CVC_RFP_Amendment_1.pdf

ATTACHMENT A – Responses to Questions

1.) QUESTION

We understand that USAID’s OIG recently conducted an audit of the USAID/Mali IICEM II project. Are the results of this audit public information, and can USAID share them with Offerors? Likewise, if any internal or external evaluations of the IICEM project have been completed, would USAID kindly share those reports with Offerors to assist in the preparation of proposals?

ANSWER

No, the audit report is a USAID internal document. USAID has not yet completed an evaluation of the IICEM activity.

2.) QUESTION

We note that the most recent quarterly and annual reports for the current IICEM II project are not available on the Development Clearing House website. Would USAID provide Offerors with all relevant IICEM II quarterly and annual reports?

ANSWER

The contractor has submitted the reports to the Development Experience Clearinghouse website.

3.) QUESTION

Page 35, Clause F.2, Period of Performance, states the period is five years from the date of award. Please confirm anticipated start date for the Mali CVC Project.

We anticipate a start date of no later than October 1, 2013.

4.) QUESTION

Will final project sites be selected at program start-up?

Yes

5.) QUESTION

Is the contractor expected to begin activities in all 119 communes at the start of the project or could a staggered approach be envisioned, targeting the most vulnerable communes first?

Can USAID clarify if the Cereals Value Chain project must work in all 117 Feed the Future communes as described on p.10 of the RFP – or only a targeted number of communes?

ANSWER

The contractor is not required to work in all communes, and is allowed to use a staggered start-up approach. There are currently 113 Feed the Future communes; please see the most updated list on the USAID/Mali website.

6.) QUESTION

Can USAID please clarify if the implementer can utilize matching grants funds for this project? If so, does USAID anticipate a ceiling for this matching grants fund?

USAID does not anticipate grant making under this award.

7.) QUESTION

Can USAID please clarify if the implementer can utilize the credit guarantee facility for this project? If so, does USAID anticipate a ceiling for this guarantee facility?

ANSWER

The contractor will not use a credit guarantee facility for this activity but will use other methods to facilitate access to finance and financial services. USAID plans to establish a Development Credit Authority (DCA) mechanism. However, this has not been finalized and the timing is uncertain. If and when a DCA is finalized, the contractor will use the DCA to facilitate access to finance for targeted beneficiaries.

8.) QUESTION

Page 5, Clause B.1, Purpose, refers to the USAID/Mali “Cereal Value Chain (CVC)” Project, while the header throughout the RFP refers to the Cereals Value Chains. Please confirm the desired name of the Project.

The name of the project is Cereal Value Chain (CVC).

9.) QUESTION

Section C, starting on page 7 of the RFP, states that the 'CVC award is USAID's central mechanism for achieving the goals of its Feed the Future strategy'. For the activities comprising the remaining elements of USAID's Feed the Future strategy, would USAID kindly list them, their implementers their years of implementation, and their expected results?

On page 29, the RFP states that USAID/Mali has partnered with two local NGOs to build the capacity of water user associations and producer groups associated with the Alatona Irrigation Project. Would USAID kindly inform Offerors which two local NGOs it has partnered with?

ANSWER

The current implementing activities funded under the CVC Project are listed below – including the activity name, partner, and life of activity. USAID/Mali will not provide expected results of these activities.

Current Activities under the FTF Cereal Value Chain Project:

Name of Activity Implementing Partner Life of Activity

Integrated Initiative for Economic Growth in Mali (IICEM)

Abt Associates 2010-2013

Alatona business development Nyeta Conseils 2012-2015

Alatona water association development G-Force 2012-2015

Increasing vegetables production and consumption

The World Vegetable Center (AVRDC) 2012-2014

Mali Agriculture Value Chain Enhancement Network (MAVEN)

ACDI-VOCA 2010-2013

Additional activities are envisioned under this project to support financial services, private sector development, policy development, and irrigation and water management. However, the exact nature of these interventions is still under development and subject to availability of funds.

10.) QUESTION

Section C.5.5. Key outputs and results. We understand that a separate contract is envisioned for implementing agricultural policy, but Mali CVC would have a role in defining constraints and contributing towards their alleviation, even though this IR is broader than the CVC contractor’s manageable interest. Request USAID augment the discussion on how the CVC contractor will contribute towards achieving IR 5.

ANSWER

As stated in section C5.5, the contractor is not responsible for directly achieving results under IR 5 and is instead only requested to substantially collaborate with other implementing mechanisms and USAID or other donor funded activities so as to contribute to the enabling environment. As stated, the policy implementing mechanism will be responsible for reporting on IR 5, not the CVC activity. The manner in which the contractor will collaborate with other implementing mechanisms is at the discretion of the contractor.

11.) QUESTION

Section C.5 and 6.2. Will USAID cover agricultural policy as a separate bilateral project that is separate from the proposed regional Sahel Resilience Learning project? Will the SAREL project include activities implemented by USAID/Mali?

ANSWER

USAID/Mali anticipates implementation of a separate agriculture policy activity. The CVC Project and activities under it are not associated with the Sahel Resilience Learning project.

12.) QUESTION

Page 36, Clause F.7.A.3, Program – Financial Reporting, Program Reporting, Monitoring and Evaluation Plan states, “The Mission is working to set up an external mechanism to establish baselines for FTF projects, including the CVC core contract.” – Questions: When does the Mission anticipate completing and disseminating this information? Will USAID allow the CVC contractor to establish its own baselines that amplify/contribute to FtF program baselines?

