SOL-72065618R00008 - ECHO Amendment 02.pdf

Solicitation: 72065618R00008 Efficiencies for Clinical HIV/AIDS Outcomes (ECHO)

AMENDMENT 02

1. Section B.4 APPROVED BUDGET BY CONTRACT LINES, paragraph ( c) is deleted in its entirety and replaced by:

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

Cost Category Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Total Total Direct Costs Indirect Costs Grants Under Contracts (GUC)

Approximately 20-30% of the overall budget

Approximately 20-30% of the overall budget

Approximately 20-30% of the overall budget

Approximately 20-30% of the overall budget

Approximately 20-30% of the overall budget

Fixed Fee Total

1. Under Section C.5 Grants under Contract (GUC) the last bullet is hereby deleted.

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

QUESTION 1: Could USAID please provide an anticipated start date for ECHO?

RESPONSE 1: The anticipated start date for ECHO is January 28, 2019 QUESTION 2: Could USAID please clarify the due date of the proposal? The top of the Cover Letter states "May 21, 2018 @ 3:00 pm (Maputo Time)" is the due date, but the third full paragraph on the second page notes the due date as May 19, 2018 @ 3:00 pm (Maputo Time).

RESPONSE 2: The dates below provided in the cover page of the solicitation are deleted and replaced by:

Closing Date for Submission of Past Performance: April 30, 2018 @ 3:00 pm (Maputo Time)

Closing Date for Receipt of Proposals: May 21, 2018 @ 3:00 pm (Maputo Time) QUESTION 3: B.4, page 8, provides the itemized budget with a specific annual amount for Grants Under Contracts and in Section C.5 on page 24 it states “Approximately 40% of the overall budget of ECHO must be allocated for grants under contracts….” Can USAID please clarify which instructions the offeror must follow, the plug figure on page 8 or 40% of the overall budget on page 24?

RESPONSE 3: Section C. 5 Grants Under Contract. The first paragraph is deleted and replaced by:

The Contractor will provide grants to government bodies in Mozambique at the provincial, district and clinic levels. In addition, from Phase 1, ECHO will allocate the entirety of its community-based care and support program activities to local non-governmental organizations, including community–based organizations. Approximately 20-30% of the overall budget of ECHO must be allocated for grants under contracts to local government and non-governmental organizations.

QUESTION 4: In Section B.10 (a), page 11; USAID states that "a table of USAID/Mozambique's Local Compensation Plan is provided as Attachment in Section J", but this does not appear to be included with the attachments. Can USAID please provide this table?

RESPONSE 4: Local Compensation Plan range table is provided below:

American Embassy Maputo, Mozambique Local Employee Compensation Ranges

Grade: Range*:

from - to - 1 $8,600 $12,000 2 $9,400 $13,200 3 $10,700 $15,000 4 $12,500 $17,400 5 $14,000 $19,700 6 $17,800 $24,900 7 $22,900 $32,000 8 $26,100 $36,500 9 $33,200 $46,500

10 $40,300 $56,400 11 $49,500 $69,300 12 $65,000 $91,000 13 $75,000 $105,000

* rounded to 100s

QUESTION 5: Section C.3.2, pages 17 and 18; the table includes a list of intervention districts organized by province and COP prioritization category. The 3rd column refers to “APR16 Achievement”, columns 5 refers to “Expected Achievement by APR17”, and column 7 refers to “COP17 Target: APR18”. Do the percentages in these columns refer to ART coverage for the estimated number of PLHIV?

RESPONSE 5: The table located in Section C.3.2, page 17 and 18 is deleted in its entirety and replaced by the updated table included below with the most recent Antiretroviral Treatment (ART) coverage rates by district, current FY 2018 achievements and targets as well as FY 2019 targets.

Province District COP18 Prioritization

APR17

PLHIV ART

Coverage Rate

Expected

PLHIV ART

Coverage Rate By APR18

COP18 Target:

