Mali_CVC_RFP.pdf

USAID/Mali SOL-688-13-000004 Page 2 of 112 pages Cereals Value Chains

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SF33 – SOLICITATION, OFFER AND AWARD…………………………………………….…………………………………………………………. 1

PART I ‐ THE SCHEDULE

SECTION B ‐ SERVICES AND PRICE/COSTS

B.1 PURPOSE

B.2 CONTRACT TYPE

B.3 ESTIMATED COST, FIXED FEE, AND OBLIGATED AMOUNT

B.4 CONTRACT BUDGET AND CEILINGS

B.5 INDIRECT COSTS

B.6 REIMBURSABLE COSTS

B.7. CANCELLATION PROCEDURES

SECTION C ‐ DESCRIPTION/STATEMENT OF WORK

C. 1: INTRODUCTION

C. 2: CVC PROJECT GOAL AND PURPOSE

C. 3: RELATIONSHIP TO FTF STRATEGY, RESILIENCE STRATEGY, MALI’S INVESTMENT PLAN FOR AGRICULTURE, AND OTHER DONOR PROGRAMS

C. 3.1: Feed the Future Strategy C. 3.2: Resilience Strategy C. 3.3: National Plan of Priority Investment in the Sector of Agriculture of Mali 2011 – 2015 C. 3.4: Other Donor Programs

C. 4: RICE AND SORGHUM/MILLET VALUE CHAINS: OPPORTUNITIES AND CONSTRAINTS

C. 5: DETAILED WORK REQUIREMENTS

C. 6: MONITORING, EVALUATION, AND LEARNING

C. 6.1: Monitoring and Evaluation C. 6.2: Learning

C. 7: ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE

SECTION D ‐ PACKAGING AND MARKING

D.1 AIDAR 752.7009 MARKING (JAN 1993)

D.2 BRANDING POLICY AND STRATEGY

D.2a Approval of Contractor Branding Implementation and Marking Plan

SECTION E ‐ INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE

E.1 NOTICE LISTING CONTRACT CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

E.2 INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE

SECTION F ‐ DELIVERIES OR PERFORMANCE

F.1 NOTICE LISTING CONTRACT CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

F.2 PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE

F.3 PLACE OF PERFORMANCE

F.4 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS

F.5 FAR 52.217‐8, OPTION TO EXTEND SERVICES (NOV 1999)

F.6 KEY PERSONNEL

F.7. PROGRAM – FINANCIAL REPORTING

F.8 CONTENTS OF PERIODIC PROGRESS REPORTS

F.9 REPORTING FORMAT

F.10 LANGUAGE OF REPORTS AND OTHER OUTPUTS

F.11 PROJECT EVALUATION

F.11a MID‐TERM EVALUATION F.11b FINAL EVALUATION

F.12 AIDAR 752.7005, SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS FOR DEVELOPMENT EXPERIENCE DOCUMENTS (JAN 2004)

SECTION G ‐ CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION DATA

G.1 CONTRACTING OFFICER’S AUTHORITY

G.2 CONTRACTING OFFICER’S REPRESENTATIVE

G.3 TECHNICAL DIRECTIONS/RELATIONSHIP WITH USAID

USAID/Mali SOL-688-13-000004 Page 3 of 112 pages

G.4 AIDAR 752.7003 DOCUMENTATION FOR PAYMENT (NOV 1998)

G.5 PAYING OFFICE

SECTION H ‐ SPECIAL CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS

H.1 NOTICE LISTING CONTRACT CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

H.2 AUTHORIZED GEOGRAPHIC CODE

H.3 LOGISTICAL SUPPORT

H.4 LANGUAGE REQUIREMENTS

H.5 AIDAR 752.7007 PERSONNEL COMPENSATION (JULY 2007)

H.6 ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR PERSONNEL COMPENSATION

H.7 EMPLOYMENT OF THIRD COUNTRY NATIONALS (TCNS) AND COOPERATING COUNTRY NATIONALS (CCNS)

H.8 INSURANCE AND SERVICES

H.9 AIDAR 752.228‐70 MEDICAL EVACUATION (MEDEVAC) SERVICES (JULY 2007)

H.10 AIDAR 752.7004 EMERGENCY LOCATOR INFORMATION (JUL 1997)

H.11 AIDAR 752.231‐71 SALARY SUPPLEMENTS FOR HG EMPLOYEES (OCT 1998)

H.12 EXECUTIVE ORDER ON TERRORISM FINANCING (FEB 2002)

H.13 USAID DISABILITY POLICY ‐ ACQUISITION (DECEMBER 2004)

H.14 AIDAR 752.7032, INTERNATIONAL TRAVEL APPROVAL AND NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS (JAN 1990)

H.15 AIDAR 752.225‐70 SOURCE, ORIGIN AND NATIONALITY REQUIREMENTS (FEB 2012)

H.16 AIDAR 752.245‐71 TITLE TO PROPERTY

H.17 APPROVALS FOR NONEXPENDABLE PROPERTY PURCHASES

H.18 VALUE ADDED TAX (VAT) AND CUSTOMS DUTIES

H.19 REPORTING OF FOREIGN TAXES (MAR 2006)

H.20 FOREIGN GOVERNMENT DELEGATIONS TO INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCES (JAN 2002)

H.21 HOMELAND SECURITY PRESIDENTIAL DIRECTIVE‐12 (HSPD‐12) (SEPT. 2006)

H.22 AIDAR 752.7101 VOLUNTARY POPULATION PLANNING ACTIVITIES (JUNE 2008)

