FINAL_Power_Africa_Answers_to_Prospective_Offeror_Questions_SOL-674-16-000023_(IDIQ).docx

USAID Answers to Prospective Offeror Questions

On June 30, 2016, USAID published SOL-674-16-000023. The cover letter to the solicitation invited prospective offerors to ask questions about the terms of the solicitation and attachments thereto. July 8 served as the deadline for the submission of questions.

This document summarizes the pertinent questions received and provides answers to those questions to help offerors submit stronger proposals to satisfy the Government’s requirement. For the sake of clarity, it does not include repeated or poorly articulated questions. Also, the Government did not change the wording of the questions posed by prospective offerors.

The answers to these questions do not themselves change the terms of the solicitation. Amendment No. 2 to SOL-674-16-000023 expressly and separately indicates such changes.

COVER LETTER

Question 1

For clarity, given that deliveries are also due in Washington, could you kindly also define Washington DC time, in addition to 17:00 Pretoria time? Is it 11:00 AM EDT the same day?

Answer 1

Amendment No. 1 clarifies that offerors must submit offers by 11:00 EDT.

Question 2

The cover letter says that USAID will not evaluate non-responsive offers. Since this a competitive RFP, and is not a procurement by sealed bidding, the FAR Part 14 rules covering responsiveness do not apply. Can you please provide an explanation of what you mean by “non-responsive?”

Answer 2

This question concerns the application of the concept of responsiveness from Federal Acquisition Regulation (“FAR”) Part 14 to an acquisition conducted by competitive negotiation as governed by FAR Part 15. The concept of responsiveness is not applicable to negotiated procurements. Where a proposal submitted under a negotiated procurement fails to meet a material requirement of the RFP, it is unacceptable, not nonresponsive. Thus, nonresponsiveness and unacceptability arise from the same kind of defect. The distinction concerns how the Government can treat such defects during the procurement (i.e., through discussions in a negotiated procurement). Amendment No. 2 clarifies this issue by replacing reference of responsiveness with technical unacceptability.

SECTION B

Question 3

The CPAF mechanism is well explained in the RFP but CPIF approach is not defined. Please explain how USAID would use a CPIF task order, as these are rarely used on multi-year service contracts, where the scope might change dramatically based on changed conditions in a country.

Answer 3

If a Task Order Contracting Officer (“TOCO”) selects a Cost-Plus-Incentive-Fee (“CPIF”) contract type for a given task order, then the TOCO will provide more information concerning that contract type in the Request for Task Order Proposal (“RFTOP”).

Question 4

On Page 2, Section B.2 refers to a range of contract types that excludes Time & Materials. It further states that the “Contractor may use any of the above contract types when awarding subcontracts.” It may be useful to issue T&M subcontracts in certain cases (e.g., legal services). Would USAID allow contractors to issue T&M subcontracts on individual Task Orders (TOs), subject to the approval of the TOCO?

Answer 4

The Contractor may not issue Time and Materials (“T&M”) subcontracts under this IDIQ.

Question 5

Given that Cost plus Award Fee contracts imply significantly greater risk, please confirm that the fixed-fee ceiling does not apply to CPAF Task Orders.

Answer 5

Confirmed. Section B.5(a) expressly states that the “fixed fee ceiling does not apply to [Firm-Fixed-Price] or cost-reimbursement incentive task orders.” FAR Subpart 16.4, “Incentive Contracts,” includes CPAF contracts in its discussion of cost-reimbursement incentive contracts.

Question 6

Does the escalation apply only to task orders issued during year 1 of the IDIQ where the POP of the task order crosses fiscal years, or does it also apply to task orders issued during subsequent years?

Answer 6

The escalation rate applies to any multi-year task order contract year, regardless of when it is issued. Amendment No. 2 clarifies this point.

Question 7

With respect to the Labor Categories, we have staff that are qualified to serve in more than one position (e.g., legal advisor, regulatory advisor). Will USAID permit the use of the same person in multiple positions or will USAID require separate resumes for each position?

Answer 7

The same person may be used in multiple positions, if the offeror’s technical proposal does not foresee a need for the positions to be occupied by full-time personnel. The time and duties of such staff must be properly tracked and clearly allocable to each position. The same person may not serve concurrently, in a full-time capacity, in more than one position. The technical proposals will be then evaluated in accordance with the technical evaluation criteria outlined in the RFP.

Question 8

Section B.6.1, Unburdened Ceiling Daily Rates. In Table 1, USAID requests unburdened CDRs for Senior-Level and Mid-Level Personnel across 13 labor categories. However, in Attachment J.4 (IDIQ Ceiling Matrix), CDRs for Senior-, Mid- and Junior-level staff are requested across the same 13 labor categories. Please clarify if two or three levels of CDRs are required to provide a compliant submission.

Answer 8

Amendment No. 2 clarifies that offerors need not provide unburdened Ceiling Daily Rates (“CDRs”) for Junior-Level staff.

Question 9

Are subcontractors to propose their own CDR ceilings, or will one table cover the prime and all subcontractors?

Answer 9

The prime offeror will propose and USAID will only evaluate CDR ceilings to be utilized during the performance of any task order under the IDIQ, regardless of the hiring mechanism the prime offeror intends to employ (i.e., direct employment, consultancies, subcontractors, etc).