(APR19) PLHIV

ART Coverage

Rate

FY19 Target

TX_CURR

Manica Barue ScaleUp Sat 71% 98% 96% 10,851

Manica Chimoio ScaleUp Agg 51% 51% 82% 41,062

Manica Gondola ScaleUp Agg 52% 76% 83% 14,705

Manica Guro Sustained 83% 82% 109% 5,281

Manica Macate Sustained 78% 101% 99% 3,203

Manica Machaze ScaleUp Sat 61% 53% 112% 13,669

Manica Macossa Sustained 19% 19% 25% 683

Manica Manica ScaleUp Agg 42% 68% 69% 13,088

Manica Mossurize ScaleUp Sat 103% 106% 139% 8,372

Manica Sussundenga ScaleUp Sat 75% 84% 102% 8,042

Manica Tambara Sustained 34% 24% 45% 2,172

Manica Vanduzi Sustained 59% 100% 98% 6,816

Niassa Chimbonila Sustained 57% 43% 65% 915

Niassa Cuamba ScaleUp Agg 28% 37% 51% 8,227

Niassa Lago Sustained 36% 41% 47% 2,374

Niassa Lichinga ScaleUp Sat 61% 83% 90% 9,700

Niassa Majune Sustained 42% 29% 55% 473

Niassa Mandimba ScaleUp Agg 13% 20% 31% 4,543

Niassa Marrupa Sustained 18% 17% 23% 927

Niassa Maua Sustained 28% 31% 37% 950

Niassa Mavago Sustained 8% 9% 11% 267

Niassa Mecanhelas ScaleUp Agg 29% 35% 59% 5,204

Niassa Mecula Sustained 8% 7% 11% 271

Niassa Metarica Sustained 37% 33% 49% 653

Niassa Muembe Sustained 35% 30% 46% 514

Niassa Ngauma Sustained 19% 18% 24% 848

Niassa Nipepe Sustained 31% 31% 41% 955

Niassa Sanga Sustained 30% 31% 39% 784

Sofala Beira ScaleUp Agg 36% 67% 66% 64,939

Sofala Buzi ScaleUp Agg 54% 80% 86% 10,668

Sofala Caia ScaleUp Agg 46% 52% 80% 7,712

Sofala Chemba Sustained 37% 50% 50% 1,711

Sofala Cheringoma Attained 128% 54% 154% 4,151

Sofala Chibabava ScaleUp Agg 42% 66% 73% 8,234

Sofala Dondo ScaleUp Sat 75% 78% 126% 28,822

Sofala Gorongosa Sustained 47% 43% 62% 5,175

Sofala Machanga Sustained 62% 99% 98% 4,219

Sofala Maringue Sustained 33% 30% 43% 991

Sofala Marromeu ScaleUp Agg 52% 71% 83% 8,389

Sofala Muanza Sustained 79% 90% 105% 1,466

Sofala Nhamatanda ScaleUp Agg 44% 64% 73% 14,483

Tete Angonia Sustained 59% 76% 77% 5,516

Tete Cahora Bassa Sustained 71% 124% 122% 8,035

Tete Changara ScaleUp Sat 73% 90% 92% 6,098

Tete Chifunde Attained 98% 109% 118% 1,235

Tete Chiuta Sustained 60% 81% 80% 1,470

Tete Doa Sustained 19% 46% 46% 1,702

Tete Macanga Sustained 92% 75% 121% 1,829

Tete Magoe Sustained 44% 86% 84% 4,624

Tete Marara Sustained 66% 76% 76% 2,629

Tete Maravia Sustained 47% 35% 62% 1,379

Tete Moatize ScaleUp Sat 76% 69% 122% 16,241

Tete Mutarara ScaleUp Agg 38% 58% 72% 4,617

Tete Tete ScaleUp Sat 71% 64% 100% 27,314

Tete Tsangano Sustained 81% 113% 111% 2,405

Tete Zumbu Attained 110% 125% 133% 1,369

Zambezia Chinde ScaleUp Agg 18% 26% 39% 5,371

Zambezia Derre ScaleUp Agg 19% 32% 42% 1,903

Zambezia Luabo ScaleUp Agg 21% 24% 40% 1,731

Zambezia Mopeia ScaleUp Agg 26% 44% 49% 5,743

Zambezia Morrumbala ScaleUp Agg 33% 62% 61% 10,724

USAID Total 48% 62% 76% 438,447

QUESTION 6: Section C.5 on page 24 summarizes the rules that the contractor must follow in implementing GUCs. There is a contradiction between bullet 7 , which notes that “No cash or in kinds grants will be made to the Government of Mozambique, including regional and district level authorities”, and the introduction to section C.5, which states that “The Contractor will provide grants to government bodies in Mozambique at the provincial, district and clinic levels.” What types of grants are the Contractor permitted to provide to the DPS, SDSGCAS, and supported health facilities?

RESPONSE 6: Bullet 7 of Section C.5 is deleted from the solicitation.

QUESTION 7: Section C.5., page 24, Grants Under Contract; can offerors in their proposal present named entities to receive grants under contract to promote rapid implementation of specific community technical activities?

RESPONSE 7: Yes. Offerors can present named entities to received Grants Under Contract in their proposal.

