS PROGRAM;

HOWEVER, USAID/SOUTHERN AFRICA WILL NOT INTEFERE IN THE PRIVATE

CONTRACTUAL RELATIONS BETWEEN PRIVATE PARTIES.

35. Does the consortium have to be led by a US based entity?

ANSWER: NO. PARTNERING DECISIONS ARE UP TO THE VARIOUS ORGANIZATIONS.

36. Does the consortium have to include a USAID contracting entity?

ANSWER: NO

37. Does the lead organization of a consortium have to have sent in information previously during the RFI phase of the call?

ANSWER: NO

38. Page L-17 of the RFP states that “Offerors shall submit a Branding Implementation Plan and Marking Plan as a separate annex to the technical proposal.” However, it is not listed as one of the annexes provided in the instructions on Pages L-6 to L-7. Can the Offeror include this as Annex 10? Does the Offeror also have the leeway to include additional annexes?

ANSWER: YES THE BRANDING IMPLEMENTATION PLAN AND MARKING PLAN

SHOULD BE INCLUDED AS ANNEX 10. THE RFP HAS BEEN REVISED TO REFLECT THIS

CHANGE (SEE CHANGE #6).

39. Page L-5 of the RFP states that the proposal shall be written on 8.5” x 11” paper. For the purposes of some annexes, for example illustrations of the organizational chart, would it be possible to use 11” x 17” paper if needed?

ANSWER: YES, FOR THE ANNEXES ONLY, WHERE THE USE OF ANOTHER PAPER SIZE

MORE EFFECTIVELY PRESENTS THE INFORMATION, SUCH AS AN ORGANIZATIONAL

CHART, OFFERORS MAY USE OTHER THAN 8.5 X 11 PAPER.

40. Can USAID clarify if the Offeror’s personnel score will be evaluated solely on the basis of the qualifications and appropriateness of proposed key personnel candidates? Can USAID clarify how, if at all, the Annex #5 (the Detailed Staffing Plan) discussed on page L-7 and the non-key personnel potentially identified and discussed there factor into the personnel evaluation?

ANSWER: THE OFFEROR’S SCORE UNDER KEY PERSONNEL WILL BE EVALUATED

SOLELY ON THE BASIS OF THE QUALIFICATIONS AND APPROPRIATENESS OF

PROPOSED KEY PERSONNEL CANDIDATES IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE EVALUATION

FACTORS SET OUT IN SECTION M.4 OF THE RFP. THE DETAILED STAFFING PLAN

WILL NOT BE SCORED. THE INFORMATION PROVIDED IS NOT DIRECTLY SCORED

BUT ASSISTS TO ASSESS THE OFFEROR'S UNDERSTANDING OF THE REQUIREMENTS

AND THAT STAFFING IS CONSISTENT WITH THE PROPOSED TECHNICAL APPROACH.

ADDITIONALLY, FOR PURPOSES OF THE COST REALISM ANALYSIS, USAID WILL

EVALUATE THE PROPOSED TYPES AND QUANTITIES OF PERSONNEL TO ENSURE

THAT THEY ARE REALISTIC TO PERFORM THE ENTIRE PROJECT.

41. Where in the proposal should information be provided about non-key personnel? Should this be limited to Annex 5: Detailed Staffing Plan, or can it also be addressed in the technical proposal body as well?

ANSWER: INFORMATION ABOUT NON-KEY PERSONNEL MUST BE PROVIDED IN

ANNEX 5: DETAILED STAFFING PLAN. THE OFFEROR CAN ELECT TO ALSO INCLUDE

SUCH INFORMATION IN THEIR TECHNICAL PROPOSAL IF APPROPRIATE.

42. As described on page L-7, can USAID clarify if the 5-page limit described for Annex #7 applies only to each of the key personnel CVs? Furthermore, can USAID clarify the page limit for each of the other key personnel support documents – the Position Description, LOC, and References List – and confirm that these should each be presented individually as a separate document?

ANSWER: THE 5-PAGE LIMIT DESCRIBED IN #7 UNDER ANNEXES APPLIES ONLY TO

CV/RESUME OF EACH OF THE KEY PERSONNEL. THERE IS NO PAGE LIMIT ON

POSITION DESCRIPTIONS, LETTER OF COMMITMENT OR REFERENCE LIST BUT

OFFERORS SHOULD BE AS CONCISE AS POSSIBLE WHILE STILL PROVIDING THE

NECESSARY DETAILS

43. As noted on page L-13, can USAID clarify if a bio data sheet must be included for any and all personnel discussed in the technical and/or cost proposal, including any non-key personnel or illustrative short term specialists described by the Offeror?

ANSWER: BIO DATA SHEETS ARE REQUIRED FOR KEY PERSONNEL ONLY.

44. Could USAID please confirm that graphics do not count against the technical proposal page limit?

ANSWER: GRAPHS, TABLES AND CHARTS PRESENTED IN THE NARRATIVE DO

COUNT AGAINST THE PAGE LIMIT. GRAPHS, TABLES AND CHARTS MAY BE

ATTACHED AS AN ANNEX, IF AUTHORIZED AS AN ATTACHMENT AND REFERRED TO

IN THE NARRATIVE. TABLES AND GRAPHS MAY BE IN SMALLER THAN 12 POINT

FONT AND THE RFP IS BEING AMENDED TO AUTHORIZE THE REASONABLE USE OF

TABLES AND GRAPHS IN SMALLER FONT.

45. In Section B.4 Budget, fixed fee is listed as a separate line item. However, Section G.1 Documentation for Payment does not include the same breakdown. Can USAID please confirm that fixed fee should be reported as a separate line item according to B.4?

ANSWER: FIXED FEE SHOULD BE REPORTED AS A SEPARATE LINE ITEM. SECTION G.1

HAS BEEN REVISED (SEE CHANGE #3).

46. The solicitation refers to “…the complimentary USAID Cooperative Agreement…” Can the Government please clarify what “Cooperative Agreement” is being referred to and provide a copy of this document to Offerors?

ANSWER: THE COMPLIMENTARY COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT HAS NOT YET BEEN

AWARDED. USAID INTENDS TO COMPETE AND AWARD A COOPERATIVE

AGREEMENT TO COMPLIMENT THE ACTIVITIES OF THIS CONTRACT DURING THE

FIRST YEAR OF THE PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE OF THE CONTRACT.

47. Would the Government please provide its Local Employee Compensation Plan (LECP) for South

Africa?

ANSWER: WHILE THE LECP IS NOT A PUBLIC DOCUMENT, USAID WILL PROVIDE THE

MOST RECENT LOCAL COMPENSATION PLAN TO ORGANIZATIONS UPON REQUEST.

PLEASE IDENTIFY THE SOLICITATION NUMBER AND GRADE LEVELS OF POSITIONS.

AS GUIDANCE IN DETERMINING THE GRADE LEVELS OF POSITIONS USE:

HTTP://ARPSDIR.A.STATE.GOV/FAM/03FAH02/03FAH020400APG.HTML