Question 10

Table 1 and Attachment J-4. The rates required in Table 1 and Attachment J-4 are considered proprietary data by the Subcontractor. Is the Subcontractor allowed to submit this information directly to the government in a sealed envelope?

Answer 10

No. Generally, per FAR 15.404-3, “Subcontract pricing considerations,” a prime contractor (or, here, offeror) has the responsibility to conduct appropriate cost or price analyses to establish the reasonableness of proposed subcontract prices.” The proposition set forth in this question unnecessarily overturns this requirement and forces undue administrative burden on the Government to negotiate with subofferors with whom there will be no direct contract privity.

Question 11

Section B.6.1 Unburdened Ceiling Daily Rates. Please confirm that B.6.1.(b) with respect to TCNs does not apply to Third Country National specialized independent consultants performing short term assignments in a third country, such as a Consultant from South Africa performing work in Sierra Leone.

Answer 11

Section B.6.1 applies to all labor providing services on cost-type task orders.

Question 12

On Page 5, Section B.6.2 “does not sets forth minimum qualifications for the mid-level and senior-level personnel that would correspond to the Unburdened CDRs set forth in Table 1.” In this case, what would be the basis for the CDRs to be proposed by Offerors? We respectfully request that USAID prescribe minimum qualifications (e.g., degrees, number of years of experience) to enable prospective Offerors to develop informed and defensible CDRs and USAID to adequately compare the CDRs proposed by various Offerors.

Answer 12

Amendment No. 2 adds minimum education and experience requirements now set forth in Table 3 in Section B.6.2.

Question 13

Request clarification on the Legal Advisor’s specific roles, responsibilities and tasks pertaining to the work to be performed under the IDIQ and Task Order 1.

Answer 13

For Task Order No. 1, the offeror’s Contractor Statement of Work (“CSOW”) will define that role, if utilized, based on the proposed technical approach to meet the objectives of the Task Order. In general, the SOO allows offerors the flexibility to determine their approach, including their staffing pattern, to meet the stated objectives without USAID prescribing such tasks. For the IDIQ, please refer to the requirements outlined in Section C, and in particular, Section C.6.3.

Question 14

Do the requirements of B.6.3 requiring subcontractors’ daily rates in excess of the unburdened CDRs apply to commercial items as defined in FAR parts 3 and 12? Or may subcontractors with adequate documentation, charge their commercial rates?

Answer 14

Section B.6.3 applies to all rates proposed for services provided under the IDIQ, if they are to be provided under a cost-type contract.

Question 15

On Page 5, Section B.6.3(c) compares a subcontractor’s fully burdened rates, loaded with the Contractor’s indirect rate on the subcontractor’s costs plus the Contractor’s fee, to the unburdened CDRs. Comparing such fully burdened rates to unburdened rates seems like a flawed comparison. Furthermore, in a cost-type RFTOP, the Contractor is already required to show how it has applied its indirect rates and profit to its subcontractor costs (as amplified by Section B.6.3(b]). The purpose and applicability of this paragraph are not clear. Please clarify.

Answer 15

Amendment No. 2 clarifies the treatment of subcontractors that have accounting systems that only process fully burdened rates.

Question 16

Section B.6.3: Section B.6.3 currently requires that Subcontractor Rates provide a breakdown of their fully burdened rates. USAID should instead allow firms providing commercial services, such as legal firms to provide rates based on published price lists or a discount from published price lists. Legal firms with whom we have discussed this project are unwilling to disclose their allocation of indirect costs or fee. Legal firms provide a ”commercial item” and as such, hourly rates should be justified based on published price lists, and a discount thereof.

Answer 16

In the situation described in this question, a cost-type subcontract may not be the best suited for such a firm. USAID encourages offerors to utilize an appropriate contract type (e.g., firm-fixed-price) to meet contract objectives.

Question 17

Does the government require a separate Table 1 for all subcontractors

Answer 17

No. Table 1 applies to all forms of labor as mentioned in Section B.6.1(a). Also, see Answer 9.

Question 18

This section seems to be a way for USAID to evaluate the cost reasonableness of fully burdened commercial rates (for companies such as law firms) in the absence of an accounting system set up to track indirect costs. Please confirm that if a subcontractor proposes a fully burdened rate without the ability to account for indirect costs, the Prime would use its own indirect multipliers and proposed fee to calculate what a similarly qualified individual would earn in salary on the prime contractor’s payroll to come up with a similar loaded rate? If this is not correct, could USAID please explain further?

Answer 18

See Answer 15.

Question 19

Since CDRs are only salaries, it is logical to assume that proposed rates based on a subcontractor’s fully loaded rates plus relevant Contractor indirect costs and reasonable profit will almost always exceed the CDR ceilings. Did USAID instead mean “exclusive of” the indirect costs and fee?

Answer 19

Yes. See Answer 15.

Question 20

This section describes the addition of rates and labor categories to the list provided in Section B.6.1. If one IDIQ holder proposes a new category that is accepted, would all other IDIQ holders be offered to propose rates for the same category?

Answer 20

No. An offeror may propose a new labor category based on its technical approach.

Question 21

On Page 6, Section B.6.4 provides for eventual changes to the labor categories, rates, and description. Please confirm that this provision will govern the contract post-award and that Offerors are not invited to propose such changes as part of their proposal?

Answer 21

Confirmed.