QUESTION 8: Section C.7.3, page 26, mentions a mid-term external evaluation. However, the section also mentions that USAID will fund the external evaluations. Are additional evaluations planned beyond the mid-term evaluation?

RESPONSE 8: USAID requires two external evaluations (mid-term and final evaluation) and will be contracted by USAID/Mozambique outside of ECHO. However, the offeror may propose additional internal evaluations as appropriate to the proposed technical approach.

QUESTION 9: Section F.5, page 33 the RFP states that the mobilization plan must be submitted within 30 days of the contract start date, but then on page 39 it notes that the mobilization plan “…must include evidence that the National HIV/AIDS Program and relevant provincial health authorities concur with the Annual Work Plan.” However, on page 34 it says the year 1 Annual Work Plan is due within 45 days after contract start date. As the Contractor may have difficulty submitting a mobilization plan within 30 days of startup that must include evidence from a year 1 work plan that is only finalized 45 days after startup, would it be possible for USAID to extend the mobilization plan submission deadline to 45 days post award date?

RESPONSE 9: The table located in Section F.5 page 33 of the RFP is hereby deleted and replace with:

DELIVERABLE DUE DATE DESCRIPTION APPROVER/RESPONSIBLE

PERSON

Post-Award Conference and Orientation

Within 15 days of the contract start date

The Contractor must participate in the post-award conference with the Contracting Officer (CO), COR and relevant USAID staff.

The Acquisition & Assistance Specialist (A&A Specialist) will schedule the Post-Award Conference.

Final Mobilization Plan

Within 45 days of the contract start date

The Contractor must participate in facilitated meetings, to finalize the mobilization plan, with the Contracting Officer (CO), COR and relevant technical staff.

The COR will schedule the initial meeting within 15 days of the contract start date. The final deliverable is subject to COR approval.

Final Management Plan

Within 30 days of the contract start date

The Management Plan must include an organizational chart and position descriptions for each position.

COR written approval

Final Staffing Plan Within 30 days of the contract start date

The Plan must contain the key personnel names and positions, as well as the support staff and consultants and the planned dates to join the activity.

COR written approval

Year 1 Work Plan Within 45 days after contract start date

Year 1 activity level Work Plan will identify all tasks to be accomplished under the SOW during the period in question and link these with activity objectives. It must include the Gender Action Plan activities.

COR written approval

Annual Work Plans Draft work plan is due the second Monday of every

Annual activity level Work Plans are due to USAID the first day of

May.

Final Workplan is due July 1 of every year.

July each year of implementation. Every Work Plan must include a detailed timeline for implementation of each agreed activity and sub-activity that will be updated as an annex to each quarterly report.

The annual work plan must also include Assessments, Research Protocols, and Studies.

Grants Under Contract Manual

Within 60 days of contract start date

Grants Manual must include details on established selection, eligibility and award criteria for sub-grantees.

Grants Manual should include details on how the Contractor will ensure compliance with

USAID GUC

requirements.

Contracting Officer (CO) written approval

Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Plan

(MEL)

Within 45 days of award start date

The COR may request at any time that the MEL Plan is updated or modified as required to effectively report activity results. The MEL Plan will be updated as necessary and reported in a consistent manner to allow for easy tracking and progress. When requested a revised MEL Plan must be submitted within 15 days of the COR’s request. The MEL Plan must include, as appropriate, GPS coordinates to geo-locate activities.

COR written approval

Environmental Monitoring and Mitigation Plan

Within 45 days of award start date

The Contractor will submit an Environmental Mitigation and

COR written approval with concurrence from the Mission Environment Officer (MEO)

(EMMP) Monitoring Plan (EMMP) and Climate Risk Mitigation Plan within forty-five

(45) days after the contract award. The COR will review and provide comments within fifteen

(15) days after receipt.

The Contractor will submit a final document no later than fifteen (15) days after receipt of COR approval.

The Contractor will submit an updated EMMP and CRM Plan with each Annual Work Plan per the Initial Environmental Examination (IEE).

Final Branding and Marking Plan

Within 60 days of award start date

The Branding and Marking Plan will describe how the Contractor will mark all property and brand flyers, papers, the website, etc. in line with USAID’s Branding and Marking Guidelines.

CO written approval

Quarterly Activity Report

Last working day of January, April, & July.

Quarterly report will describe achievements to date for each objective and will include a success story.

The report will be aligned with the Work Plan and PEPFAR Monitoring and Evaluation Reporting (MER) requirements and will include quarterly results according to the MEL Plan. The COR shall approve the report in writing. The last quarterly report of the fiscal year may be included in the annual report for that year.

