J.31 Answers and Questions Document (SBU) 8.27.21.pdf

Pag. 1 of 35

ATTACHMENT J.31

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS DOCUMENT

PROCUREMENT SENSITIVE INFORMATION

Questions and Answers to Solicitation 72052221R00003 - Sembrando

Esperanza

General Questions

1. We’ve received the below link and was wondering if IOM Honduras is eligible to apply for the program. SAM.gov The description does not include inter-governmental organization, hence the need to reconfirm. Kindly let us know.

A: This solicitation is available to U.S. or non-U.S., non-profit or for-profit organizations only. Inter-governmental organizations are not eligible.

Section B

2. Can USAID/Honduras kindly confirm that the overall award is $37.8 million, but the first Task Order is for between $10.3-15.3 million, presumably with the option for subsequent task orders?

A: That is correct. The estimated overall award is $37.8 million and the first Task Order is for between $10.3-15.3 million. We anticipate issuing subsequent task orders.

3. Could USAID/Honduras please confirm that the $20 million leverage requirement is in addition to the $37.8 million overall award amount?

A: Yes, we confirm the $20 million leverage (private and public) requirement is in addition to the $37.8 million overall estimated ceiling amount of the IDIQ.

4. RFP - B.7 Labor: In the education/experience table under the section titled minimum qualifications, the Government allows for an experience trade off in lieu of a degree. To confirm, for the senior level designation, if a candidate had no formal degree but possessed 20 years of relevant work experience, then the candidate would meet that requirement. Is that correct?

https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fsam.gov%2Fopp%2Fef14daa19eac4a7296a4ef7494d1cf98%2Fview&data=04%7C01%7CPWEERAKOON%40iom.int%7Ced6501eb5e3c4555ce2608d95088c388%7C1588262d23fb43b4bd6ebce49c8e6186%7C1%7C0%7C637629370595459611%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=XHU3t7rcjyVHSXceIvrrsGw8B0aTTN7IEgRW5IAbJMU%3D&reserved=0

Pag. 2 of 35

A: Note that the minimum qualifications and years of relevant experience for candidates without a formal degree in Section B.7 (e) have been revised.

5. B.7.d: Unburdened Daily Rates, “Note 2: The Unburdened Ceiling Daily Rates apply to all labor (the prime contractor, subcontractor, TCNs, CCN’s, and consultant salaries). CCN and TCN labor are also governed by the local compensation plan limitations as further provided in note 3 below.” The inclusion of “consultant salaries” who are NOT provided a “salary”, nor any other employee benefits, in the CDR categories is inappropriate. We request that the categories be expanded to include separate consultant categories.

A: The CDRs will not be expanded to include separate consultant categories.

Note No.2 has been revised to reflect the word “rates” instead of “salaries”.

6. Section B.7.d.2, page 13: The RFP states, ”Of note, though not described in the Definition of labor categories, administrative staff and other specialists may be included in individual task orders.” Page 13 also has a table with five labor category groupings with Senior and Mid-levels, which correspond to the key personnel positions for Task Order No. 1. In regard to this:

a. Would USAID please confirm that Offerors are not required to map other proposed positions to those labor categories?

A: Please map out all the required positions to accomplish the objectives of the respective Task Order.

The positions included in the IDIQ are those considered as key personnel.

b. Would USAID please confirm that Offerors are not required to propose CDRs for labor categories beyond those in the table?

A: We confirm that USAID will only require those CDRs listed in the table on page 13 to provide more flexibility under task orders.

c. If USAID requires CDRs beyond those listed in the table on page 13, will USAID please confirm that Offerors may group positions into labor categories of their choosing, i.e., USAID does not require CDRs for each individual position?

A: USAID will only require those CDRs listed in the table on page 13 to provide more flexibility under task orders.

Pag. 3 of 35

7. In Section B.7 (pp. 15-16), in the Minimum Qualifications chart, it appears that both Mid and Senior level staff have the same number of required years of experience if they have a JD/ABD and if they have a BS/BA. If a candidate has a JD and 10 years of experience, do they qualify as Mid or Senior? If a candidate has a BS/BA and 15 years of experience, do they qualify as Mid or Senior?

A: Table under Section B.7 (e) - Minimum Qualifications, the years of experience for Mid and Senior level staff have been revised.

8. Section B.7.e, pages 15–16: The RFP lists the minimum requirements for Senior and Mid-level labor categories. The minimum requirements for both levels of personnel are much higher than the minimum qualifications for each key personnel position as listed in Section F.6.1 on pages 203–205. In addition, there are a few inconsistencies in the table, e.g., the education and experience requirements are the same for both senior and mid-level personnel with a JD/ABD or BS/BA. Would USAID consider adjusting the minimum requirements for Senior to align with those for the key personnel positions in Section F.6.1 and reducing the mid-level requirements accordingly?

A: Please refer to the answer on Question No.7. Please propose key personnel based on the minimum requirements described in Section F.6.1 Key Personnel Qualifications (pag.206).

Section C

9. Section C: The RFP has several expected outcomes (reduction of risk for irregular migration, improvement in collective efficacy, improvement in performance index of prevention networks, improvement in capacity of youth organizations), which imply the use of standard tools or indices for measurement.

Does USAID have preferred tools or approaches that should be used to measure these outcomes?