ANSWER

As a clarification, the contractor will collect and establish baselines for output level indicators. USAID envisions a separate M&E contract which will be responsible for collecting baselines of impact level indicators. The CVC contractor is expected to collaborate with the M&E contract.

13.) QUESTION

Section F. 11. Since full results and outcomes of agriculture programs lag after inputs and activities are delivered, we suggest USAID consider making arrangements for impact evaluations 18 to 24 months after completion of the CVC project.

Such an impact evaluation would have considerable value as a learning tool for FTF in the future.

Suggestion is noted.

14.) QUESTION

Page 10, Clause C.3.1, Feed the Future Strategy, second paragraph, refers to the “FTF guidance on gender integration and USAID’s new policy on gender equality and women’s empowerment”. Does USAID plan to use the Women’s Empowerment in Agriculture Index (WEAI) to measure impacts of Mali CVC on women’s empowerment? If so, will the WEAI data be collected and analyzed by a third party evaluator contracted separately by USAID?

Yes to both questions.

15.) QUESTION

Page 11, Clause C.3.3: National Plan of Priority Investment in the Sector of Agriculture of Mali 2011 – 2015, states that:

“Although the March 22, 2012, coup d’état and subsequent political instability precludes USAID/Mali from working directly with the government….” Page 11, Clause 3.4 Other Donor Programs states “USAID/Mali has included with this contract a 3.0 million dollar option to engage in infrastructure development in suitable villages during the first 2 years of project implementation” and Page 80, Clause L.11 Instructions For The Preparation Of The Technical Proposal states, “An additional 3.0 million will be made available for use over the first two years for irrigation infrastructure.” Section L.11 (b) mentions an addition of $3 million for irrigation infrastructure tied to KFW.

(a) Would USAID kindly share the latest annual report or a detailed description of KfW's work?

No.

(b) Normally, prior to engaging in any infrastructure construction, the Contractor would engage and seek concurrence from local and national authorities, such as, for example, the Office du Niger in Segou. Can USAID clarify in what ways the Contractor may or may not engage with Government of Mali entities?

Coordination with the Government of Mali is not prohibited. However, direct support or financing of the Government of Mali is prohibited at this time.

16.) QUESTION

Can USAID clarify the intended use and timeline for utilization of the $3 million fund for irrigation infrastructure as described on p. 18 and also on p. 80 of the RFP?

ANSWER

As a clarification on water irrigation funding: during year one and two of implementation of the CVC contract, water irrigation infrastructure will be implemented by the CVC contract. The sum of $3 million has been provided in the budget for this purpose during year 1 and 2. Starting with year 3, water irrigation infrastructure investments are envisioned to be undertaken by KfW. The CVC contract and KfW will coordinate and collaborate to obtain optimal results.

17.) QUESTION

Would USAID please confirm that the irrigation work to be performed under the project (described in Section C.3.4. on RFP page 11) is considered small-scale construction, and that the resulting CVC contract will include the FAR clauses applicable to construction?

ANSWER

Although the anticipated award is for technical assistance, if the construction activities are required, the resulting award will include FAR clauses applicable to construction. “Small-scale” versus “large-scale” is not applicable at this time.

18.) QUESTION

Sub IRs 2.3 and 3.3 (RFP pages 23 and 27, respectively) indicate that the implementing contractor is expected to introduce improved food storage facilities at the farm/village level. Does USAID expect the contractor to directly support the construction of food storage facilities, similar to the small-scale infrastructure development support anticipated for irrigation activities? If so, would USAID please clarify whether Offerors should budget for food storage construction separately from the $3 million plug for irrigation infrastructure? If separate from the irrigation infrastructure, would USAID kindly provide a plug figure for such costs?

IRs 2.3 and 3.3 provide illustrative tasks that the contractor could undertake to address the challenges described within the IRs. However, USAID is not requiring the contractor to construct food storage facilities. The solicitation requests that the contractor provide innovative ways to address the challenges described under the IRs. The illustrative tasks are only suggestions on ways in which the contractor could address the challenges. However, if the contractor chooses to construct food storage facilities, the budget for this construction is not to be included in the $3 million slated for irrigation infrastructure.

19.) QUESTION

Page 16, Clause C.5.3, Technical Approach, paragraph 4, 4th sentence states: “While it is recognized that individual activities may include a significantly higher or lower percentage of women participants, the overall goal of the program is to achieve a one-to-one men to women ratio of beneficiaries.” Please provide guidance on targeted number of beneficiaries to be reached, either total number or numbers per year?

The contractor is expected to provide targeted number of beneficiaries for the intervention.

20.) QUESTION

Page 18, Clause C. 5.5.1: Intermediate Result 1: Agricultural Productivity Increased, Sub IR 1.3: Economically viable irrigation systems expanded, lists an illustrative task “Establish collaborative working relationships with other donors active in the construction of irrigation capacity in the project’s target areas. Can USAID provide any guidance on the communities that should be prioritized for immediate intervention in the project's target areas?

ANSWER

The contractor is expected to conduct its own rapid assessment to determine the priority communes for immediate intervention.