Quarterly Financial Report

The 20th of March, June, September and December of each year

The Contractor must provide pipeline and financial reports to the COR: (i) on a quarterly basis; (ii) before each contract modification/incrementa l funding; and (iii) accruals information covering the periods through the end of the reporting quarter.

COR written approval

Short-Term Consultant Reports and Technical Reports

15 days after the end of the assignment

The Consultant and STTA Reports should provide detailed information on the scope, activities and accomplishments achieved with the consultancies. Reports must be submitted to the

COR

COR written approval

Annual Report Last working day of October.

The Annual Report should summarize the year’s achievements, challenges, shortfalls and successes. The report will be aligned with the Work Plan and PEPFAR Monitoring and Evaluation Reporting (MER).

COR written approval

Other Quarterly Financial Reports

The Contractor must furnish this information to USAID in accordance with guidance circulated by the Contracting Officer, as amended from time to time

The Contractor must maintain records of all taxes paid to GRM with U.S. government funds as well as other financial information as may be required by USAID.

No approval required

Ad hoc Reporting As applicable, any The Contractor must COR written approval special reporting requirements will be communicated to the Contractor at least 7 days in advance. Once the request from the COR is received by the Contractor, the Contractor must respond within the established timeframe.

fulfill all requests from the COR regarding Agency, congressional, or presidential inquiries.

As necessary, programs will illustrate the outcome result of any/all activities.

Monthly briefings

Contractor is responsible for dissemination of the minutes from these briefings within 7 days of meeting.

The first monthly briefing notes are due 60 days after award.

The Contractor must provide monthly in-person or telephonic briefings for the COR that discuss (i) Major activities and (ii) Priority issues.

Annual Report on Non-Expendable Property.

The Contractor must prepare and submit electronically to the COR an Annual Summary Report on Non- Expendable Property on the last working day of October for each authorized year of performance.

The report must contain an executive summary and the updated List of Equipment purchased with USAID funds (description, quantity, unit price, total price, location, conditions).

Disposition of Assets and Closeout Plan

120 days prior to the end of the contract

The Disposition of assets and closeout plan must contain detailed information on assets disposition and timeline

CO written approval for the closeout process.

Final Report

45 days prior to the completion of the contract period a draft must be submitted. Within 90 days of the completion date of the contract, the contractor must submit the final report, addressing all USAID comments

The Final Report must summarize the work carried out over the life of the activity, including the results achieved and problems encountered, as well as a summary of context and design of the activity, key activities, performance and achievements, lessons learned, and other relevant information as the Contractor may choose.

The Contractor must indicate which areas are, in its judgment, most appropriate for continued the activities in the future.

COR, CO and Controller’s office written approval

PEPFAR Required Reporting

PEPFAR Quarterly Reporting Requirements

(MER)

30 days after the end of each quarter

All recipients of PEPFAR funding are required to report against indicators as per the Indicators Monitoring, Evaluation, and.

Reporting (MER 2.0).Indicator R eference Guide on a quarterly basis. The COR will confirm the specific indicators for the Contractor shall be responsible at the time of award.

COR written approval

Site Improvement through Monitoring Systems (SIMS)

Targets for SIMS visits must be completed by last day of each quarter

Site Improvement Monitoring System (SIMS) is implemented throughout the year.

COR will communicate SIMS implementation plan with Contractor post award.

Expenditure Analysis

End of each Fiscal Year (actual dates determined by

PEPFAR

Coordinator’s Office)

PEPFAR Expenditure Analysis reporting is required for all Contractors of PEPFAR funds. The COR will provide guidance once this is provided by the Office of the Global AIDS Coordinator

(OGAC).

QUESTION 10: Section F.6, page 45; in the Illustrative Staff (Non-Key Personnel) table, there is a Sr. Capacity Development Advisor based in Maputo, but it is unclear why this position is based in Maputo and not in Beira. What role does USAID see this position playing vis-a-vis working with central level stakeholders (i.e. MOH and USG/PEPFAR) vs. project implementation in the provinces?

RESPONSE 10: The mentioned position is proposed to be based in Maputo to facilitate communication with MISAU and USAID and make sure all expectations regarding capacity building and transition/sustainability are well communicated to the ECHO’s HQ. The implementing partner is free to propose additional capacity development advisors or any other staff relevant for this important component as needed for the ECHO’s HQ and provincial offices.