A: Yes, USAID prefers the use of adaptive management approaches for data collection, collaborating, learning, decision-making, and adjusting programmatic implementation. Additionally, USAID is launching a new performance data collection platform named Development Information Solution (DIS). Potential implementers would need to continue reporting their outcome and output indicators through the usual reports and would be enabled to input data into this new platform.

Pag. 4 of 35

10. Section C.6: The RFP contains several expected outcomes expressed as percent change per year. For example, the Activity Goal (page 24) presents an expected outcome of “30 percent reduction of risk for irregular migration per year in targeted areas of high violence and high out-migration. Similarly, Objective 1 (page 27) contains “20 percent annual improvement” and Objective 3 (page 30) contains “At a minimum, 30 percent annual improvement…”. Can USAID please specify the following:

a. These changes are percent and not percentage point;

A: The improvement changes represent percentages. E.g., if the risk for irregular migration per year in a target area is 70 percent, then a 30 percent reduction implies a change from 70 to 49 percent (a 21 percentage point reduction). In other words, the changes are in percent.

b. USAID will allow offerors to propose alternate metrics—such as a numerical target rather than percent—which can be properly measured using a percent change; and

A: Yes, this could be discussed when approving the respective Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning Plan; however, it is important that the offerer propose impact and outcome indicators and not output indicators.

c. USAID could reevaluate the way these outcomes should be assessed, given that in using standard tools (for example, a scale that ranges from 0 to 100) at baseline and over the life of the activity, it is not possible to have 20 or 30 percent change every year for five years, as the scale of the tool will not allow it.

A: These yearly outcomes will be discussed at the Task Order level during the approval of the respective Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning Plan.

11. Section C.6, page 25, suggests possible police engagement and direct assistance to law enforcement. However, Section H.26, page 74, incorporates AIDAR 752.225-70, which under b) (3) lists “Commodities and services for support of police and other law enforcement activities” as ineligible goods and services. Does USAID envision engaging police and strengthening relational policing interventions as part of the scope of this contract? If so, does USAID have an authorization in place, or envision providing one for the contractor to provide direct assistance to police, such as community policing training? Finally, will USAID grant a deviation to AIDAR 752.225-70 to allow the contractor to be reimbursed for costs associated with these efforts?

Pag. 5 of 35

A: Yes, engagement and strengthening of the national police is part of the scope of this IDIQ. USAID/Honduras will approve a Notwithstanding Authority for the Implementation of Police Assistance, Prison, and Law Enforcement Forces that will cover task orders issued under this IDIQ.

12. In section C.6 on p. 27, the RFP states “an estimated amount of $20 million (cash or in-kind) is desired as an external investment from traditional and non-traditional partners in support of the IDIQ; a portion of this external investment may be facilitated as Grants under Contract as applicable.” Could USAID/Honduras confirm if cost share, leverage, and/or other blended finance or impact investment approaches will be acceptable to facilitate this external contribution?

A: Leverage implies the mobilization of resources from the private and public sectors (cash or in-kind). USAID will accept cost share, leverage, and/or other blended finance or impact investment approaches.

13. Page 31, “The Contractor will develop a Local Capacity Development Work Plan which will detail the tailored mix of technical assistance, training, grants, and material inputs that will support the IDIQ results." Is this in addition to the AWPs?

A: No, the Annual Work Plan under each Task Order will contain a section about local capacity development. See Section C.7 Guiding Principles.

14. Section C.8, Grants Under Contract, states on page 32, “Said grant fund will be called the ‘Partnership & Innovation Fund’ and must amount to 25% of the total estimated cost of the award.” Similar language is included in Section C.6 on page 184 of Attachment J.1, Task Order No. 1 – Sembrando Esperanza. Could USAID please confirm that this requirement only applies to the overall IDIQ and not at the task order level? Given that Task Order No. 1 will only implement a limited number of interventions, we respectfully ask that offerors present a cost proposal for this task order that is below the 25% threshold but sufficient to meet Task Order No. 1’s objectives.

A: The requirement for a 25% GUC component is authorized in the IDIQ and will apply at the task order level, including Task Order No. 1. Therefore offerors must include a GUC component that amount to 25% of the total estimated cost of Task Order 1. GUCs are a key element of the IDIQ to support human security strategies, interventions, and service delivery systems. We have added clarifying

Pag. 6 of 35 language in Sections C.8 and L.8 (VIII) of the IDIQ and Section C.6 of Attachment J.1.

15. Section C.8 of the IDIQ (p. 32) states that $80,000 of the Grants under Contracts fund will be made available through a Rapid Response Mechanism throughout the life of the IDIQ. Can USAID please clarify how much of this $80,000 should be programmed under Task Order No. 1?

A: All $80,000 should be allocated within Task Order No. 1.

16. In Section C.8, page 32, the RFP states that grants under contract (GUCs) must amount to 25% of the total estimated cost of the award. In Section L.8, Part 4, VIII, page 163, The states, “The amount for Grants Under Contracts for this activity will not exceed 25 percent of the total ceiling amount of the IDIQ during the life of the program.” Could USAID please confirm that an Offeror may propose an amount for GUCs that aligns with its technical approach for each Task Order, as long as the cumulative value does not exceed 25 percent of the total ceiling amount of the IDIQ over the life of the program?

A: GUCs must amount to 25% of each Task Order. We have amended Sections C.8, page 32, and L.8, page 165 as stated in question 14.