H.23 SUBCONTRACT CONSENT

H.24 CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

H.25 DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION

H.26 SOURCE/ORIGIN REQUIREMENTS FOR MOTOR VEHICLES

H.27 CONTRACTOR’S USE OF PROJECT VEHICLES AND LIABILITY INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR PRIVATELY OWNED VEHICLES

H.28 BUSINESS CLASS TRAVEL

PART II ‐ CONTRACT CLAUSES

SECTION I ‐ CONTRACT CLAUSES

I.1 NOTICE LISTING CONTRACT CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

I.2 FAR 52.252‐2 CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE (FEB 1998)

I.3 FAR 52.227‐23 RIGHTS TO PROPOSAL DATA (TECHNICAL) (JUN 1987)

I.4 FAR 52.209‐7 INFORMATION REGARDING RESPONSIBILITY MATTERS (APR 2010)

I.5 FAR 52.209‐8 UPDATES OF INFORMATION REGARDING RESPONSIBILITY MATTERS (APR 2010)

I.6 FAR 52.203‐13 CONTRACTOR CODE OF BUSINESS ETHICS AND CONDUCT (DEC 2008)

I.7 FAR 52.222‐50 COMBATING TRAFFICKING IN PERSONS (FEB 2009) ALT. I (AUG 2007)

I.8 FAR 52.244‐2 SUBCONTRACTS (JUN 2007)

I.9 AIDAR 752.209‐71 ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST DISCOVERED AFTER AWARD (JUN 1993)

PART III - LIST OF DOCUMENTS, EXHIBITS AND OTHER ATTACHMENTS

SECTION J ‐ LIST OF ATTACHMENTS

ATTACHMENT 1 ‐ IDENTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL GEOGRAPHIC CODE NUMBERS

ATTACHMENT 2 ‐ USAID FORM 1420‐17 CONTRACTOR BIOGRAPHICAL DATA SHEET

ATTACHMENT 3 ‐ SF LLL ‐ DISCLOSURE OF LOBBYING ACTIVITIES

PART IV ‐ REPRESENTATIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS

SECTION K ‐ REPRESENTATIONS, CERTIFICATIONS AND OTHER STATEMENTS OF OFFERORS

K.1 NOTICE LISTING SOLICITATION PROVISIONS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

K.2 FAR 52.204‐3 TAXPAYER IDENTIFICATION (OCT 1998)

K.3 FAR 52.204‐6 DATA UNIVERSAL NUMBERING SYSTEM (DUNS) NUMBER (JUNE 1999)

USAID/Mali SOL-688-13-000004 Page 4 of 112 pages

K.4 FAR 52.204‐8 ANNUAL REPRESENTATIONS AND CERTIFICATIONS (FEB 2009)

K.5 AIDAR 752.226‐01 DISADVANTAGED ENTERPRISE REPRESENTATION (APR 1991)

K.6 FAR 52.230‐1 COST ACCOUNTING STANDARDS NOTICES AND CERTIFICATION (OCT 2008)

K.7 FAR 52.223‐13 CERTIFICATION OF TOXIC CHEMICAL RELEASE REPORTING (AUG 2003)

K.8 COMPLIANCE WITH VETERANS EMPLOYMENT REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

K.9 INSURANCE ‐ IMMUNITY FROM TORT LIABILITY

K.10 AGREEMENT ON, OR EXCEPTIONS TO, TERMS AND CONDITIONS

K.11 FAR 52.209‐7 INFORMATION REGARDING RESPONSIBILITY MATTERS (APR 2010)

K.12 FAR 52.209‐8 UPDATES OF INFORMATION REGARDING RESPONSIBILITY MATTERS (APR 2010)

K.13 SIGNATURE

SECTION L ‐ INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS

L.1 NOTICE LISTING SOLICITATION PROVISIONS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

L.2 FAR 52.215‐1 INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS ‐ COMPETITIVE ACQUISITION (JAN 2004) ‐ ALTERNATE I (OCT 1997)

L.3 FAR 52.233‐2 SERVICE OF PROTEST (SEP 2006)

L.4 QUESTIONS AND CLARIFICATIONS

L.5 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

L.5a DELIVERY INSTRUCTIONS L.5b PROPOSAL FORMAT AND PRESENTATION

L.6 RESPONSIVENESS TO RFP

L.7 OFFEROR’S RESPONSIBILITIES

L.8 SUBMISSION OF ALTERNATE PROPOSALS

L.9 GOVERNMENT OBLIGATION

L.10 UNNECESSARILY ELABORATED PROPOSALS

L.11 INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE PREPARATION OF THE TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

L.12 INSTRUCTIONS FOR PREPARATION OF THE BRANDING IMPLEMENTATION AND MARKING PLANS

L.13 INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE PREPARATION OF THE COST PROPOSAL

SECTION M ‐ EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

M.1 OVERVIEW

M.2 CONTRACT AWARD – BEST VALUE

M.3 TECHNICAL EVALUATION CRITERIA

M.4 COST EVALUATION CRITERIA

M.5 CONTRACTING WITH SMALL BUSINESS CONCERNS

M.6 CONTRACTING WITH U.S SMALL BUSINESS CONCERNS IN THE MENTOR‐PROTÉGÉ PROGRAM

M.7 DETERMINATION OF THE COMPETITIVE RANGE AND CONTRACT AWARD

ATTACHMENTS

ATTACHMENT 1 ‐ IDENTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL GEOGRAPHIC CODE NUMBERS

ATTACHMENT 2 ‐ USAID FORM 1420‐17 ‐ CONTRACTOR BIOGRAPHICAL DATA SHEET

ATTACHMENT 3 – DISCLOSURE OF LOBBYING ACTIVITIES

USAID/Mali SOL-688-13-000004 Page 5 of 112 pages

PART I - THE SCHEDULE

SECTION B - SERVICES AND PRICE/COSTS

B.1 PURPOSE

The purpose of this contract is to provide technical assistance and services as described in detail in Section C, Statement of Work for the implementation of the USAID/Mali “Cereal Value Chain (CVC)” Project.