Question 22

“Contractors will not be authorized to bill USAID directly for IDIQ management costs under this IDIQ contract or under task orders”. Consistent with USAID’s Clean Energy IDIQs, it is our understanding that what is not direct chargeable are things like central IDIQ meetings and accruals reporting; however, the IDIQ Manager may also have a role on task order management that would be billable, as long as the IDIQ Manager is listed as personnel on the task order, and work performed is solely to the benefit of the task order being billed. Is this correct?

Answer 22

This IDIQ Contract does not require an IDIQ Manager and will let the experienced IDIQ contractors manage their corporate activities in a manner consistent with their policies and procedures, while ensuring acceptable performance. If the contractor’s employees provide services in support of a task order, then it must comply with the cost principles articulated in FAR Part 31 and the contract’s terms and conditions.

Question 23

Billing Central Management Costs states that: “The Contracting Officer has determined that a key (full time) technical manager is not necessary or required to administer this basic IDIQ Contract. Contractors will not be authorized to bill USAID directly for IDIQ management costs under this IDIQ Contractor or under task orders. Contractors must propose a centralized management structure that allows for recovery of IDIQ management costs as part of its indirect costs.” This contract requirement is at variance with our accounting methods and current audits. Typically, task-order-specific or contract-specific management tasks are charged directly to those contracts. Moreover, each task order requires project management and administrative time, which is properly charged to the task order, vice a general indirect cost pool. If USAID disallows management costs, this will effectively result in other clients paying for USAID’s task order management work. It will also result in difficulty establishing a NICRA, since a “centralized management structure that allows for recovery of IDIQ management costs as part of …indirect costs” would be a new and unaudited structure. It appears that B.7 (f) (quoted below) properly anticipates the charging of program management time. Further, Section B.7 (f) states that “The Contractor can recoup indirect costs (e.g., overhead, G&A, etc.) as other direct costs if it is part of the Contractor’s usual accounting procedures, consistent with FAR Part 31 and the Contractor’s NICRA.” Please consider removing or revising B.6.5, or clarifying that program and project management charges will be negotiated on a by-task-order basis.

Answer 23

The contractor may bill task order-specific work to the applicable task orders. If the contractor wins multiple awards, then USAID does not envision a need for centralized coordination of task orders that would require a separate management task order.

Question 24

Would USAID consider providing further clarity on whether an approach on Grants Under Contract (GUC) is required now as part of proposal for IDIQ and what is the weighting/points allocated to the GUC process?

Answer 24

This IDIQ only allows for the use of grants under contract (“GUC”); it does not require them. An offeror may propose the use of GUCs based on its technical approach if it will help the contract meet contract objectives. USAID will evaluate the overall approach in accordance with the evaluation factors set forth in Section M.

Question 25

The Mission provides a Local Compensation Plan table for Nigeria. That said, several Nigerian-born international power experts and lawyers may have a salary history that far exceeds those stated CCN rates. Will USAID consider CCN rate waivers for professionals in this category, which exceed the LCP, assuming bidders can show a salary history which supports the higher rate structure? If so, where should that waiver request be included, if at all?

Answer 25

An offeror may propose a Cooperating Country National (“CCN”) that exceeds the prevailing compensation contained in a Local Compensation Plan (“LCP”). Please review Agency for International Development Acquisition Regulation (“AIDAR”) 722.170, “Employment of third country nationals (TCNs) and cooperating country nationals (CCNs).” In its cost proposal narrative, the offeror must justify why USAID should seek Mission Director approval to exceed the LCP.

Question 26

Section B.7 (e) Indirect Costs and Advanced Understanding on Ceilings, Table 3, in our experience, for FFP task orders the overhead ceiling rates and the G&A ceiling rates would serve as the basis for negotiation. Please confirm that both the Overhead and G&A ceiling rates would serve as the basis of negotiation and not just the Overhead rate.

Answer 26

Amendment No. 2 clarifies this point.

Question 27

In some offerors’ cases, they may not utilize a fringe rate as part of their burden formula. We request clarification regarding provision of a fringe rate. Specifically, Section B.7 of RFP states that a “Contractor must not change its established method if classifying or allocating indirect costs.” However, in Section L.9.4.2, we are instructed that the Offeror, core team members and major subcontractors should propose a fringe rate if they do not have an approved fringe rate. Please clarify.

Answer 27

Once the parties to the IDIQ contract agree to the information required in Section B.7, then the contractor must not change its method of classifying or allocating indirect costs without the prior written approval of the IDIQ Contract Officer. This does not contradict the instruction in Section L.9.4.2, which concerns information that the offeror must provide to allow USAID to evaluate proposed costs prior to making an award.

SECTION C

Question 28

On page 10, Section C.3—1—e.--“The Contractor will prioritize support for the following: . . . In Economically feasible hydropower projects when they are developed in an environmentally and socially sustainable manner.” On page 17, Section C.6.4—Engineering, paragraph 2—“Power Africa generation projects encompass a range of technologies, including . . . large hydropower projects (applying the definition from the World Commission on Dams (“WCD” report).” However, on page 23, Section C.6.10—Cleaner Energy Technologies—last bullet point—--“The Contractor will provide technical experts on a range of cleaner energy technologies, including . . . Hydropower”: Provide technical assistance and analysis to governments and developers on micro- and mini-hydropower technologies and projects.” Can USAID confirm that support for hydro power projects covers the full range from micro to large projects?