QUESTION 11: Section F.8, page 49 states that a 6 day workweek for STTA must be approved by the COR on a case-by-case basis. Would USAID please reconsider allowing for a 6 day workweek for all STTA? This allows for maximum utilization of staff/consultants on STTA, especially those traveling from outside of Mozambique. Allowing for 6 day workweeks is also a cost savings as the length of the travel can be reduced if the individual is working 6 days a week rather than 5 days a week.

RESPONSE 11: Yes. A 6 day workweek for STTAs with no premium pay is authorized without COR’s approval.

QUESTION 12: Section L.5, Technical Proposal (Part 1), Annex 5, page 112, states that the LOCs for Key Personnel “indicate the dates” that Key Personnel are available to start work. Given that the award date is unknown; would it be possible for offerors to instead indicate the number of days after contract award individual key personnel will be able to start work?

RESPONSE 12: Section L.5, Technical Proposal (Part 1) the following paragraph is deleted in entirety and replaced by:

“Annex 5: Resumes of Proposed Key Personnel (not to exceed 32 pages): must be provided for each proposed candidate. The Offeror must include as part of its proposal a signed statement for each individual proposed as key personnel, confirming his/her intention to serve in the stated position and his/her present availability to serve for the term of the proposed contract. These Letters of Commitment are required for all Key Personnel and must be included. Offerors must indicate the number of day after the contract award that each Key Personnel candidate is available to start work. At least three (3) references is required for each proposed key personnel.”

QUESTION 13: Section L.5, Annex 5, page 112; could USAID clarify if references are required for key personnel? If so, how many and where should they be included in the submission?

RESPONSE 13: Please see response to question number 12.

QUESTION 14: Section L.5 (j)(2), page 112 requests that the cost proposal must be submitted in Excel and not PDF format. Can USAID confirm that only the budget part of the cost proposal is required to be in Excel?

RESPONSE 14: The summary and detailed budget of the cost proposal are required to be in Excel MS Office (2010 or 2003 version). The Budget narrative must be in Word.

QUESTION 15: Section L.5, Annex 6 (MELP) mentions a results framework. However, the MELP template attached to the proposal contains a section for the Activity’s logical framework but no mention of a results framework. We are concerned that we will not be able to fit both frameworks into the 10 pages allotted for Annex 6. Would USAID permit offerors additional space in Annex 6 to include both? Additionally, if offerors are not permitted additional space in Annex 6, would USAID prefer a results framework or a logical framework be included?

RESPONSE 15: Section L.5, Technical Proposal (Part 1) the following paragraph is deleted in entirety and replaced by:

Annex 6: Monitoring Evaluation and Learning Plan (MELP) (not to exceed 13 pages): At a minimum, the MELP as described in Section F will identify appropriate activity indicators for each level of the results framework, show data sources, and describe how data will be collected/collated/acquired, analyzed, and presented to regularly inform performance. The plan will identify core indicators for every result and intermediate result/outcome and provide preliminary five-year performance indicator targets for these core indicators. The MELP will effectively track activities’ inputs and outputs and achievement of performance outcomes over the contract’s life. Offerors may include both a logical framework and a results framework considering the new page limit.

QUESTION 16: Section L.7.7, page 171; USAID references a past performance matrix as Attachment 7, but Attachment 7 does not appear to be a past performance matrix. Please provide the matrix USAID requires.”

RESPONSE 16: The total number of pages for this solicitation is 132. The solicitation does not contain page 171. Section L.7.7 is located on page 117 and there is no reference to Attachment 7 on Section L.7.7 page 117. The solicitation states the following:

"7. Past Performance

Contractors Performance Information (See Section M.2).

The offeror (including all partners of a joint venture) must provide performance information for itself and each major subcontractor (“Major Subcontractors” are those subcontractors whose proposed cost exceeds 10% of the Offeror’s proposed total cost or perform a key element of the scope of work. USAID may request to review any proposed subcontractors below the 10% threshold. As applicable, any request to review proposed subcontractors below the 10% threshold will be communicated to the Offeror.) in accordance with the following:

1) The Offeror must submit a Past Performance Matrix (Annex 7) that lists up to five (5) projects of the prime and up to two (2) projects each of any major subcontractors of most recent (within the last 5 years) and relevant contracts and/or assistance awards for prime and efforts similar to the work in the subject proposal. The most relevant indicators of performance are contracts of similar type of work, scope and size, and complexity/diversity and how recently they were performed…”

QUESTION 17: Section L7.7, page 118; USAID has requested that for each of the contracts and/or assistance awards listed above that are not in CPARS, offerors should provide the following:

o Scope of work or complexity/diversity of tasks, o Primary location(s) of work, o Term of performance, o Skills/expertise required, o Dollar value, o Contract type, i.e., fixed-price, cost reimbursement, etc; and o “Point of contact information for the CO, COR, or Project Manager of the five (5) largest federally awarded contracts or task orders over the last three (3) years.”