B.2 CONTRACT TYPE

This is a cost-plus-fixed-fee (CPFF) completion-type contract. For the consideration set forth below, the Contractor shall achieve the performance objectives and deliverables or outputs described in Section C in accordance with the performance standards specified herein.

B.3 ESTIMATED COST, FIXED FEE, AND OBLIGATED AMOUNT

(a) For the five year contract period, the estimated cost for the performance of the work required hereunder, exclusive of fixed fee, is TBD. The fixed fee, if any, for the contract period is TBD. The total estimated cost plus fixed fee is TBD.

(b) Within the estimated cost plus fixed fee (if any) specified in paragraph (a) above, the amount currently obligated and available for reimbursement of allowable costs incurred by the Contractor (and payment of fee, if any) for performance of the contract period hereunder is TBD. The Contractor shall not exceed the aforesaid obligated amount unless authorized by the Contracting Officer pursuant to the clause of this contract entitled “Limitation of Funds” (FAR 52.232-22).

(c) Funds obligated hereunder are anticipated to be sufficient through TBD.

B.4 CONTRACT BUDGET AND CEILINGS

(a) The contract budget found in Section B.5, Budget, is based on the contractor’s original proposal and/or final proposal revision, which was accepted by USAID through award of this contract.

(b) Without the prior written approval of the contracting officer, the contractor may not exceed the total estimated cost set forth in the budget hereunder or the obligated amount, whichever is less.

(c) The following itemized budget sets forth the estimates for reimbursement of dollar costs for individual line items of cost, and the fixed fee (if any).

Items Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Total Direct Costs Indirect Costs Fixed Fee Total Estimated Cost (TEC) + Fixed Fee

Note 1 - Individual subcontractors proposed as part of officer should include the same cost element break-downs in their budget as applicable.

Note 2 – Refer to table with funding projections in Section L

B.5 INDIRECT COSTS

(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]

USAID/Mali SOL-688-13-000004 Page 6 of 112 pages

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 local organizations.

All costs for local organizations shall be budgeted and billed as direct costs.

(b) The Contractor shall make no change in its established method of classifying or allocating indirect costs without the prior written approval of the Contracting Officer.

(c) The Government shall not be obligated to pay any additional amount on account of indirect costs above the ceiling rates established in the contract.

(d) This understanding shall not change any monetary ceiling, obligation, cost limitation, or obligation established in the contract.

B.6 REIMBURSABLE COSTS

The US dollar costs allowable shall be limited to reasonable, allocable and necessary costs determined in accordance with FAR 31 (Contract Cost Principles), A-21 (Cost Principles for Educational Institutions), A-122 (Cost Principles for Non-Profit Organizations), FAR 52.216-7 (Allowable Cost and Payment), FAR 52.216-8 (Fixed Fee), if applicable, and AIDAR 752.7003 (Documentation for Payment), in order to be reimbursable under this contract.

B.7. CANCELLATION PROCEDURES

In accordance with FAR 17.106-1(c) Cancelation procedures, all program years except the first are subject to cancellation. The cancellation ceiling shall be established below for years two, three, four and five of the contract.

Cancellation dates for years two, three, four and five are shall be the following:

Contract Year Two: _______ TBD_______ Contract Year Three: _______TBD_______ Contract Year Four: ________TBD_______ Contract Year Five: ________ TBD_______

Cancellation Ceiling:

This is a CPFF type contract where the contractor is authorized to be reimbursed for all costs which are allowable in accordance with FAR 52.216-7, “Allowable Costs and Payment”. Therefore, the contractor will not incur any costs which would have been amortized over the life of the contract should the contract be cancelled in accordance with FAR 52.217-2. Therefore, the cancellation ceiling for each cancellation date is [ ].

[END OF SECTION B]

USAID/Mali SOL-688-13-000004 Page 7 of 112 pages

SECTION C - DESCRIPTION/STATEMENT OF WORK

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

AIP Altona Irrigation Project AVRDC The World Vegetable Center BMP Best Management Practices CAA Centre d’Apprentage Agricole CAADP Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Program CAR Centres d’Animation Rurale CIDA Canadian International Development Agency CLA collaborating, learning, adapting COR Contracting Officer Representative CRSP Collaborative research Support Program CVC Cereals Value Chain DRA Regional Directorates of Agriculture EMMP Environmental Mitigation and Monitoring Plan ESDM environmentally sound design and management EU European Union FtF Feed the Future GOM Government of Mali IEE Initial Environmental Examination IFDC International Fertilizer Development Center IICEM Integrated Initiatives for Economic Growth in Mali INTSORMIL Sorghum, Millet and Other Grains CRSP IPR Implementation Procurement Reform IR Intermediate result KfW Kreditanstalt fur Wiederaufbau MAVEN Mali Agriculture Value Enhancement Network MCC Millennium Challenge Corporation NGO Non-government Organization PNIP-SA National Plan of Poverty Investment in the Sector of Agriculture PNISA National Agricultural Sector Investment Program PROMISAM Project to Mobilize Food Security Initiatives in Mali SOM Soil Organic Matter WAEMU West African Economic and Monetary Union USAID United States Agency for International Development