Answer 28

USAID-supported projects under Power Africa may include hydropower of any size, but will be considered on a case-by-case basis, based on a careful consideration of social and environmental implications of such support, and the development impact of new power generation, among other things.

Question 29

Section C. 6 Required Contractor Services of the RFP states: “This IDIQ Contract covers a total of 49 countries in SSA [Sub-Saharan Africa] with the exception of those countries USAID has identified as Critical Priority Countries (“CPCs”) in the region (e.g., South Sudan). Currently, USAID has 33 bilateral missions and 4 regional missions covering the remainder of the 54 countries (also referred to as “non-presence” countries)”. We would appreciate it if USAID could clarify the scope of the IDIQ by listing which countries USAID anticipates the IDIQ Contract will cover, plus which countries are identified as CPCs.

Answer 29

The cited paragraph contained a typo, which has been corrected in Amendment No.1. Among other things, USAID selected an IDIQ contract because it cannot predetermine, above a specified minimum, the precise quantities of supplies or services needed during the contract period. In this case, given a host of political and economic factors, USAID cannot identify precisely the countries in which it will operate within sub-Saharan Africa (“SSA”). However, we do anticipate working in a range of Anglophone, Lusophone and Francophone countries, with varying levels of power sector capacity; as an example, this IDIQ may cover countries such as Burkina Faso, which is extremely limited in its power sector development, to Nigeria, which is much more advanced. At this time, only South Sudan is considered a Critical Priority County (“CPC”); however, this designation may change in which case USAID will advise accordingly.

Question 30

Section C6.5 Planning. IRPs require the use of modeling software, often also requiring payment of an annual license fee. Please clarify whether Power Africa funds can be used to buy such software, and for the annual license fees.

Answer 30

An offeror may propose the procurement of any commodity that best fits their technical approach. USAID will evaluate the proposed associated costs for reasonability and realism, as stated in the RFP.

Question 31

Section C6.6 Electric Utility Reform and Restructuring. The SOW requires the contractor to assist electric utilities to design and implement Paid Metering Infrastructure (“PPM”) and Advanced Metering Infrastructure (“AMI”) programs. Please clarify whether Power Africa funds can be used to pay for PPM and AMI related software and hardware

Answer 31

See Answer 30.

Question 32

Section C6.14 Coordination. The contractor will be required to ‘Track and monitor priority Power Africa transactions and maintain a Power Africa project tracker and/or provide information to a central repository on Power Africa projects and transactions, including but not limited to providing assistance to maintain the PATT.’ Please clarify whether the contractor should contribute to the current PATT being maintained under PATRP and/or SAEP, or whether a separate tool should be created for the Task Orders under the IDIQ.

Answer 32

The Contractor will need to contribute to the already existing Power Africa Transaction Tracker (“PATT”).

SECTION D

Question 33

Please confirm that USAID does NOT expect a BIP or MP to be submitted with this proposal.

Answer 33

Confirmed. IDIQ Contractors that win task orders will prepare such documents post-award for review and comment by USAID.

SECTION F

Question 34

Section E.4 states that the ME&L Plan functions as the QASP. Section C.10 of Attachment J.2 references performance standards as well as indicators. Could USAID please clarify that for the purposes of this task order, performance standards are the same as indicators?

Answer 34

As described in Section F.4, performance standards concern the evaluation factors for each assessment of a contractor’s performance as detailed in FAR § 42.1503.

Question 35

Please confirm that the authorization of a six day work week for key personnel applies as well to other full time project personnel based in the field.

Answer 35

No. Section F.7 clearly explains the labor categories that require prior written approval by USAID to work six-day work weeks.

Question 36

Could USAID clarify if the NPSP ME&L Plan is due 90 days after award or 120 days after award?

Answer 36

Amendment No. 2 clarifies that the contractor must submit the NPSP ME&L Plan 120 days after award.

Question 37

On Page 38, Section F.9.1 contains certain reporting requirements. Please confirm that those requirements apply at the TO level. Also, what is meant by the sentence “the IDIQ COR or the TOCOR may request any ad hoc strategies, surveys, etc.” How would such ad hoc activities be paid for under the IDIQ or the TO?

Answer 37

USAID confirms that the requirements contained in Section F.9.1 apply only to Task Orders. Please see Amendment No.1. Ad hoc reporting preparation costs can be billed directly under the Task Order. Offerors should take care to budget for these costs in the preparation of Task Order proposals.

Question 38

F.9.2 Mobilization Plan. Please confirm this requirement is applicable only to Offerors’ that have existing Task Orders.

Answer 38

Confirmed. A mobilization plan is only applicable to Task Order performance.

Question 39

F.9.4 Activity ME&L Plan. Can USAID provide more insight on who is “Power Africa” as represented in the sentence “Power Africa will review the PA ME&L Plan annually”?

Answer 39

Amendment No .1 clarifies that “Power Africa” will consist of USAID personnel, which can include any relevant member of the Office of the Coordinator for Power Africa.

Question 40

On Page 44, Section F.10.1 Fair Opportunity states that “the “TOCO must contact all Contractors (or all Contractors designated under a specific sector) and provide them an opportunity to submit a proposal for all task orders.” Is the phrase “(or all Contractors designated under a specific sector)” applicable to this IDIQ? If not, kindly remove.

Answer 40

Amendment No. 2 deletes this reference.