17. Page 35, Internship program. Are these interns expected to work for the implementer or consortium partners? Or both?

A: Interns are expected to work for both the IDIQ implementer and consortium partners. Section C.12 has been amended.

18. Pg. 35, Section C.12, “The contractor will be asked to develop a paid internship program under separate task order(s).” Is the contractor expected to price the internship program as part of Task Order 1? Or acknowledge its role on subsequent task orders?

A: The internship program is expected to be priced in subsequent task orders, not as an item of Task Order 1.

19. RFP - C.2 Description: “USAID investments will expand upon the best practices and lessons learned from the crime and violence prevention programming in Honduras...” Can USAID please list those programs and performing

Pag. 7 of 35 contractors/NGOs in Honduras that it wishes the incoming Contractor to build upon?

A: Some key activities include, Proponte Mas, GENESIS, Asegurando La Educación, Honduras Local Governance, etc. All previous and current USAID/Honduras’ activities upload their progress reports in USAID’s Development Experience Clearinghouse (DEC) at https://dec.usaid.gov/dec/home/Default.aspx

20. RFP - C.2 Description: “USAID/Honduras envisions that this IDIQ will capitalize on previous and current USAID investments for crime and violence prevention..”

Can USAID please list those investments/programs and performing contractors/NGOs in Honduras that it wishes the incoming Contractor to build upon?

A: Please refer to the answer on Question No.19.

21. RFP - C.2 Description: “A key feature of the IDIQ will be intensive, strategic collaboration and partnerships with and among civil society, local community stakeholders, Government of Honduras (GOH) counterparts, academia, private sector, and other USAID-funded activities.” For those contractors/organizations that are implementing the other USAID-funded activities, will that present a conflict of interest? Will those contractors/organizations be ineligible to bid on the Sembrando Esperanza?

A: Contractors/organizations that are implementing other USAID-funded activities may not present a conflict of interest (COI). Potential Offerors must ensure they comply with the requirements for Organizational and Consultant Conflicts of Interest in FAR Subpart 9.5 and AIDAR Subpart 709.5. The CO will be responsible for identifying and evaluating potential organizational COIs as early as possible; and avoiding, neutralizing, or mitigating significant potential conflicts before contract award.

22. Please provide clarification on reconciling the larger impact evaluation of the program and the request to robustly evaluate five pilots under Objective 2 (page 27). What are the expectations for the external evaluators’ influence on Objective 2 pilot evaluations?

A: The pilot projects will be developed in close collaboration with the IDIQ’s COR. Pilot projects may be subject to the external impact evaluation. The impact https://dec.usaid.gov/dec/home/Default.aspx

Pag. 8 of 35 evaluation will be managed directly by the DRG Learning Division in Washington.

Following their standard practice, this means that the Learning Division will manage the contracts for this work, hiring an independent principal investigator from the academic community to lead the design and implementation of the evaluation. The evaluation questions and precise methodology will be developed in collaboration with the IDIQ COR and USAID/Honduras’ MEL Specialist. The evaluation design will be finalized in consultation with the IDIQ contractor and will align with the annual work plan to ensure that the implementation timing and geographic targeting for the components under evaluation are conducive to rigorous impact evaluation methodology, particularly as needed to ensure validity.

23. We kindly request that all documents related to the piloting of new risk assessment tools are made public to all applicants. A powerpoint presentation does not provide sufficient information about the nature of the tool, the scales utilized, and the explanations of methodological approaches. This places other applicants at a disadvantage.

A: Please browse the following links/attachments included in the RFP: PM Impact Evaluation (RFP, attachment J.27) and IMC (RFP, attachment J.28). USAID prefers to be less prescriptive about these new proposed risk assessment tools.

However, there is public information about the Risk Behavior Measurement Instrument (IMC by its Spanish acronym) developed and implemented by the Proponte Mas activity in Honduras. The National Autonomous University of Honduras and Casa Alianza were legacy partners of Proponte Mas and are currently administering this tool.

24. Could USAID/Honduras please confirm that this $20 million leverage requirement may shared across all task orders issued over the period of the IDIQ?

A: Yes, the expectation is that all task orders will contribute to this leverage target over the period of the IDIQ.

25. Could USAID/Honduras please clarify the relationship between the Draft Knowledge Management and Organizational Development Plan listed as an annex under section L.7.a and the Knowledge Management Strategy of no more than 25 pages included in Attachment J.1 section C.4 on p. 183? Are these expected to be the same document and should the Draft Knowledge Management and Organizational Development Plan follow the guidance given for the Knowledge Management Strategy?

https://sam.gov/api/prod/opps/v3/opportunities/resources/files/6c39a0e10b4c4254bd3bc753749b17d3/download?&token= https://sam.gov/api/prod/opps/v3/opportunities/resources/files/6c39a0e10b4c4254bd3bc753749b17d3/download?&token= https://sam.gov/api/prod/opps/v3/opportunities/resources/files/395668f6f3fe45b2b99016ac0659aa66/download?&token=

Pag. 9 of 35

A: These documents are related, the Draft Knowledge Management and Organizational Development Plan should be submitted as part of your technical proposal and the Knowledge Management Strategy is a milestone document of TO No.1. The documents are closely related and the guidance provided within the SOW of TO No.1 can support the development of the Draft Knowledge Management and Organizational Development Plan.