C. 1: Introduction

The USAID/Mali FtF strategy was approved in April 2011 and was designed to guide implementation of agriculture and nutrition interventions for the strategic period 2010 – 2015. The FtF strategy uses a value chain approach to increase economic opportunities and focuses development interventions on three value chains: sorghum/millet, rice, and livestock. These three value chains are key to Mali’s development and overall food security as the majority of the population relies directly upon these staple foods for their livelihood and food security. The CVC Project, of which this contract is a part, incorporates both the sorghum/millet and rice value chains. As outlined in September of 2012, the CVC Project refers to a series of activities that contribute to the promotion and sustainability of the cereals value chain. The Cereals Value Chains (CVC) award is the USAID/Mali’s central mechanism for achieving the goals and objectives of its Feed the Future (FtF) strategy for the sorghum/millet and rice value chains.

The CVC award will take a facilitative approach to value chain development to ensure that project efforts lead to sustainable partnerships and increased benefits for all actors operating within the value chains. Other awards within the USAID/Mali portfolio will also work towards the achievement of FtF outcomes, and close coordination between all implementation entities will be required

USAID/Mali SOL-688-13-000004 Page 8 of 112 pages for maximum impact. As the central mechanism to the CVC Project, the CVC award will play an important role in the coordination and integration of diverse activities to achieve clear results.

C. 2: CVC Project Goal and Purpose

The CVC award is the central component of the CVC Project and the contractor will have a leading role for coordination and value chain integration, with support from other CVC awards that center on policy reform, research, and finance. The CVC award will promote the integrated, women-empowering, and inclusive development of the sorghum/millet and rice value chains and contribute to strengthening resilience of vulnerable communities and populations. This includes key activities necessary for value chain integration and competitiveness such as production, research and technology dissemination, marketing, processing, trade, finance, capacity building and elements of policy reform. Key aspects of the implementation approach will include: capacity building across an array of business development services and agricultural production skills; strengthening of relationships among value chain actors and support services; and promoting an enabling environment necessary for long-term competitiveness.

The goal of the CVC award is inclusive and equitable agricultural sector growth through increased value chain integration and competitiveness leading to broad-based economic growth.

The purpose of the project is to increase agriculture production, productivity and incomes, by both increasing direct income to men and women farmers, as well as through various value-added income generating activities carried out by value chain actors (including:

input suppliers, farmers, traders, processors, wholesalers, buyers and exporters), as well as support services that strengthen the value chain including agricultural technology providers and financial service providers.

Also, the CVC award seeks to identify and contribute to resolving key constraints with respect to the local and international enabling policy environment, to allow systematic and long-term transformation of the agricultural sector, led by the cereals value chains.

The four key Intermediate Results to be achieved during the project include:

1) Increased agricultural production and productivity in the cereals value chain;

2) Expanded market and trade of core value chain products;

3) Increased resiliency of vulnerable communities and households;

4) Strengthened local capacities and systems.

The CVC award will also contribute to a fifth Intermediate Result:

5) Improved policy and enabling environment.

While improving the policy and enabling environment is considered important for project success, USAID/Mali will implement a separate mechanism that specifically addresses policy reform. As such, the Contractor selected for the CVC award will not be responsible for achieving Intermediate Result 5. Nonetheless, the CVC Contractor will work with client farmer groups, producer associations, input suppliers, and other private sector participants to identify policy impediments and collaborate with other mechanisms within the FtF portfolio as well as other donors in setting the policy reform agenda.

Overarching these results and corresponding to the project purpose is an integrated vision whereby strengthening the cereals value chains is achieved through the connection across and facilitation of relationships among value chain actors, support services and other key market participants, as well as addressing key policy constraints relating to these value chains, whereby the entire value chain is positioned for sustainable growth, upgrading, and value addition which brings the benefits to the target smallholder and beneficiary households.

The CVC award will contribute to achieving the goals and objectives of the USAID/Mali FtF strategy by contributing primarily to food access in terms of increased incomes and ability to purchase food; secondarily, to increased availability in terms of main season production and off-season or integrated production of more diverse and nutritious foods; and thirdly, to enhanced utilization, which includes behavior change at the household level that applies nutritional education, both knowledge and practice, to consuming increased quantities of high quality healthy foods.

The CVC Project’s (which the core CVC mechanism is the primary implementation vehicle) intended goal and associated Intermediate and Sub-intermediate Results, are summarized in the project’s Results Framework below.

USAID/Mali SOL-688-13-000004 Page 9 of 112 pages

Cereals VC Project

Results Framework

PROJECT GOAL: Inclusive agricultural sector growth through increased cereal value chain competitiveness

IR 1: Agricultural productivity in irrigated and dryland systems increased

IR 3: Resiliency of vulnerable communities & HHs increased

Sub IR 1.1

Technology development, dissemination, management and innovation enhanced

Sub IR 1.2

Access to quality inputs increased

Sub IR 2.4:

Effective aggregation of production established

Sub IR 2.5:

Access to demand-driven support services strengthened

Sub IR 2.3:

Post-harvest handling and processing improved

Sub IR 2.7:

Regional trade constraints removed

Sub IR 1.3

Economically viable Irrigation systems expanded

Sub IR 2.2:

Sustainable farm to market linkages, access strengthened

Sub IR 2.6:

Access to Market information expanded

Sub IR 1.5:

Seed and fertilizer policies & procedures improved

IR 4: Cross-Cutting: Local capacities and systems strengthened

Sub IR 4.1 Local organizations’ capacity to receive USAID funding developed

Sub IR 3.2

Drought resilient cropping systems adopted at scale

Sub IR 4.3 Capacity of financial service providers strengthened

Sub IR 3.4 Community literacy, numeracy and nutrition practices improved

Sub IR 1.4

Soil and water management techniques improved

Sub IR 1.6:

Property rights strengthened

Sub IR 2.1:

Market-driven, value-added products introduced

IR 2: Markets and trade expanded

Sub IR 3.1 Income streams diversified & asset building strategies employed

Sub IR 4.2

Capacity of producer groups and water-user associations improved

Sub IR 3.3 Appropriate food storage facilities available

Sub IR 4.4 Capacity of extension and advisor service providers strengthened

Sub IR 4.5 Local capacity to support continued learning enhanced

IR 5: Cross-Cutting: Policy and enabling environment improved

Sub IR 5.1 Local capacity of universities, think tanks and civil society increased

Sub IR 5.2 Agricultural Policy environment Improved

USAID/Mali SOL-688-13-000004 Page 10 of 112 pages

C. 3: Relationship to FtF Strategy, Resilience Strategy, Mali’s Investment Plan for Agriculture, and Other Donor Programs

C. 3.1: Feed the Future Strategy

USAID/Mali’s primary focus on cereals and livestock value chains, and on improving the enabling environments within which these value chains operate, directly contributes to the FtF’s goal of sustainably reducing global poverty and hunger, most specifically through inclusive agricultural sector growth and expanding markets and trade. Increased productivity in and commercialization of the rice and sorghum/millet value chains, along with growth in private sector engagement in these value chains, attention to existing and new end-markets, and the appropriate facilitating policies, will increase availability of these important staple crops and access to these foods through positive impact on incomes of actors along the chains. The target value chains contribute to improvements in nutritional status through stabilizing food supplies, while inter- and relay cropping of vegetables and legumes within these production systems (further enabled by sustainable soil and water management practices) increases the availability of diverse and nutritious foods.

The CVC project specifically targets improved nutrition-related behaviors through support of a community-based literacy and numeracy activity, which will have embedded nutrition-related messages, contributing to the FtF goals of household and community utilization.

In line with FtF guidance on gender integration and USAID’s new policy on gender equality and women’s empowerment, the proposed strategy will:

Ensure that women, as agricultural producers, have equal access to assets, inputs, and technologies, including land and other productive natural assets, extension services, financial services, agricultural inputs, and the knowledge to enable them to participate in and obtain appropriate returns from the agricultural system.

Expand the involvement and participation of women in decision making at all levels and in all institutions (community, national, regional, global) related to policy, investment allocation, program development and implementation.

Ensure the interest of women and men are reflected, including efforts to help ensure the participation of women, and monitor and evaluate program impact on both men and women.

The CVC award will work within the FtF intervention zones in Mali. The FtF intervention zone as currently defined includes a total of 117 communes within Sikasso, Mopti, Koulikoro and two communes in Segou that encompasses the MCC Alatona Irrigation Project (AIP) sites. USAID/Mali expects to reinstate programming in Timbuktu and northern Mopti as the security situation permits.

The CVC contractor will be expected to expand or reallocate resources to these territories as the situation evolves.

The FtF communes were selected on the basis of agricultural potential, poverty and nutritional status of the population as indicated by stunting and wasting indices. Due to both agricultural potential and the tremendous need, it is expected that FtF interventions will have the greatest impact within these regions. Approximately 3.15 million people live in the FtF intervention zone, and an estimated 300,000 people will be directly affected by the FtF initiative, while approximately 1.3 million will indirectly benefit.

An important assumption is that humanitarian aid will continue to sustain critical assistance needs of the country, thereby allowing FtF interventions to focus on long-term development. The success of the FtF program will depend upon the degree to which USAID is able to support the engagement of the population in the value chain development process. This engagement will depend on the ability of the population to take risks in the hopes of higher rewards.

C. 3.2: Resilience Strategy

USAID/Mali developed a draft resilience strategy in October 2012. This strategy will be finalized by mid-2013. Its goal is to reduce the number of humanitarian caseloads, the depth of poverty and global acute malnutrition of the communities and people who are exposed to recurrent crises. The purpose of the strategy is to help these chronically vulnerable populations better withstand shocks and stresses and better and more rapidly recover from these shocks and stresses and become active participants in an inclusive economic growth. The CVC award will strive to build off the Mission's resilience strategy by ensuring that the activities are inclusive of the most vulnerable populations and build their resilience to crisis. The CVC Contractor will be asked to propose specific activities that will target the most vulnerable populations in communes identified by the resilience strategy, and will contribute to the resilience objective of reducing the humanitarian caseloads in targeted communes. The CVC Contractor will be encouraged to engage the most vulnerable through all segments of the value chain process, through specialized training and employment opportunities that support the value chain approach.