Question 41

On Page 45, Section F.10.2(f)(1) states that “the concern must perform in accordance with FAR § 52.219-14, whereby at least 50% of small business employees must perform the services for the task order.” Please confirm that for purposes of this IDIQ, independent consultants engaged by a small business prime will be counted to satisfy the minimum 50% requirement.

Answer 41

Generally, if a Government prime contractor hires a consultant to perform a specific part of the prime contract work, then the consultant is likely a subcontractor per the definition provided under FAR § 44.101. Small business subcontractors are not employees. Nevertheless, USAID invites the prospective offeror to explain why it should count independent consultants toward the minimum requirement based on some legal authority. In sum, whether an independent consultant is an employee will depend on the facts of each case.

Question 42

On Page 47, Section F.10.2(j) defines a limit of 15 pages on technical proposal for TOs below $5,000,000 including resumes, graphs, and past performance information. Can USAID kindly clarify if this is an absolute limit inclusive of any and all annexes to the technical proposal?

Answer 42

Amendment No. 2 clarifies the page limit.

Question 43

F.11.4 (d) Task Order Limitations. The clause states “The Contractor assumes all costs associated with the preparation of any task orders awarded under the fair opportunity process as an indirect cost. USAID will not reimburse awardees for fair opportunity proposals as a direct cost”. Please confirm that USAID means that labor is also captured within this statement.

Answer 43

The statement that the “Contractor assumes all costs” captures labor costs.

SECTION H

Question 44

H6 requires the Contractor to obtain prior written approval from the TOCO to utilize business class travel. The cost principles require the Contractor to use the lowest cost airfare. If business class is lower cost than economy class travel, is written approval still required? If Contractor does not obtain approval and travels by economy class, will the costs in excess of the lower cost business class be allowable?

Answer 44

FAR 31.205-46(b) does provide the following: “[A]irfare costs in excess of the lowest priced airfare available to the contractor during normal business hours are unallowable except when such accommodations require circuitous routing, require travel during unreasonable hours, excessively prolong travel, result in increased cost that would offset transportation savings, are not reasonably adequate for the physical or medical needs of the traveler, or are not reasonably available to meet mission requirements. However, in order for airfare costs in excess of the above airfare to be allowable, the applicable condition(s) set forth above must be documented and justified.” If business class airfare is lower than economy class airfare, then the contractor will have a strong argument in its request to the contracting officer; but, it must still request approval.

Please note that traveling business class while implementing a Government activity carries more issues than merely costs, considering the U.S. taxpayer funds these activities. The Task Order Contracting Officer (“TOCO”) will make allowability determinations based on real facts that exist during implementation.

Question 45

RFP Reference: H.6 Page Number: 57 “Business Class Travel: For purposes of cost effectiveness, the Contractor must use economy class travel for all official programmatic and entitlement travel charged against any task order issued under this IDIQ Contract. In exceptional circumstances, the Contractor may request prior written approval of the TOCO to utilize business class travel.” Question: While development contractors don’t typically offer business class airfare to their employees, it is a commonly extended benefit to most employees of the financial and legal advisory firms whose expertise USAID seeks to retain through this IDIQ. Would USAID confirm that the established travel policies of subcontractors as they relate to business class travel represent an “exceptional circumstance” and that offerors should manage the budgeting of business class airfares in subcontractor budgets accordingly?

Answer 45

Subcontractor policies that allow for business class travel generally do not constitute exceptional circumstances. See Answer 44 for more information from the pertinent regulatory provision about what information could justify business class travel.

Question 46

On Pages 57, Section H.6 refers to “exceptional circumstances” under which the TOCO may provide prior written approval for business class travel. However, the applicable cost principle at FAR 31.205-46(b) lists such conditions when other than the lowest customary standard airfare costs may be allowed, none of which use the term exceptional. In the interest of clarity, we kindly request deleting Section H.6 and referring instead to the standard applicable FAR clause (FAR 31.205-46, Travel Costs) and AIDAR clause (AIDAR 752.7002, Travel and Transportation).

Answer 46

No. Note that AIDAR 752.7002 provides in pertinent part that “[d]etermination of reasonableness, allocability and allowability will be made by the contracting officer based on the applicable cost principles . . . and the particular needs of the project being implemented by this is contract.” Section H.6 is an additional contract requirement to the above regulatory requirement quoted in Answer 44 that explains a particular project need: U.S. taxpayer funds supporting an initiative to help those mired in extreme poverty with no access to energy should not be diverted to paying the business class airfare of select few. The contractor will need to explain the exceptionality of the circumstances that justify why this should not be so.

Question 47

H.14 “This contract provides for the Contractor to execute Grants under Contracts (“GUC”) for the implementation of certain tasks or activities.”

Question a: Are we correct that offerors are free to propose Grants under our solution for TO 1?

Question b: If yes, may offerors add rows in the budget templates for Grants?

Answer 47

Offerors may propose GUCs for Task Order No. 1 and may adjust the budget template to accommodate their technical approach.

SECTION I

Question 48

(RFP page 103 of 165) I.30 AIDAR 752.7027 Personnel (DEC 1990) states as follows: (a) Clearance. (1) Individuals Engaged or Assigned Within the United States. The contractor will obtain written notification from the Contracting Officer of Cooperating Country clearance of any employee sent outside the United States to perform duties under this contract. (2) Individuals Engaged or Assigned When Outside the United States. No individual shall be engaged or assigned when outside the United States to perform work outside the United States under this contract unless authorized in the schedule or otherwise approved by the Contracting Officer or Mission Director. However, when services are performed in the Cooperating Country on a casual or irregular basis or in an emergency, exception to this provision can be made in accordance with instructions or regulations established by the Mission Director. Our consortium members have offices all around the world and would like to utilize some of them at their home bases. Could we assume that (2) above would be waived for this project?