21.) QUESTION

Page 26, Section C: Sub IR 3.1: Income streams diversified and asset building strategies employed, first paragraph, next to last sentence, states “Linkages between CVC activities and the USAID-Funded livestock project, through the use of crop residues as animal feed, will be strengthened in as much as possible.” Please clarify which USAID-Funded livestock project is referenced here.

ANSWER

USAID anticipates implementing a livestock activity during the same period as the cereal value chain contract. The implementing partners (CVC contractor and livestock implementer) will be expected to coordinate as applicable.

22.) QUESTION

Would USAID please clarify whether Sub-IR 4.3, “Capacity of Financial Service Providers Strengthened” is deemed beyond the manageable interests, and therefore not the direct responsibility, of the contractor? The Results Framework on page 9 of the RFP shades the box for Sub-IR 4.3 implying that it is not a direct responsibility of the CVC contractor.

However, the scope of work on page 30 includes illustrative tasks and makes no direct reference regarding whether achievement of this Sub-IR is deemed within the manageable interests of the CVC implementer.

ANSWER

Please note that the text in the Results Framework is revised as follows: Page 30, Sub-IR 4.3: “Financial Systems Strengthened”. Sub-IR 4.3 has been modified and the shading removed, thus making it a required result. See below in this amendment for the updated results framework.

The challenge here is that so many actors within the cereal value chain continue to lack access to financial services. Mutual distrust between financial providers and value chain actors is a recurrent constraint hindering the development of the financial system. The CVC contractor will work to improve the relationships between financial service providers and cereal value chain actors, in particular rural producer groups and other agro-entrepreneurs to expand agricultural finance.

23.) QUESTION

In Annex 2, USAID/Mali FTF Indicators, we deduce that the highlighting and asterisks in the chart indicate the following:

Blue highlights: Impact/required indicators Yellow highlights: Required if applicable (RiA) Red highlights with two asterisks: Whole of Government (WOG) No highlights or asterisks: Standard FTF/F-series indicators

Would USAID please confirm that this understanding is correct and that, for the purposes of the proposal, the yellow highlighted indicators in Annex 2 are only applicable to the CVC project if the Offeror deems them required?

ANSWER

Blue highlight (with ***) ---these are required impact level indicators Yellow highlight (with *) --- these are required as applicable indicators Yellow highlight (with orange **) --- these are required as applicable whole of government indicators No highlight or asterisks --- Standard recommended FTF indicators

Correct, the yellow (* or **) are required as applicable and thus for the application the Offeror is allowed to deem if they are applicable or not.

24.) QUESTION

RFP Section C.3.1, page 10: The RFP states that “The CVC contractor will be expected to expand or reallocate resources to these territories (Timbuktu and northern Mopti) as the situation evolves.” Can USAID clarify if it needs to budget for potential interventions in these areas?

ANSWER

The current solicitation excludes the regions of Timbuktu and northern Mopti. The contractor will propose intervention areas based on the 113 communes currently listed on the USAID/Mali website.

25.) QUESTION

RFP Section C.3.2, page 10 of the RFP mentions that USAID has “developed a draft resiliency strategy. Can USAID kindly share the draft resilience strategy in development by USAID/Mali in October 2012? Was this draft developed with the input of other authors, and if so, would USAID kindly share a copy of the strategy?

No, this is currently an internal document until finalized. The strategy was drafted with input from multiple experts from Washington, Mali and the West Africa Region. The USAID/Mali “Resiliency Briefer” is attached to this amendment as a reference. Below is a list of additional resources:

Enquête Démographique et de Santé (EDSM-IV) 2006. Macro International Inc. Calverton, Maryland, USA December 2007. Chapters 9 and 11 on nutrition. http://www.measuredhs.com/pubs/pdf/FR199/FR199.pdf

INTSORMIL, 2011. “Economic Impact of Sorghum and Millet Technologies in Mali: Agricultural Campaign 2010-2011.

Bulletin IER-INTSORMIL No. 11. Purdue University http://intsormil.org/SMMali/Mali- 2010%20Bulletin%20Final%20Copy.pdf

INTSORMIL, 2012. “Transfer of Sorghum, Millet Production, Processing and Marketing Technologies in Mali: Annual Report October 1, 2010-September 30, 2011”. Purdue University.

http://intsormil.org/SMMali/Mali%20Annual%20%20report%20Oct%201%202010-Sep%2030,%202011.pdf

Michigan State University Food Security Team. 2011. Mali Agricultural Sector Assessment http://fsg.afre.msu.edu/promisam_2/MSU_Mali_Ag_Sector_Assessment_2011.pdf

Plan National d’Investissement Prioritaire dans le Secteur Agricole au Mali-2011-2015. Rapport PNIP-SA Août.

http://fsg.afre.msu.edu/promisam_2/PNIP_SA_06_08_2010.pdf

VcCLIR: Mali Commercial Legal and Institutional Reform for Agricultural Value Chains in Mali. EAT (Enabling Agricultural Trade) Agenda for Action. February 2012.

http://www.fintrac.com/cpanelx_pu/EAT/09_47_8688_EAT_VcCLIR_Mali_Main_09Mar12_fin_web.pdf

26.) QUESTION

On page 24, under IR 3, there is language pertaining to major shocks or stresses that would require humanitarian relief efforts and a modification of the CVC work plan; could USAID clarify under what conditions relief efforts and a work plan/approach modification would be necessary?