Section H

26. Section H.2.1.a.1, page 56: The RFP states, “If, during contract performance, the contractor proposes salary or wages for a new individual(s) that exceeds TBD% ceiling of the individual’s current salary or wage or the highest rate of annual salary or wage received during any full year of the proceeding three (3) years, the Cognizant Officer’s approval is required.” The latest version of the Contractor Biographical Data Sheet – USAID Form 1420-17, as required in Section L.8, Part 4, I on pages 161–162, does not require potential employees or consultants to disclose their salary or consultant rate history. Could USAID please confirm that Offerors should use market data rather than salary or rate history in determining proposed salaries for this activity, including consultant rates, and remove all language related to using salary or rate history to establish proposed salaries and rates?

A: Yes, confirmed. Offeror should use market data rather than salary or rate history. Salary ranges for ALL the professional positions will be established based on the market value, on duties and responsibilities of the position, in the country and locality of contract performance. Section H.2.1 (a) has been amended to correct this wording.

27. Page 56, H.2.1 ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR PERSONNEL COMPENSATION (Applicable to Cost-Reimbursement task orders only) (a) Limitations: (1) If, during contract performance, the contractor proposes salary or wages for a new individual(s) that exceeds TBD% ceiling of the individual’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, the Cognizant Contracting Officer’s approval is required. Please note that in October 2019, USAID officially changed its approach to establishing compensation: as implementers are required to propose market-based salaries based on established market driven data and not individual salary history. As such, we kindly request the removal H.2.1 (a)(1).

Pag. 10 of 35

A: Please refer to answer on Question No.26

28. Would USAID please consider removing paragraph H.2.1(a)(1), since the determination for requesting CO salary approval is tied to the rate history of the candidate? Since the SF 1420 currently in use does not request salary history, and removal of this requirement was intended to ensure that candidates are paid according to market rates rather than salary history, the successful awardee would be unable to share this information with USAID or to use salary history as a basis for negotiating a proposed rate.

A: Please refer to answer on Question No.26

29. The DBA rates table in Section H.4.A (p. 58) suggests the project will be for a Base Period and Option Years, but Section F.2 (p. 39) states the period of performance will be seven (7) years from the effective date of the award. Could USAID confirm this Activity will not have a Base Period with Option Years?

A: The option periods under Section H.4 apply to the contract between USAID and the DBA contractor, not to the IDIQ to be awarded as a result of this Solicitation.

30. Section H.12, page 66, indicates that all grants issued under the contract must be to nongovernmental organizations. However, the regulations allow contractors to execute solely in-kind grants to government entities. Could USAID please confirm that solely in-kind grants to government entities will be allowed under this contract, pursuant to ADS 302.3.4.13?

A: We confirm that GUCs to partner government entities may be authorized under the IDIQ and any of its task orders, pursuant to USAID Policy (ADS 302.3.4.13). Such GUCs may be allowed in exceptional circumstances and must have prior USAID approval. Section H.12 has been revised accordingly.

31. Can USAID please confirm that the grants manual referenced in Section H.12 on page 66 is the same grants manual required in Attachment J.1, Section F.5 on page 196?

A: Yes, the grants manual referenced in Section H.12 on page 66 is the same grants manual required in Attachment J.1, Section F.5 on page 196.

Pag. 11 of 35

32. Page 74, H.26 752.225-70 SOURCE AND NATIONALITY REQUIREMENTS (FEB 2012), “The authorized source for procurement is Geographic Code 937 unless otherwise specified in the schedule of this contract." H.3 (page 57), Geo code is 935. Please confirm 935 is the approved code.

A: The authorized Geographic code for this contract will be 937. Section H.3 (pg.57) has been amended as appropriate.

33. Could USAID/Honduras please provide information on the process to obtain a notwithstanding authority waiver for Section 660 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 to enable and guide engagement with the Honduran National Police? If such a waiver has been obtained, could USAID/Honduras please provide details on the types of engagements and interventions permitted, and the restrictions and limitations governing these?

A: USAID/Honduras will obtain a notwithstanding authority waiver for Section 660 of the FAA of 1961 which will allow for work with the Honduran National Police under the resulting contract. Engagement with the National Police may include advising, communication campaigns, community outreach activities like fairs and others, IT hardware, etc.

Section I

34. Pg. 114 I-14(a) discusses tax exemption in Ukraine. Should this instead reference Honduras?

A: That is correct, tax exemption is related to Honduras. This section has been corrected in the RFP.

Section J

35. The link to Attachment J.2 (p. 121) is inaccessible to non-USG personnel. Could USAID please make it publicly available?

A: Attachment J.2 is being included as an excel attachment. This checklist does not need to be submitted with the proposal and serves as a tool only.

36. Could USAID please issue Attachment J.2 Proposal Preparation Checklist as an unrestricted PDF or Word file? The link provided on p. 121 of the RFP requires a USAID-issued PIV/PIV-A card or token to access the file.

Pag. 12 of 35

A: Please refer to answer on Question No.35,

37. Can USAID please reshare Attachment J.2 Proposal Preparation Checklist? The current link is not accessible for those outside USAID and it is also not available for download off Sam.gov.

A: Please refer to the answer on Question No.35.

38. Section J, page 121: The links for both Attachments J.2 (Proposal Checklist) and J.12 (Key Individual Certifications for Narcotics), are not accessible. Will USAID please share the documents with bidders?