Answer 48

The contractor will need to request Contracting Officer approval per the terms of AIDAR 752.7027, if appropriate.

Question 49

RFP Section I.1 includes FAR Clause 52.229-8 Taxes-Foreign Cost Reimbursement Contracts. Please confirm if the resultant Nigeria Order 01 will be exempted from local taxes and duties (for US and local teaming partners and their personnel).

Answer 49

USAID assistance and program-related procurements in Nigeria are exempt from host government taxes and duties. The exemption does not include personal income taxes and corporate taxes. As a result, all taxes and duties are considered unallowable under Task Order No. 1.

Question 50

Section I.1, page 72, Notice Listing Contract Clauses Incorporated by Reference. The following FAR contract clauses have not been updated to include 2015 and 2016 updates. We kindly request USAID to update them: 52.204-10 OCT 2015 52.203-14 OCT 2015 52.208-6 OCT 2015 52.219-9 OCT 2015 52.222-21 APR 2015 52.222-26 APR 2015 52.222-35 OCT 2015 52.222-37 FEB 2016 52.222-38 FEB 2016 52.222-54 OCT 2015 52.230-2 OCT 2015 52.230-4 OCT 2015 52.230-6 JUL 2010 52.244-6 FEB 2016 I.2 FAR 52.203-13 OCT 2015 I. 16 AIDAR 752.219-9 MAR 2015 K.1 52.225-25 OCT 2015 K.4 52.209-5 INSERT (OCT 2015)

Answer 50

Amendment No .1 updates the FAR clauses.

Question 51

Section I.1, page 75: There is a duplication of AIDAR 752.7001: 752.7001 Biographical Data 752.7001 Voluntary Population Planning Activities We respectfully request deletion of 752.7001 Voluntary Population Planning Activities

Answer 51

Amendment No. 2 deletes the reference to AIDAR 752.7001.

SECTION L

Question 52

The terms “consortium member” and “core team member” are used throughout. Are these terms synonymous

Answer 52

This solicitation references “consortium” on three occasions. On two occasions the solicitation refers to consortium when broadly instructing prospective offerors that they can arrange their teaming arrangement in any way that reasonably aligns with their offer. Amendment No. 2 changes the third reference to a “consortium” that could have confused a prospective offeror.

Question 53

Can USAID confirm that proposals will be confirmed as received according to electronic submission timestamp and the post mark ship date provided by a commercial courier and that hard copy proposals are not due to South Africa on the close date but must be postmarked by the close date?

Answer 53

Amendment No. 2 eliminates the requirement for offerors to send offers to Pretoria, South Africa.

Question 54

There is no reference to a transmittal letter for the Technical proposal. Will USAID allow a letter of transmittal and if so, can it be outside the page limitation?

Answer 54

Amendment No. 2 allows the offeror to send a transmittal letter that will not count toward the page limitation.

Question 55

If hard copy proposals are hand carried, would USAID consider providing a receipt due date after the RFP close date to allow for travel time to South Africa?

See Answer 53.

Question 56

Please clarify if USAID will accept the transmittal slip from commercial delivery services as equivalent to post mark from the origin post office?

Answer 56

Amendment No. 2 clarifies that the transmittal slip from a commercial delivery service equates to a postmark from the origin office.

Question 57

Section L.5.2.(i) Electronic Submission. Please confirm that delivery of IDIQ Past Performance Information is only requested in electronic format and that no physical delivery is required. Should a physical copy of the Past Performance Information be included with the hard copy proposals?

Answer 57

Amendment No. 2 underscores the requirement in Section L.5.2.1that offerors electronically submit Past Performance Information prior to the offer submission date. Amendment No. 2 also clarifies that the offeror must submit the same information in its electronic and hard copy offer submissions.

Question 58

Question 7: L.5.1 for purposes of delivery at 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, 14th Street entrance, please advise if there are any special authorizations or screenings required before delivery will be accepted.

Answer 58

No. The point of contact will meet the offeror at the entrance identified in the solicitation.

Question 59

Please confirm that only the 20 page Annex F—Past Performance Information is due on August 1 and that the 5 page Past Performance narrative is due August 12 with a re-submission of Annex F.

Answer 59

Amendment No. 2 clarifies that the offeror must submit Annex F (unrestricted offerors) or Annex C (restricted offerors)—in addition to Attachment J.12 (formerly Attachment J.53)—prior to the submission of the offer.

Question 60

Offer expiration date states “Proposals in response to this solicitation will be valid for the number of days specified in the solicitation cover sheet (unless a different period is proposed by the Offeror).” The validity number of days does not appear in the cover letter. Please provide this figure or state that the number of day is to be proposed by the Offeror.

Answer 60

The cited language originates from FAR § 52.215-1. Please see Section L.4(i) for offer expiration information.

Question 61

Section L.8 b). Would USAID consider allowing the use of additional 11x17 pages in the Technical Proposal, including in Annexes?

Answer 61

No. Only Attachment J.12 may be submitted using A3 (11x17 inches) paper.