Could USAID clarify if the request within the last bullet was intentionally included?

RESPONSE 17: Yes. The offeror must provide the information requested in the last bullet.

QUESTION 18: Section L.8 (a), page 119, notes that fixed fee may not be taken on Grants Under Contract (GUCs). Given that the GUCs program is estimated to be 40% ($XXXX) of the entire contract value, and there is risk to the contractor of disallowed cost that may not be recovered if the grantees do not properly handle the grants program, will USAID reconsider and allow a small fee?

RESPONSE 18: Please see response for question number 42.

QUESTION 19: Will USAID provide a letter of credit for the Grants Under Contract portion of the contract expenditures so that contractors do not have to finance these grants?

RESPONSE 19: Letter of credit will not be authorized for this contract.

QUESTION 20: Section L.8 (d), page 119 requires the use of the average exchange rate provided by the Central Bank of Mozambique to ensure consistent evaluation of proposals. Can USAID please clarify the date or date range that should be used for the average exchange rate to ensure a consistent use of exchange rate by all bidders?

RESPONSE 20: The Offeror should use the rates from the first quarter of calendar 2018.

QUESTION 21: Section L.8 (g), page 119, provides the structure for the cost proposal. The budget and narrative are not included in this structure. Can USAID please confirm that the budget and narrative should not be included in the overall Cost Volume PDF?

RESPONSE 21: Section L.8 (g) is being revised to include the following bullet after the last bullet:

• Along with the detailed budget, the Offeror must submit a detailed budget narrative that supports item for item the cost estimates proposed in its detailed budget by cost category. The budget narrative must be provided in sufficient detail to allow complete cost realism, allowability, and reasonableness analyses of the proposal, therefore it must provide a detailed description and address why these costs are considered realistic, fair and reasonable and necessary to successfully implement the activity. This must include a complete breakdown of cost elements associated with each line item and those costs associated with any proposed subcontract, e.g., salaries, fringe benefits, overhead, other direct costs (supplies, equipment, travel, transportation, per diem amounts, airfares, destination and number of trips, taxis, rent, and domestic and international communications), TCN/CCN labor costs, general and administrative, and fixed fee. The fixed fee proposed must include the rationale for the proposed amount of fixed fee. The budget by component must include a brief discussion of how the component budget aligns to the summary budget and the technical approach. International travel must be identified separately and broken down by destination, number of trips, and number of travelers. The narrative must also include a description of the source of that particular cost estimate (historical experience with the cost item, catalogue price, vendor price quotes, etc.). Narratives for the individual cost items must provide a discussion of any estimated escalation rates and proposed salary increases where applicable.

Estimated costs proposed may not exceed ceilings imposed by USAID or Federal procurement policy.

QUESTION 22: Section L.9, page 120, references the SF 33 as the Cover Page. Can USAID please confirm that an offeror may include a cover page, cover letter, and table of contents before the SF 33?

RESPONSE 22: Yes. Offeror may include a cover page, cover letter, and table of contents before the SF33.

QUESTION 23: Section L.10(4)(A) on page 121 requires the submission of Biographical Data Sheets for all long term, short term expatriates and for all short term and long term cooperating country personnel, but section L.10(I) only requires the biographical data sheets for positions that exceed $49,000 per year. Can USAID please clarify which Biographical Data Sheets should be included with the cost proposal?

RESPONSE 23: The offeror must submit biographical data sheets to support the proposed long-term and short-term personnel cost of those positions that are expected to exceed $49,000 per year.

QUESTION 24: Section L.12(a), page 124 requires the submission of Representations, Certifications, and Other Statements of Offeror for the offeror, team members, and each proposed major subcontractor. Can USAID please specify which team members, other than major subcontractors, are required to submit Representations, Certification, and Other Statements of Offeror?

RESPONSE 24: The Offeror must submit Representations, Certification, and Other Statements of Offeror for the prime and major subcontractors only.

QUESTION 25: Section L.12(c), page 124 requires the submission of a copy of SF LLL for the offeror, team members, and each proposed major subcontractor. Can USAID please specify which team members, other than major subcontractors, are required to submit a copy of SF LLL?

RESPONSE 25: The Offeror must submit a copy of SF LLL for the prime and major subcontractors.

QUESTION 26: Section L.15, page 126 requires letters of commitment from each team member and major subcontractors. Can USAID please specify which team members, other than major subcontractors, are required to submit a letter of commitment? Section M, page 128. Would USAID consider providing evaluation points for each factor listed within section M?