ANSWER

Please note, the following paragraph is removed from the solicitation: “In addition to helping farmers become more resilient to shocks or stresses (e.g. drought, flood, and pests/locusts), in the incident of a shock or stress, activities to help farmers in target zones recover will be undertaken. In this case, the contractor shall submit a work plan justifying the need for a modified approach to USAID/AAO for mission review and approval.”

27.) QUESTION

RFP section C.6, page 31: Kindly confirm that a draft PMP is not required with the proposal submission.

ANSWER

This is correct. A draft PMP is not required with the proposal submission. However, as stated in section M.3, technical evaluation criteria, part a – soundness of technical approach, “…proposals will be judged in part in meeting the ambitiousness of proposed expected results and targets as well as the feasibility of the technical approach in achieving these targets.”

Although a formal PMP is not required, expected results and targets must be included in the submitted proposal.

28.) QUESTION

RFP section F.3, page 35: USAID specifies that the contractor will ‘establish a central project office in Bamako’, but in Section L.11 (c) (p 80), USAID refers to ‘country office and field sub-offices.’ Could USAID please clarify?

ANSWER

As stated in F.3, the contractor will establish a central project office in Bamako. It is up to the discretion of the contractor if additional field sub-offices are to be established. However, if the contractor does decide to establish sub-field offices then per instructions in Section L.11 (c.), the contractor must specify the composition and organizational structure of the entire project team (including sub-offices).

29.) QUESTION

Page 18, footnote 2, of the RFP states that the contractor is “free to describe the activities they intend to implement... and will not be beholden to the “Illustrative Tasks' list.” Sections L and M of the RFP ask for a conceptual/technical approach and strategy (i.e., methodology and techniques). Does USAID want bidders to include a discussion of proposed activities in their 30 page proposals? Does USAID want bidders to include a work plan as an annex?

ANSWER

Offerors have the option to include a draft work plan as part of the proposal annexes, with the total number of pages for the annexes not to exceed 30 pages.

30.) QUESTION

Has USAID established a breakdown of program spending by region? If so, would USAID kindly share it with bidders?

No, this will be the contractor’s responsibility.

31.) QUESTION

Section H.6. Request USAID make the Embassy compensation plan available to offerors, thus facilitating more accurate and realistic cost proposals for CVC. Can USAID please provide the local compensation plan for Mali? Can we please receive the latest copies of the USAID/Mali Foreign Service National pay scale?

ANSWER

The local compensation plan is an internal document. However, please see the summary of the Foreign Service National pay scale provided with this amendment.

32.) QUESTION

Page 44, Clause H.6(c), Additional Requirements for Personnel Compensation, salaries and wages paragraph, states that “no individual salary or wage may exceed the employee’s current salary or wage, or the highest rate of annual salary or wage received during any full year of the immediately preceding three (3) years without the approval of the Contracting Officer.”

Subclause (f) allows the use of an approved salary scale in the establishment of individual salaries.

Market value, salary scales, and contactor policy complement each other in the establishment of a fair value for position requirements (compensation structure) and are the basis of the AIDAR 752.7007 approach. Inserting the use of an individual’s salary history into the Offeror’s compensation structure and position assessment undermines the position valuation and creates unfair compensation for equal work. Please remove the conflicting requirement of individual salary history consideration as a limitation of salary structure and market value.

ANSWER

The following sentence has been removed from the solicitation with this amendment: “As well, no individual salary or wage may exceed the employee’s current salary or wage, or the highest rate of annual salary or wage received during any full year of the immediately preceding three (3) years without the approval of the Contracting Officer.”

33.) QUESTION

Page 31, Section C.6.1., Monitoring and Evaluation, states “The Contractor will be required to develop a results framework that incorporates key FTF results, indicator and targets and against which it will report on project progress and results achievement.” Please confirm that the Results Framework will be submitted to and approved by USAID after project award and up to 60 days after implementation has begun. See F.7.A.3

ANSWER

USAID confirms that the Results Framework will be submitted to and approved by USAID after project award and up to 60 days after implementation has begun

34.) QUESTION

Section F.7.1. Request USAID please confirm that the First Annual Workplan is due 60 days after the effective date of the CVC contract award.

The first Annual Work-plan is due within 30 days following the effective date of the award.

35.) QUESTION

Section C. and F.6. The RFP does not list any key personnel for Mali CVC, yet team configuration and quality of key personnel account for 30 percent of the technical evaluation criteria for the proposals. Please confirm that key personnel positions, qualifications and roles/responsibilities are to be proposed by offerors.

Yes, the key personnel, including their respective positions, qualifications and roles/responsibilities are to be proposed by offerors.

36.) QUESTION

Page 44, Section H, Special Contract Requirements, does not include a Grants Under Contracts authorization. Since there is precedence in Mali for issuance of grants under a contract to local firms, and since GUC is an important implementation authorization for building and sustaining capacity in local partners, the Offeror requests incorporation of the authority within the RFP. Please authorize issuance of grants in accordance with the appropriate USAID regulations under this project. Will the contractor be able to award grants-under-contract?

USAID does not anticipate that the Contractor will award any grants under the contract.