Question 62

Section L.8 (b). The RFP allows use of a font smaller than Times New Roman 12 point for tables and footnotes. Please confirm we use a point size less than 12 for graphics as well?

Answer 62

Amendment No. 2 confirms that the offeror may use reasonably sized font, smaller than 12 point, for graphics as well.

Question 63

Section L.6.2 of the RFP lists 5 data points that must be shown on the first page of the proposal. Section L.9.1 requires the completed SF 33 to be placed “in front of the cost proposal volume.” Please clarify.

Answer 63

Section L.6(c)(2) includes requirements from FAR § 52.215-1. Section L.9.1 provides an additional requirement.

Question 64

Section L.6(c)(2) and page 134, Section L.8(c)(i) and Page 127: Please clarify the information to be included on the first page of the proposal. Page 129, Section L.6.(c)(2) contains requirements for the “first page” of the proposal, which conflict with requirements for the “cover page” listed on page 134, Section L.8.(c)(i)

Answer 64

The regulatory requirements contained in FAR § 52.215-1 do not conflict with the solicitation requirements contained in the rest of Section L. Please provide the information required in both.

Question 65

“The Offeror and its team must also describe its demonstrable experience increasing access to financing in SSA”RFP Reference: M.4.1.b Page Number: 158“USAID will also evaluate the depth, breadth and success of the Offeror’s experience in increasing access to financing in SSA. ”Question: We are fully cognizant that the 49 nations covered by the Power Africa Expansion IDIQ represent unique environments, but we believe that lessons learned regarding “increasing access to finance” from outside of SSA are very much applicable. Would USAID allow offerors to present examples from outside of SSA in order to more fully demonstrate our breadth of relevant experience?

Answer 65

USAID does understand and appreciates this logic. Amendment No. 2 slightly refines this requirement to allow offerors to highlight relevant and pertinent experience in similar operating environments. However, some relevant and meaningful SSA experience (a minimum of one project) is still required, given that SSA will serve as the place of performance for this IDIQ.

Question 66

Section L.8.1. If the Offeror (prime) is proposing to use a major subcontractor (as defined by the RFP as a firm with 20% or more of the total TO costs), may we include their corporate capabilities in the Corporate Capability and Experience Section (in addition to Core Team members)?

Answer 66

No. The Offeror must follow the terms of the solicitation.

Question 67

Section L.8.2. It is likely that the CORE team will be augmented by major subs and niche subcontractors for Task Order #1. USAID has not allowed for space in the technical proposal to present the Task Order team, which has additional specialty firms. Should offerors include the TO Team presentation in the Task Order Management Plan, or would USAID consider allowing for 2 more pages to be included at the front of the TO Technical Approach section to present the expanded delivery team used in the TO Technical Approach as described in L.8.2

Answer 67

The offeror must provide this information pursuant to Section L.8.2(b).

Question 68

Section L8. In Section L.8.3 (a), the RFP instructions include major subcontractors in those that must submit Past Performance information. In Para 1 below that, the instructions state “for each of the IDIQ core members.” To clarify, does USAID want Past Performance information from the three core team members AND any major subcontractors, in addition to the CORE team?

Answer 68

Section L.8.3(a) clearly requires Past Performance Information from the Offeror, the core team members, and major subcontractors. Please note that solicitation does not limit the number of core team members that the offeror may propose.

Question 69

Section L.8.3 (a) (2), page 137, states “Provide for each for the contracts listed above a list of contact names, job titles, mailing addresses, phone numbers, e-mail addresses”. Can USAID please confirm that mailing addresses are not required for client references?

Answer 69

Amendment No. 2 eliminates the requirement to send mailing addresses.

Question 70

Section L.8.3. It is not clear what USAID intends for the Offeror to include in the Past Performance section, especially considering the 5-page limit. Could you clarify what is intended to be submitted in this section? Presumably it is a summary of Past Performance experience for the team as a whole? Please confirm.

Answer 70

The offerors have USAID confirms that the requirements contained in Section F.9.1 apply only to Task Orders. Please see Amendment No.1. Ad hoc reporting preparation costs can be billed directly under the Task Order. Offerors should take care to budget for these costs in the preparation of Task Order proposals. the discretion to discuss past performance in any way they see it fit to strengthen their offer.

Question 71

Section L.8.3. May we submit Attachment J53, Past Performance Matrix, on 11x17 pages and, if so, how would they be counted in the page limit?

Answer 71

Amendment No. 2 clarifies that the offeror may submit Attachment J.12 (formerly Attachment J.53) on 11x17 pages. Annexes do not count toward the page limit.

Question 72

Section L.8.3 (d). Is the SB subcontracting plan counted in the 5-page limit for Past Performance section? If not, where should it be submitted and what is the page count limitation?

Answer 72

The offeror may discuss performance in using small business concerns in its past performance narrative or in Annex F.

Question 73

Section L.8.3 (d) 3.b. Please confirm the prime Offeror is the only entity required to submit SB past performance

Answer 73

Confirmed.

Question 74

(RFP page138 of 165) L.8.3 Contractor Past Performance Information (a) 1 says “...The Offeror must not submit past performance information related to assistance award” Could you clarify what you mean by “assistance award”?