RESPONSE 26: All key personnel are required to submit a letter of commitment. No evaluation points will be attributed to the factors and subfactors. Evaluation of the proposals will be in accordance with Section M.

QUESTION 27: Section M.2, page 129; the evaluation criteria for Sub-factor 1.2 stipulates that USAID will evaluate proposals based on “the degree to which the Offeror demonstrates an understanding of the HIV epidemiological context and challenges in Mozambique and clearly outlines feasible, technically appropriate, gender-sensitive strategies and approaches to address challenges and to successfully achieve ECHO’s Objectives 2 and 3.” Unfortunately, only the incumbent Offeror has access to the necessary data disaggregated by gender, age group, and health facility to be able to effectively analyze the HIV epidemiological context as it relates to the 95:95:95 targets. Would it be possible for USAID to provide the 2017 FY APR data that is associated with attachment J.3 - CHASS FY 17 Q4 Quarterly Report?

RESPONSE 27: FY 2017 APR data is incorporated in this amendment 2 in ATTACHMENT J.7.

QUESTION 28: Will capital lab equipment and reagent supplies be a part of this contract? If yes, is there a limit?

RESPONSE 28: No. Capital lab equipment and reagent supplies are not part of this contract.

QUESTION 29: Can USAID please provide the latest data from the SLIPTA assessments?

RESPONSE 29: SLIPTA assessments are conducted by the Ministry of Health (MISAU)/Instituto Nacional de Saúde (INS). The offerors must request the reports from INS.

QUESTION 30: P. 1 of the RFP lists a closing date of May 21, 2018. However, p. 2 states that proposals are due no later than May 19, 2018. Please confirm which is the correct due date for proposals.

RESPONSE 30: Please see response for question number 2.

QUESTION 31: P. 112 lists Annex 7: Past Performance Matrix as an annex to the technical proposal. Would USAID please confirm that Annex 7: Past Performance Matrix is to be submitted on April 24th and will not be included with the technical proposal?

RESPONSE 31: Please see response to question number 2.

QUESTION 32: P.112 Annex Past Performance Matrix states that “the matrix must include up to five (5) of the most recent and relevant contracts and/or assistance awards of five (5) years for the prime inclusive of major subcontractors.” However, p. 117 states “the Offeror must submit a Past Performance Matrix (Annex 7) that lists up to five (5) projects of the prime and up to two (2) projects each of any major subcontractors.” Could USAID please confirm the total number of projects to be listed in the matrix for both the prime and major subcontractors?

RESPONSE 32: The Offeror must submit a Past Performance Matrix (Annex 7) that lists up to five (5) projects of the prime and up to two (2) projects each of any major subcontractors.

QUESTION 33: P. 126 of the RFP states “Offerors must submit a Branding Implementation Plan (BIP) and Marking Plan (MP). These will be submitted as a separate annex to the technical proposal.”

However, p. 111 states that “Annexes to the technical proposal…are limited to the following.” Seven annexes are listed but the BIP and MP are not mentioned. Should the Branding Implementation Plan and Marking Plan be included as an additional annex?

RESPONSE 33: Yes, the Branding Implementation Plan (BIP) and Marking Plan (MP) must be included as an additional annex.

QUESTION 34: Would USAID please confirm the start date of the project?

RESPONSE 34: Please see response for question number 1.

QUESTION 35: Is the Contractor responsible for procuring laboratory equipment and consumables (i.e. viral load, CD4, chemistry, RDTs) as well as opportunistic infection treatments that are not currently covered (i.e. flucytosine, liposomal amphotericin B, and liposomal doxyrubicin) for quality HIV services?

RESPONSE 35: No, the Contractor will not be responsible for procuring laboratory equipment and consumables.

QUESTION 36: Per PEPFAR’s 2018 guidance, is the project expected to provide cervical cancer screening and treatment services in scale-up sites?

RESPONSE 36: Yes. PER PEPFAR’s 2018 Guidance Cervical Cancer Screening and Treatment services are to be provided in scale-up sites. To reflect this change ATTACHMENT J.7 ATTACHMENT J.7 - COP 17 Guidance to ART Clinical Implementing Partners is deleted in its entirety and replaced by ATTACHMENT J.7 - COP 18 Guidance to ART Clinical Implementing Partners.

QUESTION 37: Are private sector partners considered as civil society organizations?

RESPONSE 37: Private sector partners are not considered civil society for the purposes of this activity. However, Mozambican private sector partners are considered local non-government organizations.