37.) QUESTION

On page 5 in B.4.a, the RFP references a Section B.5 Budget that does not currently exist. Can USAID please clarify or point to the appropriate section?

The following supersedes paragraph B.4(a), “The contract budget shown below is based on the contractor’s original proposal and/or final proposal revision, which was accepted by USAID through award of this contract.”

38.) QUESTION

Page 6, Clause B.5(a), Indirect Costs, states that “All costs for local organizations shall be budgeted and billed as direct costs.” This prohibition undermines the development of a sustainable business model, especially in local for-profit organizations, that is a Core Principle of USAID Forward. While the Offeror fully understands the need for allocable and allowable cost justifications, which are supported by an annual audit, the entire indirect cost structure should not be summarily prohibited. In addition, this could undermine the competitive nature of independently established subcontractors and subgrantees. Please remove this prohibition.

The following sentences in the RFP are changed as follows:

“Indirect costs shall not be allowed for local organizations.” This sentence is changed to: “Indirect costs shall not be allowed for organizations without a NICRA or without annual audits that clearly and sufficiently demonstrate the organization’s indirect cost rate.”

“All costs for local organizations shall be budgeted and billed as direct costs.” This sentence is changed to: “All costs for organizations that do not have a NICRA or sufficient indirect cost rate supporting documentation will be budgeted and billed as direct costs.”

39.) QUESTION

We note that there is no requirement in Section B for proposing indirect cost rate ceilings. Further, we request that such a clause not be incorporated, and that this requirement be deleted in its entirety based on the following authorities: a) FAR 42.703-1 “Policy”, FAR 42.707(b) “Cost-sharing rates and limitations on indirect cost rates”, and USAID’s “Best Practices Guide for Indirect Costing”.

On page 6 in B.5.c, the RFP references ceiling rates, but there is no existing language elsewhere in the RFP regarding ceiling rates. Can USAID please provide a section that cites the terms and conditions applicable to ceilings on indirect rates.

ANSWER

At the time of award, an indirect cost rate ceiling will be negotiated. Once this rate is negotiated, the government will not be obligated to pay any amount that exceeds the rate established in the contract.

40.) QUESTION

Page 6, Clause B.7 Cancellation Procedures, states that cancellation ceilings for years 2 through five are TBD. Please confirm that the ceiling will be negotiated with the successful Offeror and no ceiling needs to be submitted at this time.

Section B.7, “Cancellation Procedures”, is not applicable and has been removed from the RFP.

41.) QUESTION

Page 39, Clause F.11, Project Evaluation, states that the contract will be evaluated at mid-term and end. Please confirm that the cost of evaluations will be covered by USAID and Offerors do not need to include it in their budgets.

ANSWER

USAID anticipates conducting both a mid-term and a final evaluation. Offerors are not requested to include costs of these evaluations in their proposals.

42.) QUESTION

Page 42, Clause G.4(a)(2), AIDAR 752.7003 Documentation For Payment, states “The report should be supported with the detailed cost breakdown of program expenses, including seminars, grants, roundtables, etc.” This clause refers to detailed costs of program expenses as a reporting level. Please clarify if this is an additional financial report required beyond the country and budget categories?

ANSWER

USAID does not intend to impose undue financial reporting on the awardee while submitting the SF-1034 for reimbursements but expects the contractor to submit supporting documentation to justify the claims.

43.) QUESTION

Page 49, Clause H.17 Approvals for Nonexpendable Property Purchases, states a definition of NXP as “property which is complete in itself, does not lose its identity or become a component part of another article when put into use, is durable with an expected service life of two years or more, and which has a unit cost of more than $500”. Please confirm that the definition of NXP established by the Standard Provision and the A-122 Cost Principles for non-profit organizations may be incorporated should the successful Offeror be a non-profit organization. This definition is a unit cost of $5,000 and a shelf life of one year.

Yes, USAID confirms that if the successful offeror is a non-profit organization the Standard Provision and the A-122 Cost Principles for non-profit organizations will be incorporated.

44.) QUESTION

Page 78, L.5b Proposal Format and Presentation, states that “All pages of the technical and cost proposals should be sequentially numbered.” Please clarify if Offerors should number sequentially and consecutively across all proposal pieces or if page counts can be sequential only within technical proposal and cost proposal, or, further, by annexes within.

ANSWER

Page numbers should be sequential within the technical proposal and within the cost proposal. The numbering should not be consecutive between the two proposals.

45.) QUESTION

Page 79, L.11 Instructions for the Preparation of the Technical Proposal, details documents “Not included in the page limitation”. Please confirm that standard exceptions such as an acronym list and transmittal letter are also allowed outside of the 30 page technical proposal limitation and that USAID will allow Offerors to provide a of list acronyms following the table of contents that will not count against the 30 page limitation?

The acronym list and the transmittal letter are not included in the 30 page limitation of the technical proposal.

46.) QUESTION

Page 80, Section L.11.b details maximum award funding levels for the CVC project. We note that the levels for CVC core activities are flat across Years 2-5 ($4.25 million per year). Is this a strict annual budget allocation? May Offerors propose a technical, management, and cost strategy with funding levels that deviate from the levels indicated in the RFP? Please confirm that the annual funding levels are illustrative only and Offerors are allowed to propose annual costs reflecting the requirements of the proposed implementation?