USAID/Mali SOL-688-13-000004 Page 11 of 112 pages

C. 3.3: National Plan of Priority Investment in the Sector of Agriculture of Mali 2011 – 2015.

The CVC Project is directly in line with USAID Mali’s current operating plans and priorities for agricultural investments in support of the National Plan of Poverty Investment in the Sector of Agriculture (PNIP-SA). The PNIP-SA and the CVC Project prioritize investments in sorghum/millet and rice, and they share intentions of increasing production and incomes, promoting a favorable business environment, and improving nutritional status. Both also emphasize gender and climate change as integrated issues. The PNIP-SA is the Government of Mali’s (GOM’s) bridging plan that links the previous ten-year agricultural strategy with the upcoming National Agricultural Sector Investment Programme (PNISA), scheduled for finalization in the near term. Both are informed by the Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Program (CAADP) process and highlight Mali’s shift from a project-based approach to a sector-based approach. USAID Mali’s CVC project reflects the desire to align donor programming with priorities outlined in these two high-level documents and the underlying principles of aid effectiveness outlined in the Paris Declaration.

As such, the FtF strategy accords with a government led strategy. Although the March 22, 2012 coup d’état and subsequent political instability precludes USAID/Mali from working directly with the government, the CVC Project is structured to define what is possible now and what might be possible in the future when the appropriate legal and policy determinations allow USAID to work directly with the GOM again.

C. 3.4: Other Donor Programs

A critical assumption is the continuation of donor support to Mali against the backdrop of a constitutional government. Following the coup d’état of March 22, 2012, there was widespread condemnation of the military take-over coupled with the suspension or termination of donor support. Mali remains a heavily donor supported country, and prior to the coup, had been receiving a billion dollars a year in development aid including direct government support. At present, with a transitional government in place, there remains a wide range of donor responses, from the complete resumption of international development programing to the complete termination of existing programs. As discussed below, in the aftermath of the international and Malian military intervention and elaboration of a roadmap leading to elections, more donors are re-establishing programs, including budget support. Key donors within the agriculture sector in Mali include: the European Union (EU), The Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA), the German Cooperation, the Danish, Dutch and Swiss Cooperation and others. The EU is a strong partner in the agriculture sector, providing direct budget support (suspended following the Coup of March 22), technical assistance and significant support in the rice sector through irrigation work. CIDA is active in Koulikoro, Kayes, Segou, Mopti, and Timbuktu (prior to the coup d’état), and is initiating a 5-year, 75 million dollar, partnership with the German Cooperation to support irrigation infrastructure development, as well as a 20 million dollar program for producer group strengthening and a separate 20 million dollar program for rural micro-finance.

The German Cooperation remains a donor leader in small-scale irrigation construction and rehabilitation. The Danish, Dutch and Swiss Cooperation are also active in the sector. Denmark has suspended its agriculture programs that directly support the GOM but remains active in areas that involve micro-finance and the private sector. Both the Danish and the Dutch will be redesigning some their activities following the coup of March 22.

USAID Mali, in support of the Paris Declaration, has also sought opportunities to coordinate with other donors in order to ensure an effective and united approach to development. Within the US commitment to Feed the Future made by President Obama at L’aquila, the USG is playing a leadership role to advance food security objectives, and USAID/Mali currently serves as the chair of the Agriculture and Rural Economy donor working group (until the end of calendar year 2013). USAID/Mali seeks opportunities for synergistic programming with other donors, collaboration to ensure cohesiveness and non-duplication of effort, economies of scale and efficiency in use of public and private resources. A key objective of collaboration is to leverage shared investments of international donors in the targeted value chains, rather than risk over-subsidization or contradictions in market development strategies, a particular threat to success in value chain development approaches.

In addition to USAID/Mali’s leadership role in the Agriculture donor working group, USAID/Mali is also planning to partner with KfW (the German development bank) to build small-scale irrigation infrastructure in the Sikasso region. Through this partnership, USAID will fund an existing infrastructure program managed by KfW. A similar relation exists between CIDA and KfW, and an agreement between the EU and KfW is currently in development. CIDA funds are being used to support infrastructure in the Koulikoro, Mopti and Timbuktu regions, therefore, it has been proposed that USAID funds will support infrastructure development in Sikasso, and associated technical assistance in operating, managing and maintaining these systems. The KfW model focuses heavily on the construction of irrigation infrastructure and the establishment and training of the producer groups that will manage the infrastructure. USAID takes a broader approach to include value chain development and support services, and therefore, may find opportunities to complement KfW construction activities by linking target communities with additional value chain activities. At present the planned roll out of this partnership is uncertain due to policy restrictions on new programming on the side of both the German and US development agencies. For this reason, 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. After the first two years the CVC Contractor will be expected to work with KfW to identify and partner with local villages and build upon the capacity and potential of the villages to engage in the cereals value chain as a result of these infrastructure investments.

USAID/Mali SOL-688-13-000004 Page 12 of 112 pages

C. 4: Rice and Sorghum/Millet Value Chains: Opportunities and Constraints

While Mali faces many agricultural production challenges, it also, nonetheless, possesses certain comparative advantages which enable it to be the largest agricultural producer of the Sahelian region, and second only to Nigeria in all of West Africa. Large areas suitable for dry land agriculture make Mali a leading producer of cereal grains, and the Niger River delta provides rich potential for irrigated agriculture. Mali preceded most of its neighbors with economic reforms in the 1980s and 90s, and with the further efforts of opening trade throughout the region, Malian farmers and the private sector have taken advantage of major new outlets that are now available for Malian agricultural products leading to an improved performance of the agricultural sector, which currently accounts for approximately 35% of overall GDP.

Driving much of the recent agricultural sector growth has been the rice sector which accounts for 12% of agricultural GDP. This growth is mostly the result of the recent rise in world prices, but is also due to expanded public sector investments in large-scale irrigation infrastructure, increased farmer adoption of new technologies, and the withdrawal of the government from rice marketing and processing. There has been a marked increase in urban demand, particularly for locally produced rice, and a nascent, but expanding, processing sector responding to a higher-value market segment, which currently has a 20% price differential over paddy.