A: For Attachment J.2 please refer to the answer on Question No.35. The link provided for Attachment J.12 appears to be working properly, however we are including Attachment J.12 as a PDF file.

39. J.3 - Budget Template: Line 52, In—Country Travel, considering that there are 25+ municipalities which will be the beneficiaries of this Program, but the level of focus for each individual municipality is to be determined by USAID, we recommend a plug number for line 52 in order to normalize pricing across all Offerors.

A: For In-Country travel (line 42) - Offerors may use an approximate of $35,000 per year.

40. J.3 - Budget Template: What is the expectation by USAID the number of vehicles to be procured under this Program?

A: The number of vehicles is tied to each offeror’s proposal for each task order.

41. J.3 - Budget Template: Line 81, Security Services, is this line item for completion of the security situation plan? Or for physical security services for contractor staff? Or is to be priced for something else such as security of office and/or housing?

A: This will depend on how each offeror allocates their costs based on their own accounting standards and practices. Offerors may insert more categories under the Other Direct Costs (ODC) budget line item in case the line needed is not listed. Please refer to Section F.5.11 - Security Situation Plan (pag.199).

Pag. 13 of 35

42. J.3 - Budget Template: Line 99, Participant Training, is this line item for training of contractor staff either initial or part of continuous education? Or is this training to be given to partner country officials/stakeholders?

A: The Line 99, Participant Training, is specifically related to the training of beneficiaries/stakeholders.

43. Attachment J.10, Cost/Price Matrix, requires offerors to include a number of person-days per labor category. Since a scope of work for the matrix is not defined, the number of person-days per labor category may vary widely by offeror. If the Cost/Price Matrix remains applicable, could USAID please provide this information so that offerors can submit cost proposals based on the same assumptions?

https://pages.usaid.gov/system/files/idiq_template_ombudsman_03162021.docx

A: We have decided to remove the cost/price matrix (Attachment J.10) and will conduct the cost analysis of proposals based on the detailed budget for TO1.

Offerors must use the Budget Template in Attachment J.3 and disregard Attachment J.10.

44. In Attachment J.10, the Cost/Price Matrix, could USAID please clarify the position title for each Category? There are 6 Categories but only 5 positions listed in the CDR Table on page 13 of the RFP.

A: Please refer to the answer on Question No.43.

45. In Attachment J.10, the Cost/Price Matrix, there is a note that says, “In coordination with the technical office, the CO will provide most likely level mid range pay.” Could USAID please provide plug figures for the number of person-days, Local Hired Personnel Labor person-days and rate, and Fringe Benefits on Local-Hires rate?

46. In Attachment J.10, Section B “Fringe Benefits” would USAID please confirm that the second subcategory should read “Fringe Benefits on LT Field-Based US Expatriate Personnel”?

Pag. 14 of 35

47. In Attachment J.10, Section B “Fringe Benefits”, would USAID please provide a percentage for local hire fringe benefits to ensure that all offerors are evaluated equitably, similar to USAID’s provision of Other Direct Cost estimates?

48. Section J, page 121, lists Attachment J.12, Key Individual Certifications for Narcotics; however, USAID has not required this certification within Section L.

Would USAID please confirm if Offerors should provide this certification, and if so, for which individuals and within what part of the proposal?

A: Per Section F.6 (a) - Key Personnel, Pag. 203, “Key Individuals must complete the Mandatory Reference ‐ Key Individual Certification before they are identified as key personnel (refer to Attachment J.12). ” Please provide these certifications as part of the technical proposal (annexes).

49. J.13 - Contractor Employee Biographical Data Sheet: Confirming that completion of this sheet for contractor staff is not required for bid submission.

A: Per Section L.8, Page 159, “Offerors must provide a narrative justifying the rates for each cost category proposed with supporting information such as historical biodata forms used.”

50. J.14 - Sample of Work Plan: Confirming it is USAID’s expectation that Offeror’s are to follow the format in attachment J.14 for submission of their detailed work plan.

A: This template has been provided as a sample only.

51. Section J, page 122, lists Attachment J.15, Certification Regarding Trafficking in Persons Compliance Plan; however, USAID has not required this certification within Section L. Would USAID please confirm if Offerors should provide this certification, and if so, within what part of the proposal?

A: Provision 52.222-56 was included by reference under Section L.1. According to Attachment J.15, “A signed copy of the below certification will be requested of the apparent successful Offeror prior to award. If at the time of Proposal submission, the Offeror has a compliance plan that meets the below requirements, the Offeror is requested to submit the certification as part of its

Pag. 15 of 35

Cost/Business Proposal.” A revised version of Attachment J.15 is included with Amendment 1 to the solicitation.

Section L

52. RFP - L.5 General Instructions: Can USAID please include attachment J.2 Proposal Preparation Checklist?

A: Please refer to answer on Question #35

53. In section L on page 153, USAID states Offerors must submit signed and dated proposals to oaahonduras@usaid.gov, addressed to the Contracting Officer;

however, on page 152, the Contracting Officer is identified as “TBD”. Could you USAID please confirm that submissions be addressed to Ms. Claudia M.

Enriquez, per the RFP cover letter?

A: Please submit your proposals (Technical and Cost/Business) to oaahonduras@usaid.gov addressed to Claudia M. Enriquez, Contracting Officer, per the RFP cover letter.