The annual funding levels reflect the anticipated annual appropriation levels; therefore, Offerors are requested to propose implementation strategies within these annual funding ceilings.

47.) QUESTION

Page 81, Section L.11(e), Past Performance, describes a requirement for a list of five grants, cooperative agreements, etc. for work of a similar size and scope for Offerors and major subcontractors. Please clarify if this section should be addressed exclusively within an annex to the technical proposal or if a narrative should also be provided within the 30-page technical proposal limit.

ANSWER

Please provide the requested information as an annex to the technical proposal and a summary narrative in the technical proposal reflecting the Offeror’s Past Performance with regard to the forecasted requirements.

48.) QUESTION

Page 82, Clause L.13, Instructions for the Preparation of the Cost Proposal, does not provide an exchange rate for CFA to USD for all Offerors to use in budget preparation. In order to facilitate an equal comparison of proposed costs by the various bidders, please provide an estimated CFA franc to U.S. Dollar exchange rate.

USAID/Mali uses a standard exchange rate of 1 U.S. Dollar to 475 Francs CFA, for budgetary purposes.

49.) QUESTION

Page 83, Clause L.13(e) Overhead, G&A and Material Overhead, requires a basis of justification for indirect cost rates in included in a proposal. Since the RFP requires similar cost documentation as required for the prime Offeror from major subcontractors only, (a) please confirm that the Offeror does not have to incorporate indirect cost documentation for non-major subcontractors, rather may maintain such documentation in the due diligence files for audit purposes within the intent of privity between the prime and subcontractors and (b) confirm that a broader range of documentation justifying the incorporation of an indirect rate maybe allowed as a basis for a proposed rate, including the documentation mentioned in Paragraph 1 of the Clause.

ANSWER

USAID confirms that offerors do not have to incorporate indirect cost documentation for non-major subcontractors. For establishing an indirect cost rate, a broader range of documentation may be accepted by USAID on a case by case basis.

50.) QUESTION

Page 84. Clause L.13(h) Instructions for the Preparation of the Cost Proposal, requires that “the Offeror must submit fully completed and signed USAID Biographical Data Sheet (AID Form 1420-17) for each proposed staff member.” Please revise this clause to conform to the requirements stated in AIDAR 752.7001 and limit the requirement to key personnel and staff posted outside the United States on long-term assignments. All other staff shall be documented in the contractor’s established policies, procedures, and practices in accordance with page 44, Clause H.5, AIDAR 752.7007 Personnel Compensation and AIDAR 752.7001.

ANSWER

Pursuant to AIDAR 752.7001, please provide biographical data for all proposed staff members. This biographical data must be submitted on the AID Form 1420-17 for all key personnel and individuals to be sent outside of the US. The biographical data must be in the form usually maintained by the contractor or the AID Form 1420-17 for all other individuals. The offeror must certify that it has taken reasonable steps to verify the accuracy of the information provided in the form.

51.) QUESTION

Section H, p.84 requires CCN biodatas in local currency. Can salary history be reflected in whatever currency in which candidates were paid?

ANSWER

The CCN salaries must be stated francs CFA. If salaries were paid in another currency, they must be converted. The sentence “For CCNs, the salary in Blocks 6, 14 and15 must be stated in Mali Bamako” is changed as follows: “For CCNs, the salary history and proposed salary must be stated in francs CFA.”

52.) QUESTION

“Offerors…are expected to comply with the mandate of FAR Clause 52.204-8…and complete the annual representations and certifications electronically via the Online Representations and Certifications Application (ORCA). Please confirm that completion of annual representations and certifications on sam.gov (System for Award Management) meets these requirements.

Yes, registration on sam.gov (System for Award Management) meets these requirements.

53.) QUESTION

Page 92, Attachment 3, Disclosure of Lobbying Activities, please confirm that the SF-LLL is a required element of the cost proposal, and should be completed by the Offeror only and submitted as part of Representations and Certifications.

ANSWER

The SF-LLL is a required element of the cost proposal, and should be completed by the Offeror only and submitted as part of Representations and Certifications.

54.) QUESTION

In Section F.7 (page 35) the RFP states that the first Annual Work Plan is due “no later than 30 days after the effective date of this award.” The next sentence indicates that contractor will “develop a detailed draft Work Plan for submission within 60 calendar days from the date of the award.” Please clarify the due date for the first Annual Work Plan.

In Section F.7 (page 36), the RFP states that the first annual “Work Plan will provide detailed activities for year one of implementation (the period through end of September 2015).” Please confirm that the September 2015 date is correct. If possible, please provide USAID’s anticipated start date for the CVC project to assist with proposed work planning development and budgeting.

ANSWER

Please note that the first Annual Work plan is due no later than 30 days after the effective date of this award , In the second paragraph, please read “30 calendar days” instead of “ 60 calendar days “ from the date of the award.

The sentence of page 36 should read, “The Work Plan will provide detailed activities for year one of implementation (the period through end of September 2014).”

55.) QUESTION

The only personnel qualification requirement stipulated in the RFP (Section H, page 44) is that contractor personnel possess English, French, and/or Malian language proficiency. Please confirm that no other minimum qualifications for proposed personnel are being imposed at this time. If this is correct, would USAID please clarify how it intends to evaluate the qualifications of personnel proposed by Offerors?