There remains even greater potential for growth through expansion of production and value addition. There are vast areas of suitable land for rice production under different production systems, and in the bas-fonds production system in Sikasso alone, there is the potential for increases in production of some 900,000 tons covering an additional 300,000 hectares that could affect the livelihoods of 170,000 rural households.

Mali has the potential to be able to increase overall rice production based on continued strong demand both domestically and in the region and could eventually become a net rice exporter within the life of the FtF strategy. With the growth in demand, rice production will also expand in the rain-fed areas of the country offering additional production and income growth opportunities for more farming populations outside the main large-scale irrigated zones, particularly for women. Notwithstanding the growth of the rice sector over recent years, expanding irrigation infrastructure through private investments is constrained by lack of access to long-term financing.

The other major constraints facing the sector include inefficient water management in the large irrigated areas, confusing trade policies with tariff exonerations for rice imports and export restrictions when there is fear of domestic production shortfalls, insecure land tenure rights in the large irrigated systems, limited adoption of improved technologies and practices, lack of appropriate scale processing technologies, unavailability of credit for processors and other agro-entrepreneurs, and overall lack of value addition investments on the part of the private sector.

Millet and sorghum, grown on over 2.0 million hectares, are the most widely cultivated and consumed commodities in Mali. Most production of millet and sorghum is by low-income farmers who are not well integrated into markets and usually must cope with the vagaries of rainfall, weathered soils and drastic price fluctuations throughout the year. Traditionally, these crops have not benefited from the same degree of research, extension, and infrastructure more commonly found in the cotton and rice zones, yet remain the mainstay of the farming systems and are grown primarily for home consumption. With the periodic fluxes in the cotton sector, however, there are signs that farmers are actively looking for crops like sorghum to be an additional cash crop. Whereas a strong price incentive, more productive resource base, and the availability of inputs have favorably affected the rice sector, millet and sorghum systems are characterized by low productivity with most farmers using traditional methods of production with limited availability and use of modern inputs. Average millet and sorghum yields range from 400-1000 kg./ha., leaving little, if any, surplus. As a result, millet and sorghum exhibit more modest production trends. Most increases in production in recent years have been the result of expanded areas being cultivated in the face of growing population pressures, which will prove unsustainable if productivity per land area cannot be increased.

Nonetheless, progress has been achieved with millet and sorghum by increasing productivity through the development of improved varieties, greater use of fertilizers, and more effective soil and water management practices. The latter have shown to increase rainfall-use efficiency by reducing run-off (which can be as high as 50%) and increasing the capacity of Mali’s weathered soils to use fertilizer more efficiently. The INTSORMIL Collaborative Research Support Program (CRSP) reports that by using “Best Management Practices” (BMP), farmers have been able to achieve millet yields of two tons per hectare and sorghum yields over 3 tons per hectare. Included in the BMP would be the use of fertilizer and improved seeds in tandem with agricultural technologies and systems that trap rainfall and get it into the soil instead of running off and by increasing soil organic matter content.

While the value-added opportunities for millet/sorghum will be more modest than those of rice, they exist nonetheless, and along with increased productivity, offer an important means of achieving food security, particularly among vulnerable households. Growth in marketed volumes has increased more rapidly than production in recent years driven by rapid urbanization and increased cross-border trade, and millet/sorghum now account for 3.6 million tons of staple foods marketed in West Africa, third to rice (5.7 million tons) and wheat 4.1 million tons). Farmers and farmer organizations are increasingly showing interest in increasing marketable share through the development of higher quality production, which reaches the market through a network of wholesalers, traders, retailers, and other agents providing various services such as transport and storage. The grain marketing is structured by a number of collectors in the production zones linked to a small number of wholesalers who drive the system. INTSORMIL data shows that producer groups that delivered clean grain to the market and monitored market prices were able to obtain prices of 31-40% higher from the value added.

USAID/Mali SOL-688-13-000004 Page 13 of 112 pages

As with rice, there is a growing millet/sorghum processing sector that is emerging that offers the potential to deliver clean processed flour, couscous and other amalgamated products, and has striven to develop additional markets including the use of sorghum flour as a substitute for 10-15% of the wheat used in many baked products. In addition, INTSORMIL researchers have been promoting sorghum as a substitute for maize as feed in the growing poultry industry. They note that sorghum is competitive when its price is 95% that of maize. Calculating the costs and benefits from investments in improved seed and fertilizers and in storing the crop until prices are higher, they report that net returns to millet farmers ranged between 50-100% in 2010.

Agricultural markets for most commodities, in general, have been characterized by a heritage of mutual distrust between farmers and traders that inhibits cooperation and market integration. In such a context, the development of stronger, better-coordinated vertical market linkages face many obstacles. State involvement in agricultural marketing operations has evolved over the years from complete control, thought by many as a means for ensuring adequate national food stocks, to the current situation with totally liberalized markets for most products. However, over the years, development programs have focused efforts to increase production through public agencies and on building the capacity of cooperatives and other farmer organizations to be the primary actors in the marketing chain for their products with support of government programs often subsidizing many essential operations such as inputs supply, warehousing, and transport. This approach neglected the importance of the network of private traders, assemblers, wholesalers, and retailers who are better placed to connect production zones to major sources of demand and served as a disincentive for promoting private investments in marketing support activities, services, and infrastructure. Also, the performance of farmer organizations in becoming effective marketing agents and performing retail functions has, for the most part, been a failure. There remains little interaction and coordination between value chain actors to increase volumes and efficiency of production and marketing systems, and the vertical linkages in the value chain are quite weak. As a result, value chain development for the major crops in Mali remains at a very nascent level.