54. Would USAID please clarify whether the BIP/MP should be included as an annex to the technical or cost volume?

A: Per Section L.7(a), the Branding and Marking Plan must be included under the Annexes to the Technical Proposal.

55. In section L.7 (a), the RFP states that ‘All information from appendices must be referenced in the technical proposal and summarized and included in the annex section.’ The second half of the sentence ‘...and included in the annex section.’

appears to restate the first half of the sentence. Are the summarized appendices to be re-summarized and included in the annex section as well?

A: Sorry for the confusion. This language has been deleted from Section L.7(a).

56. Regarding Section L.7.a (p.154), may offerors use a font size smaller than 11 for tables, textboxes, and graphics?

A: Offerors may use a font size not smaller than 10 for tables, textboxes and graphics. This wording has been added to Section L.7(a).

mailto:oaahonduras@usaid.gov

Pag. 16 of 35

57. Section L.7, page 154: The RFP states that major subcontractors are those expected to perform at least 20% or a prominent part of the technical effort.

Section L.7(b)5(a) on page 158 states that major subcontractors are those whose proposed cost exceeds 25% of the offeror’s total proposed cost. Section L.8, Part 4, XI on page 166 states that major subcontractors are those whose total estimated cost plus fixed fee exceeds 25% of the contractor’s TO1 total estimated cost plus fixed fee. Would USAID please confirm that major subcontractors are those expected to perform at least 20% or a prominent part of the technical effort over the life of the IDIQ?

A: The correct definition of major subcontractors is included in Section L.7, page 158: ”Major subcontractors are those expected to perform at least 20% or a prominent part of the technical effort.”

This definition will apply to the IDIQ and any task order issued under the IDIQ.

This information will be corrected throughout the RFP.

58. Section L.7, page 154: Could USAID kindly confirm that in graphics, tables, and textboxes, offerors may use a smaller font than 11 point, so long as it is legible without magnification?

A: PLease refer to answer on Question #56.

59. Page 154, “Do not use a type smaller than 11- point type” to exclude tables and textboxes. Please confirm whether USAID allows for tables and textboxes to 10-point type.

60. Pg. 154, Section L.7 (a), “Do not use a type smaller than 11-point type.” Can USAID confirm that this limitation does not apply to footnotes? And will USAID allow the font in text boxes to be 10 pt.?

61. Section L.7, page 154, states the “technical proposal must be entirely separate from the cost proposal and it must not include cost information in the content of the technical proposal,” yet Section L.7.a, page 155, requires inclusion of a “draft Year 1 Work Plan outline…including notional budget” and the Sample Work Plan in Attachment J.14 notes that that this notional budget should be the “sum of

Pag. 17 of 35 costs or LOE anticipated for all sub-tasks.” Would USAID confirm that no cost information should be included in the Technical Proposal, including the work plan annex, and remove the language from the solicitation?

A: We confirm that no cost information should be included in the Technical Proposal, including the work plan annex. This language has been removed from the solicitation. Please note Attachment J.14 is a sample only.

62. Section L.7 (p. 154) defines “major subcontractors” as those expected to perform at least 20% or a prominent part of the technical effort, but Section L.7.b.5 (p.

158) defines a “major subcontractor” as one whose proposed cost exceeds 25% of the offeror’s total proposed cost, and L.8 Part 4 XI (p. 166) defines it as one whose total estimated cost plus fixed fee exceeds 25% of the contractor’s TO1 total estimated cost plus fixed fee. Could USAID please clarify which of these definitions to use?

A: Please refer to answer on Question #57.

63. Please provide clarification on the definition of major sub-contractor under SEA.

On p.154, USAID states “Major subcontractors are those expected to perform at least 20% or a prominent part of the technical effort.” On pages 157 and 166, USAID respectively states that “a major subcontractor is one whose proposed cost exceeds 25% of the offeror’s total proposed cost” and “Major subcontractors are those whose total estimated cost-plus fixed fee exceeds 25% of the contractor’s TO1 total estimated cost plus fixed fee”.

64. In section L.7 on p. 154 the RFP defines major subcontractors as: “Major subcontractors are those expected to perform at least 20% or a prominent part of the technical effort. All major subcontractors will need approval by the IDIQ CO in accordance with FAR part 52.244-2 and part 44.202-2.” On p. 158, the RFP states that performance information is required for each major subcontractor defined as “one whose proposed cost exceeds 25% of the offeror’s total proposed cost.” Could USAID/Honduras please clarify if the minimum threshold used to define major subcontractors is 20% or 25% of total proposed cost?

A: PLease refer to answer on Question #57.

Pag. 18 of 35

65. Pg. 154 L.7, “Major subcontractors are those expected to perform at least 20% or a prominent part of the technical effort.” And pg. 166, Section L.8 Part 4 XI.

“Prime and Major TO Subcontractor Percentage of Work Overview: As an annex, submit the filled out form that represents the percentage of work for the prime and major TO subcontractor(s). Major subcontractors are those whose total estimated cost-plus-fixed fee exceeds 25% of the contractor’s TO1 total estimated cost-plus-fixed-fee.” Can USAID please clarify what defines a major subcontractor under this IDIQ and Task Order 1?

A: PLease refer to answer on Question #57.