Answer 74

Amendment No. 2 clarifies that the term “assistance” refers to the implementation of cooperative agreements and grants. The terms “assistance,” “grants,” and “cooperative agreements” refer to the legal mechanisms references in 2 CFR 200 and the Automated Directives System 303, “Grants and Cooperative Agreements to Non-Governmental Organizations.”

Question 75

L.8.3 Contractor Past Performance Information refers to “Performance Using Small Business (SB) Concerns”. Does this specifically refer to the offeror’s experience using the US small businesses? If this refers specifically the experience using the US small business, and if the offeror does not have such experience because it is not a US firm, what should the offeror provide? And how would that be evaluated?

Answer 75

FAR 19 provides the definition of “concern” to mean any business entity organized for profit with a place of business located in the United States. Nevertheless, Amendment No. 2 further clarifies that use of small business specifically refers to the use of U.S. small businesses. Offerors that do not have any experience utilizing U.S. Small Business concerns, pursuant to FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iv) will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably in this particular aspect of Past Performance.

Question 76

Section L.8 Instructions for the Preparation of the Technical Proposal. The RFP includes a Branding and Marking Plan Template in attachment J.16 but it is not listed among the approved annexes in section L.8. Can USAID please clarify if a draft branding and marking plan should be included as part of the technical proposal?

Answer 76

Amendment No. 2 adds Section L.12 that clarifies when the offeror may need to submit a Branding and Marking Plan.

Question 77

Section L.8 Instructions for the Preparation of the Technical Proposal. The RFP identifies Task Order #1 Contractor Statement of Work as Technical Proposal Section VI; however, there is no similar guidance provided for Task Order #1 Management Plan or Tracking and Managing Results sections, which are described in section L.8.2. on pages 136-137. Please confirm that the entire Task Order #1 Technical Approach, which includes all subsections (Contractor Statement of Work, Management Plan, and Tracking and Managing Results) is to be included within Section VI and the total for all three sections is not to exceed 25-pages.

Answer 77

Amendment No. 2 allows for additional space to discuss the task order management plan and the tracking and managing results approach.

Question 78

Section L.8.4 Technical Proposal Annexes. The RFP states that CVs are limited to three pages and that three references must be included for each Key Personnel candidate. Can USAID please clarify if references can be submitted separately from the CVs and are therefore exempt from the three page limit?

Answer 78

Section L.8.4 states that the CVs must contain no more than three references. CVs must not exceed three pages. Accordingly, offerors must not submit references separately from the CV; and, therefore, references are not exempt from the three page limit.

Question 79

Section L.8.4 Instructions for the Preparation of the Technical Proposal. Please confirm that Annex C may contain information only related to proposed Key Personnel. If this is not the case, please advise what additional information may be contained in Annex C.

Answer 79

Annex C only relates to proposed Key Personnel under the task order. However, the cost proposal should include Employee Biographical Data Sheets for all known individuals proposed for work on the task order.

Question 80

Section L.8.4, page 140: Annex F – Past Performance Information has a limit of 30 pages; however, due to the volume of past performance information needed from our core team members, we kindly request USAID to increase the maximum pages allowed from 30 pages to 40 pages.

Answer 80

Amendment No. 2 increases the page limitation for Annex F from 30 pages to 40 pages.

Question 81

The instructions for descriptions of quality awards or certifications states that it will not be included in the page limit. If these descriptions are not to be included in the five page past performance narrative or in the 30 page Annex F past performance section please clarify where this section that is not included in the page limit should be.

Answer 82

Amendment No. 2 increases the page limitation for Annex F and eliminates the notation that descriptions of quality awards are not included in the page limit. The offeror may discuss such pertinent information in Annex F or in the past performance narrative.

Question 83

Please confirm that the past performance summary matrix should be included in the 30 page limit given that it may likely take up a good deal of space through 11x17 paper, which counts as two pages.

Answer 83

Amendment No .1 clarifies Attachment J.12 (formerly Attachment J.53) may be submitted in A3 (11 x 17 inches). As such, it will count towards the page limitation as one page.

Question 84

Section L.8(a) and Page 137, Section L.8.3(a)1. Please clarify the page limits and content for Past Performance information within the Technical Proposal Section VII. RFP Section L.8(a) states that Contractor Past Performance is not to exceed 5 pages. However, Section L.8.3(a)1 states that the offeror is to provide up to 5 contracts for the Contractor and up to 5 for each of the IDIQ core team members, as well as major subcontractors. Please confirm that the 5 page limit stated for Technical Proposal Section VII is meant to contain a 5-page narrative summary of past performance, while Annex F is meant to contain Contractor Performance Reports (Attachment J.12) and the Past Performance Summary Matrix (Attachment J.53).

Answer 84

Amendment No. 2 clarifies that the offeror may include Contractor Performance Reports in Annex F and not the five page section allotted to the discussion of past performance in the technical proposal.

Question 85

Section L.8.3(a), Is it acceptable to make minor modifications to the format and content of Attachment J.12 to include the additional information listed in RFP Section L.8.(3)(a)2?

Answer 85

No, Attachment J.12 may not be altered. However, Offerors are encouraged to maximize use of Annex F and/or Section VII of the Technical Proposal.

Question 86

Section L.8.3(a). Is there a page limit length for each Contractor Performance Report (Attachment J.12) (e.g., is each Contractor Performance Report limited to 1 page?)

Answer 86

No. However, the offeror may submit the CPR in Annex F and, if so, must follow the overall page limitation for that section.

Question 87

Secti…