ANSWER

The following is added to page 80, Section L.11, Instructions for the Preparation of the Technical Proposal, Subsection (d), Qualifications of the Proposed Personnel:

“The offeror will propose a maximum of five key personnel, but no less than the following two key personnel to lead the successful implementation of the CVC project: Chief of Party and Deputy Chief of Party. It is important that key personnel possess skills and fulfill roles that are complementary to each other and form a cohesive team.

1) Chief of Party: The Chief of Party (COP) must have significant expertise in agriculture and agricultural value chains, preferably in the Sahel region. The COP must have proven experience in value chain program and activity management, competitiveness and agribusiness policy enabling environment, and be able to bring lessons learned from similar projects. S/he must also have proven experience in collaborating with other partners, donors, and government counterparts.

2) Deputy Chief of Party: The Deputy Chief of Party (DCOP) must have significant and broad expertise in agriculture, preferably in the Sahel region. The DCOP must be able to represent the COP in her/his absence. S/he must have a proven track record of management and organization of projects of similar size and complexity.”

The following is added to page 87, Section M.3c, “Team Configuration and Qualifications of Key Personnel”:

“In addition, proposals will be evaluated on the following:

1) Extent to which the COP and DCOP demonstrate continuous professional excellence, technical expertise, proven leadership and management abilities, excellent team building and communication skills, and strong cross-cultural and interpersonal skills.

2) Extent to which Key Personnel and Other Personnel address the technical areas and qualifications outlined in Sections C and L and possess complementary skills, knowledge, and expertise.”

56.) QUESTION

Would USAID please clarify the information it requires from Offerors for the Management and Personnel sections of the technical proposal? The guidance based on the evaluation criteria in RFP Section M is clear; however, when compared to the instructions in Section L, the required information appears to contain inconsistencies and redundancies.

To improve readability and the logical flow of Offerors’ proposals, would USAID consider moving the language quoted below from Section L.11(d), Qualifications of Proposed Personnel, to Section L.11(c), Management Plan?

“Offerors will further describe the quality and responsiveness of the proposed management structure and the integration and capacity of local partner organizations, if any proposed, as subcontractors.”

“Proposals shall identify all proposed partners and discuss their respective roles and responsibilities. An organization might not possess all the skills required to achieve all the results identified in this RFP; therefore, organizations may enter into partnerships with other organizations, including but not limited to non-profit indigenous Malian organizations, if that makes the most technical sense. Under this RFP, only one organization shall be designated to serve as the prime organization and will be responsible for the achievement of results and the implementation of the program. However, if Offerors intend to utilize subcontracts, the proposals should indicate the extent intended, the method of overseeing performance, and the tasks/functions they will perform. Offerors shall state whether or not they have existing relationships with these other organizations and the nature of the relationship (e.g., subgrantee, subcontractor, partnership. etc.). The Offeror must specify the technical resources and expertise of proposed subcontracting organizations.”

ANSWER

Please see the response to the question above.

The following sentence and paragraph are moved from Section L.11, Instructions for the Preparation of the Technical Proposal, Subsection (d), Qualifications of Proposed Personnel, to Section L.11, Subsection (c), Management Plan:

“Offerors will further describe the quality and responsiveness of the proposed management structure and the integration and capacity of local partner organizations, if any proposed, as subcontractors.”

“Proposals shall identify all proposed partners and discuss their respective roles and responsibilities. An organization might not possess all the skills required to achieve all the results identified in this RFP; therefore, organizations may enter into partnerships with other organizations, including but not limited to non-profit indigenous Malian organizations, if that makes the most technical sense. Under this RFP, only one organization shall be designated to serve as the prime organization and will be responsible for the achievement of results and the implementation of the program. However, if Offerors intend to utilize subcontracts, the proposals should indicate the extent intended, the method of overseeing performance, and the tasks/functions they will perform. Offerors shall state whether or not they have existing relationships with these other organizations and the nature of the relationship (e.g., subgrantee, subcontractor, partnership. etc.). The Offeror must specify the technical resources and expertise of proposed subcontracting organizations.”

57.) QUESTION

RFP Section L (page 80) states that key personnel resumes/CVs may not exceed three pages and that non-key personnel resumes/CVs are limited to one page. In our experience, one-page resumes/CVs are highly abbreviated, especially for senior-level personnel, and often fail to reflect the relevant breadth and depth of a proposed candidate’s experience.

Therefore, in addition to key personnel, may Offerors submit three-page resumes/CVs for non-key, long-term technical personnel to provide the TEC all relevant information about these personnel?

No, Offerors are required to submit no more than one page for non-key long term technical personnel.

58.) QUESTION

Please confirm that letters of commitment and references are required only for proposed key personnel, per Section L.11(d) (pages 80-81).

Yes, USAID confirms that letters of commitment and references are required only for the key personnel.

59.) QUESTION

Sections L.11.d and e (page 81) instruct Offerors to provide current fax numbers for key personnel references and technical representatives for organizational past performance references. Given that faxing is no longer a common means of communication, would USAID consider waiving the requirement for fax numbers in these two sections?

Please delete all references to fax as a means of communication, instead use e-mail in lieu thereof.