66. RFP - L.7 Instructions for the Preparation of the Technical Proposal: Under past performance information, USAID states “and each major subcontractor (one whose proposed cost exceeds 25% of the offeror’s total proposed cost). It also states “Major subcontractors are those expected to perform at least 20% or a prominent part of the technical effort.” Confirming the correct % of a major subcontractor.

67. RFP - L.7 Instructions for the Preparation of the Technical Proposal: Can USAID please include the Contractor Performance Report – Short Form?

A: This language has been removed from Section L. Please refer to the Contractor Performance Matrix (Attachment J.5).

68. RFP - L.7 Instructions for the Preparation of the Technical Proposal: Are there any page restrictions for the annexes (i.e., work plan, branding and marketing plan etc.)?

A: In accordance with Section L.7(a), Page 154, Annexes are not included in the Page Limitation.

69. RFP - L.7 Instructions for the Preparation of the Technical Proposal: How many years does USAID allow for in determining the recency of a past performance contract submitted by a Bidder?

A: Recency for past performance will be considered for awards active or ended no more than 3 years ago. Sections L.7 and M.2 have been amended to include this period.

Pag. 19 of 35

70. Section L.7.a (p. 154-155) refers to both a “Contractor Performance Report –

Short-Form (Attachment in Section J)”, and an item described as “Past performance matrix and past performance report forms, references, Past Performance information in using small business concerns.” Additionally, the instructions for Technical Factor 3 (Past Performance Information) in Section L.7.b.5.a (p. 158) require that offerors list in an annex to the technical proposal up to five (5) of the most recent and relevant contracts for efforts similar to the work in the subject proposal. Can USAID please clarify the following:

a. Is Attachment J.5 intended to serve as the template for the Contractor Performance Report – Short-Form (Attachment in Section J)?

A: Please note that Contractor Performance Report - Short Form language has been removed from Section L. Please follow Attachment J.5.

b. Is either item referenced above [either the “Contractor Performance Report – Short-Form (Attachment in Section J)”, or the “Past performance matrix and past performance report forms, references, Past Performance information in using small business concerns”] intended to serve as the annex prescribed by L.7.b.5.a (p. 158)?

A: The Past Performance Matrix, Attachment J.5, is intended to serve as the Annex prescribed in Section L.7.b.5.a

71. In section L on page 155 the RFP states that Offerors must submit a past performance matrix and past performance report forms, references, and past performance information in using small business concerns, however this is not included in the list of required annexes on page 155. Does USAID require these documents to be submitted within the technical proposal?

A: These documents must be submitted within the technical proposal, as requested in Section L.7(a).

72. Pg. 155, Section L.7 (a), “A draft Year 1 Workplan outline with specific and clear objectives and target outcomes, including notional budget.” Does USAID want the Draft Year 1 Work plan in the Cost Application or Technical Application?

A: Please include the draft work plan in the Technical proposal and refer to Question 61.

Pag. 20 of 35

73. Section L.7.a (p.155) states that “For the Chief of Party position, USAID expects to receive two proposed candidates of which one will be selected as a primary candidate.” Please confirm that USAID intends to select one finalist candidate from the two proposed as part of the evaluation process.

A: We have updated Section L.7 (a).d (pag.160). This requirement is no longer included. Offerors must propose only one COP candidate.

74. Section L.7(a), page 155, states, “For the Chief of Party position, USAID expects to receive two proposed candidates of which one will be selected as a primary candidate.” We respectfully request that USAID reconsider this requirement as it poses practical challenges to recruitment of qualified candidates and securing of candidate commitment.

A: Please refer to the answer on Question No.73.

75. Section L.7(a), page 155, requires “a draft Year 1 Work Plan outline with specific and clear objectives and target outcomes, including notional budget.” Could USAID please remove the request for a “notional budget” from the technical work plan annex as the “technical proposal must be entirely separate from the cost proposal and it must not include cost information in the content of the technical proposal” per Section L.7, page 154?

A: Please refer to the answer on Question No. 61.

76. Regarding Section L.7.a (p. 155) could USAID confirm that there are no page limits associated with the technical annexes?

A: That is correct, there is no page limit on the Annexes.

77. Section L.7.a (p. 155) states that USAID expects offerors to propose two candidates for COP. As different candidates have different cost implications, could USAID please confirm that offerors may use an illustrative salary and benefits package for a single COP candidate to be determined?

A: Please refer to the answer on Question No.73 and propose a single candidate for COP.

78. Section L.7.a, page 155: The RFP contains instructions for the draft Performance Monitoring Plan Annex, which request “summarized Performance Indicators

Pag. 21 of 35

Reference Sheets (PIRS).” Given that PIRS represent a substantial effort and are usually written in consultation with the Activity’s technical team and management during start-up, would USAID please confirm that PIRS are not required during the proposal stage?

A: The request PIRS should be a summarized or draft version. The formal PIRS will be approved during implementation.

79. Section L.7.a, page 155: The RFP states, “for the Chief of Party position, USAID expects to receive two proposed candidates of which one will be selected as a primary candidate.” Would USAID please confirm that Offerors are expected to budget costs related to their primary candidate only, and not both proposed candidates?

A: Please refer to the answer on Question No.73.

80. Section L.7, page 155: The RFP states that “Contractor Performance Report- Short Forms (see Attachment in Section J)” are excluded from the page limit.

However, there are no attachments in Section J that match this form.

A: Please refer to the answer on Question No.67.