Cereal production is also hampered by gender-based constraints concerning access to assets and traditional beliefs and practices. In general, women have little or no access to or control over the land which is used to grow cereals or the income from the sale of cereals, which limits their incentives to improve productivity. Sorghum and millet production is generally the responsibility of the head of household head, typically a man, with women and youth in the household providing labor in the production process, without control over the harvest and its disposition, although this varies across the country. Women are also, generally, limited in their ability to participate in training sessions because of their gendered-based responsibilities of caring for their children and their households.

Women are limited in their participation in commercial agriculture because of social beliefs that men, as heads of households, are expected to control household resources.

Current USAID support to both value chains has demonstrated improved overall value chain performance when price incentives emanating from the market are apparent to farmers and farmer organizations, as well as key actors throughout the core value chain and supporting service markets. This certainly has been the case for rice and becoming more evident with respect to millet/sorghum.

Also, the Mission’s investments to date have demonstrated the importance of transforming producer organizations into true business partners with the other actors in the value chains, and has shown the importance of high-quality, on-the-job enterprise management training as a necessary input for building the capacity of these organizations to be active stakeholders in the value chain.

A major element of public support to the targeted value chains and overall agricultural sector in Mali is an input subsidy program implemented since 2008/09. The input subsidy program began with the “Initiative Riz,” a major effort on the part of the government to promote rice production as an attempt to keep the price of domestically produced rice low. The subsidy program has been extended since to cover inputs for most crops. Fertilizer is the main component of the subsidy, but seeds, pesticides and agricultural equipment are also now included. The subsidy program, while improving rice yields in the short term, has been criticized for not being managed efficiently with often late deliveries by suppliers and late repayments by farmers, which in effect serves as a disincentive for the growth of private sector input suppliers in entering the market. Additionally, the overall cost to the Malian government is highly burdensome and a major drain on the national public budget. Also, the subsidy program takes away the incentive for farmers to better use adaptive research for increasing the use of soil fertility practices in order to achieve improved efficiencies for all inputs. There are other policy constraints affecting Mali’s agricultural sector which need to be addressed to maximize the opportunities to strengthen the cereals value chain. . The harmonization of seed policy with regional policies will make improved seed more easily accessible. Much remains to be achieved in improving trade policies across the region through procedural reforms, harmonizing grades and standards consistent with international agreements, and promoting investments in trade infrastructure such as roads, heavy transport and warehousing. Increasing private sector investments in the agricultural sector will require easier access to capital, and a commitment on the part of the GOM to implement transparent and predictable trade policies which increase incentives for investments.

The challenge under FtF will be to build on the body of experiences gained in recent years, most notably through the USAID funded Integrated Initiatives for Economic Growth in Mali (IICEM) program, to promote growth of the sorghum/millet and rice value chains by responding to end market demands and investment opportunities through improving value chain vertical integration and increasing farmers’ access and participation in markets. The CVC project seeks to strengthen the market system that encompasses these chains, including the core value chain actors, support services, and national and regional enabling environments. As such, the project will seek key leverage points throughout the system that sustainably build human and institutional capacity among producer groups, new and emerging market intermediaries, as well as strengthening relationships throughout the market system within which they function, in order to close essential gaps in the value chain and achieve long-term competitiveness and income generation. By building upon

USAID/Mali SOL-688-13-000004 Page 14 of 112 pages previous USAID investment in Mali’s agricultural sector, and the lessons learned and momentum gains from work targeting these specific value chains, the CVC project has the potential to achieve systemic and sustainable change. Anticipated results include greater market integration, increased private investment, increased productivity, improved value chain competitiveness, improved food availability, enhanced resilience and increased farm revenues and food security.

C. 5: Detailed Work Requirements

C. 5.1 Introduction

The contract includes the following four work requirements:

1. Increase agricultural productivity in irrigated and dryland systems in the cereals value chain

2. Expand markets and trade of core value chain products

3. Increase resiliency of vulnerable communities and households

4. Strengthen local capacities and systems

Although the contractor will not be directly responsible for improving policy and enabling environment it will be required to substantially work toward this objective with client farmer groups, producer associations, input suppliers, and other private sector participants to identify policy impediments and collaborate with other mechanisms within the FtF portfolio as well as other donors in setting the policy reform agenda.

C. 5.2. Background

In March 2012, elements of the Malian military, unhappy with the government’s alleged mishandling of the January 2012 Turaeg-led rebellions in northern Mali, orchestrated a successful coup d’état against the president and suspended the country’s constitution.

Taking advantage of a weakened military and power vacuum created by the coup, the northern rebellion gained momentum. By early April 2012 rebels and extremists gained control of the three major northern cities of Gao, Kidal and Timbuktu.

At the request of the interim Malian president, France with the help of African and Malian forces was asked to intervene militarily in mid-January 2013. Within weeks, this military intervention significantly altered both the security and political landscape of the country. The extension of Malian government authority in key cities of the north and the Malian government’s elaboration and adaptation of a roadmap which leads to new presidential and legislative elections has changed the political backdrop affecting development cooperation. The adoption of the Malian roadmap for the transition paved the way for Mali’s European partners to resume development assistance including budget support aimed at strengthening fragile states. In accordance with U.S. legal and policy restrictions the U.S.