60.) QUESTION

Does USAID anticipate that any inventory (vehicles, furniture, computers, etc.) from closed or closing USAID/Mali projects will be transferred to the CVC project? If yes, would USAID please provide Offerors a list of the relevant inventory to assist in realistic and consistent development of proposed budgets? If not, can USAID confirm that all Offerors should budget for new vehicles, equipment, furniture, and other materials as necessary to meet the needs of their proposed staffing, organizational, and technical approach?

Yes, all Offerors should budget for new vehicles, equipment, furniture, and other materials as necessary. At the time of final negotiation USAID anticipates providing the successful Offeror with a list of inventory that will be provided.

61.) QUESTION

RFP section L.13(3), PAGE 85: USAID requires approximate percentage of each type of work to be subcontracted. Should the percentage be based on the total cost of the project? Alternatively can Offerors provide the technical areas we expect the sub-contractors to cover?

Please provide the technical areas and the percentage of each type of work you anticipate sub-contracting based on the overall cost of the project.

62.) QUESTION

RFP section M.3, page 87: Can USAID confirm that offerors can include PPRs for relevant projects outside of West Africa/Mali?

Yes, provided that the information is relevant to the cereal value chain project and that the projects are similar.

63.) QUESTION

RFP Section L, page 79: Can USAID please confirm that offerors can add letters of support from resource organizations in the cost proposal?”

This question is unclear and cannot be answered.

64.) QUESTION

In H.6.l.(3), the first and second sentences seem to provide inconsistent guidance on the authorized six-day work week. Can USAID please confirm that a six-day work week for local STTA will require advance CO approval and a six-day work week is authorized for international STTA with no premium pay at contract award?

ANSWER

Yes, USAID confirms that a six-day work week for local STTA will require advance CO approval and, if approved, a six-day work week is authorized for international STTA with no premium pay at contract award.

65.) QUESTION

On page 33 in D.2a, the language in the RFP indicates that the approval of the Branding Implementation and Marking Plan is approved as submitted in Annex C of the proposal thus granting approval at contract award. However, on page 38 in F.7.E, the RFP indicates that a BIP should be in place 100 days from the date of award. Can USAID please confirm whether the Branding Implementation and Marking Plan is approved upon award or within 100 days after award?

A final Marking Plan should be in place within 100 days from the date of the award.

66.) QUESTION

Would USAID kindly share its list of vetted or certified local organizations, ready to receive direct awards from USAID?

USAID/Mali does not have a list of certified local organizations ready to receive direct awards from USAID. Each organization must be determined responsible at the time of award.

67.) QUESTION

In the spirit of USAID Forward, and given the “facilitative” nature of CVC, would USAID consider non-exclusive commitment of Malian firms and organizations on this bid?

Yes.

68.) QUESTION

Could USAID please confirm if Mali is an accompanied post?

ANSWER

The USAID/Mali mission is currently operating under Authorized Departure status for adult dependents and non-school aged children. The mission is operating under Ordered Departure status for school aged children. This status is reviewed on a monthly basis. At this time, contractors have the option of having all family members at post, but evacuation benefits are authorized as applicable.

69.) QUESTION

Can USAID confirm if there is a bilateral agreement with Mali and the USA specifically on the Value Added Tax conditions?

Yes, there is a bilateral agreement and there is a VAT exemption in the Standard Provisions.

ATTACHMENT B - Summary of the changes-edits to the RFP in response to the questions

Re: the response to question 5: The RFP is edited to read “113 communes” on pages 10 and 37.

Re: the response to Question 8: The RFP is edited to read “Cereal Value Chain (CVC)” (without the “s”) as the project name every time it is mentioned. Therefore the following changes are made (the list may not be exhaustive):

Header on each page

p. 7, three different places

p. 8, three different places

p. 10

p. 11

p. 13

p. 14, two different places

p. 17

p. 28 and

p. 29

Re: the response to question 38: Section B.5(a) is revised to read:

“(a) (a) The contract clause entitled “Allowable Cost and Payment (DEC 2002)”, FAR 52.216-7, specifies that the indirect cost rates shall be established for each of the Contractor’s accounting periods that apply to this contract. Pending establishment of revised provisional or final indirect cost rates, allowable indirect costs shall be reimbursed on the basis of the following negotiated provisional or predetermined rates and the appropriate bases:

Description Rate Base Type Period 1/ 1/ 1/ [To be determined]

The Contractor is allowed to recover applicable indirect costs (i.e., overhead, G&A, etc.) on other direct costs (ODCs), if it is part of the Contractor’s usual accounting procedures, consistent with FAR Part 31, and Negotiated Indirect Cost Rate Agreement (NICRA). Indirect costs shall not be allowed for organizations without a NICRA or without annual audits that clearly and sufficiently demonstrate the organization’s indirect cost rate.

All costs for organizations that do not have a NICRA or sufficient indirect cost rate supporting documentation will be budgeted and billed as direct costs.”

Re: the response to question 40: Section B.7, Cancellation Procedures, is deleted in its entirety.

Re: the response to question 26: The third paragraph under section C.5.5.3 is deleted in its entirety.

Re: the response to question 22: Section C.5.5.4, IR-3 is edited to reflect the revised Results Framework concerning sub-IR 4.3. (No change in the following section on Illustrative Tasks).

Re: the responses to question 54: Section F.7.A.1, First Annual Work Plan, the first paragraph is edited to read:

“The first Annual Work Plan is due no later than 30 days…