81. Section L.7, page 155: Section L notes that the Management Structure Organizational Chart(s) are excluded from the 20-page limit. Will USAID clarify if these charts should be included in the proposal or as an annex to the proposal?

A: Per Section L.7 (a) please include this information within the Technical Proposal. This information is not subject to the 20-page limit.

82. Section L.7, page 155: Will USAID please confirm that past performance references (Attachment J.5), quality awards, and small business information should be included as an annex to the technical proposal, which does not count against the page limit?

A: Per Section L.7 (a) please include this information within the Technical Proposal. This information is not subject to the 20-page limit.

83. Section L.7.a, page 155: The RFP notes that “All information from appendices must be referenced in the technical proposal and summarized and included in

Pag. 22 of 35 the annex section.” Would USAID please clarify the difference between appendices and annexes in this context?

A: Please refer to the answer on Question No.55.

84. Pg. 155, Section L.7 (a), “Annexes are limited to the following, and any additional annexes will not be accepted nor reviewed:

• Draft Year 1 Work Plan

• Draft Knowledge Management and Organizational Development Plan

• Draft Performance Monitoring Plan Annex

• Key Personnel Annex: CVs and Letters of Commitment Only

• Proposed Quick start-up plan

• Fee Distribution Plan

• Branding and Marking Plan.”

Can USAID Confirm that the Contractor Performance Report - Short Form, Past performance matrix and past performance report forms, references, and Past Performance information in using small business concerns are included in the Technical Approach Annexes? Additionally, can USAID provide the Contractor Performance Report – Short Form template?

A: Please refer to answers on Questions No.67 and 71.

85. Page 155, please confirm the requirements of two COP candidates of which one will be selected as a primary candidate.

A: See answer to question no.73.

86. Pg. 155, RFP Section L.7(a), “Key Personnel Annex…For the Chief of Party position, USAID expects to receive two proposed candidates of which one will be selected as a primary candidate.” Can USAID please confirm that contractors are required to submit two separate CVs, Letters of Commitment, etc. and propose two separate candidates for the proposed Chief of Party position? If two candidates are required, may we respectfully request an additional page to the technical approach for space to describe two separate candidates for the Chief of Party position?

A: See answer to question no.73.

Pag. 23 of 35

87. Regarding Section L.7.b. (p. 156), would USAID kindly consider making the Executive Summary a non-counting section, as it is not listed as part of the evaluation criteria?

A: The Executive Summary will continue to be included in the Technical Proposal’s 20-page limitation.

88. Section L.7.b.4 (p. 157) states that “This should include a description of consortiums, sub-granting and subcontracting arrangements that incorporate a broad range of demonstrated experience and expertise that address all of the programming areas set forth in this SOW or tap into the regional experience and expertise that will be critical to success.complement of local” Could USAID confirm that the words “complement of local” should be disregarded?

A: Yes, this language has been removed from the RFP.

89. Page 157, Management and Staffing Plans: “…each staff member’s role, responsibilities, technical expertise, and estimated percentage of time each will devote to completing tasks under this activity.” Does the estimated percentage of time signify the estimated level of effort devoted by each staff member to completing tasks under this activity?

A: Yes, your understanding is correct.

90. Please provide clarification on whether Past Performance Information (Factor 3 of the Technical Contact) counts towards the 20-page limit. Please note on p.158, USAID requests that applicants “List in an annex to the technical proposal up to five (5) of the most recent and relevant contracts for efforts similar to the work in the subject proposal.”

A: The past performance information does not count towards the 20-page limit, as indicated in Section L.7(a). Besides, annexes don’t count towards the page limitation.

91. Could USAID/Honduras consider inclusion of at least one recent and relevant cooperative agreement as part of Past Performance Information?

A: Yes, per Section M.2.c(a), Page 175, offerors may provide grant, cooperative agreement or contract information that shows relevant and similar technical and field experience.

Pag. 24 of 35

92. Pg. 158, Section L.7 (b) 5., “List in an annex to the technical proposal up to five

(5) of the most recent and relevant contracts for efforts similar to the work in the subject proposal, as reflected in both the Applicant’s institutional record and the experience of key personnel.” For the 5 past performance contract examples, is it 5 examples total including the prime and all major subcontractors?

A: In accordance with L. 7.(b)5. “The Offeror (including all partners of a joint venture) must provide performance information for itself, the contractor teaming arrangements, if any, and each major subcontractor.”

93. Section L.8 references in various paragraphs that offerors should provide TBD information that will be used to complete Section B of the IDIQ, but does not explicitly require offerors to complete Section B and incorporate it into their cost volumes. Further, there is additional TBD information in TO 1 Section B that is to be determined based on an offeror’s proposal, such as cancellation ceilings, but offerors are not required to incorporate the TO 1 Section B into their offers.

Would USAID please indicate how offerors should present both IDIQ and TO 1 Section B information in their cost volumes?

A: See answer to question 122 regarding cancellation ceilings.

94. Section L.8, Part 1, page 160: The RFP states that the completed Standard Form 33 must include an original signature. Since proposals will be submitted electronically, could USAID please confirm that a scanned or electronic signature would be sufficient?

A: Yes, a scanned or electronic signature on SF 33 would be acceptable.

95. Would USAID please clarify for purposes of completing the Cost/Price Matrix, whether fringe, indirects, and fixed fee should be presented as the applicable percentage, or as the calculated dollar amount based on each offeror’s proposed indirect…