QUESTION 38: ECHO will provide direct service delivery and/or augmented human resources at the district/facility level. Can USAID please provide the number of staff who are currently funded under CHASS grants or direct employment mechanisms and which cadres?

RESPONSE 38: ECHO’s approach is expected to be different from the one implemented by CHASS which is essentially based on Technical Assistance. The Offeror will have to make the necessary assessments in order to determine the most realistic approach to human resources at all levels.

QUESTION 39: In Attachment J.10- Past Performance Information (format to be used for Annex 7: Past Performance Matrix), “#8. Title/Brief Description of Product/Service Provided” is missing.

Please confirm that this information is to be included in the form.

RESPONSE 39: Corrected version of ATTACHMENT J.10 is included in this amendment 02.

QUESTION 40: Page 8 – Approved Budget by Contract Line Items . Could USAID confirm that Grants Under Contracts (GUC) annual figures are estimates and can be adjusted per individual Offeror’s technical approach?

RESPONSE 40: Please see response for question number 3.

QUESTION 41: Page 24 – Grants Under Contract (GUC) states “Approximately 40% of the overall budget of ECHO must be allocated for grants under contracts to local government and non-governmental organizations.” However, later on the same page, it states “No cash or in kinds grants will be made to the Government of Mozambique, including regional and district level authorities.” Would USAID please confirm that Grants Under Contract can be awarded to provincial, district, and facility level-based government recipients?

RESPONSE 41: Yes, GUCs can be awarded to provincial, district and facility level-based government recipients.

QUESTION 42: Page 41 – GUC Threshold - Could USAID please confirm that while Fixed Amount Awards are an optional instrument that can help to mitigate the risks related to Grants Under Contracts, Offerors are permitted to use other financial instruments for GUCs, such as cost reimbursable grants, in the case where the value is over $150,000?

RESPONSE 42: Section F.5 Reports and deliverables number 6 is deleted in its entirety and replaced by:

“6. Grants Under Contract Manual: Prior to awarding any grants (unless specific approval is provided by the Contracting Officer), the Contractor must develop, in consultation with, and for USAID’s Contracting Officer approval, a Grants under Contract Manual, if applicable, electronically and in English The Grants under Contract Manual must include, at a minimum, the following information:

* Information on source selection processes,

* Templates for grants,

* The approach to and method of administering the grants and ensuring compliance with applicable requirements; and

* Objective(s) being addressed by the grant.

GUC threshold:

* U.S. Non-governmental Organizations: the total value of an individual grant to a U.S. NGO must not exceed $100,000.

* Non-US Non-Governmental Organizations: The total value of an individual grant to a non U-S- NGO must not exceed $7,000,000.

* Partner Government Entities: The total value of all GUCs that provide funds (as opposed to in-kind assistance) to a particular government entity (for example, ministry, municipality, district, etc.) must not exceed $300,000 for the duration of the prime contract, however, USAID may authorize the increase of this limitation to up to $1,500,000. The total amount of all awards to partner government entities over the life of the project may not exceed $9,900,000 unless specifically authorized by USAID.

* Fixed Feed: Fixed fee may not be taken on GUCs. However, please note there are ways to mitigate risks with GUCS. For example, Fixed Amount Awards with payment based on milestones may be used to mitigate risk rather than cost-type grants that may require advances.

QUESTION 43: P.64 of the RFP it states that annual increases “may be granted after the employee's completion of each twelve-month period of satisfactory services under the Contract.” If an organization has a policy of implementing increases to existing staff on an annual schedule, a particular employee may receive the increase before 12 months service on this particular project. Could USAID change the language to read “one annual increase per year”?

RESPONSE 43: The language remains unchanged.

QUESTION 44: P.119 – Exchange Rate - Because the MZN to USD exchange rate is relatively volatile, in order to ensure that all applicants are providing costing estimates based on the same cost basis, could USAID please provide a date on which applicants are required to obtain an exchange rate from the Central Bank of Mozambique? Alternatively, if USAID does not believe this to be an efficient exercise, could USAID please provide an MZN/USD exchange rate to be used for the proposal cost application?

RESPONSE 44: Please see response for question number 20.

QUESTION 45: Page 119 – Cost Proposal Structure

a. Could USAID please clarify whether the following cost application components are necessary to be provided by the Offeror as well as subcontractors?

Offeror’s Policies and Procedures;

Evidence of Responsibility

RESPONSE 45a: These components are required for the prime and for each major subcontractor.

b. Moreover, could USAID please clarify if Offerors and subcontractors who have an established NICRA are required to submit Policies and Procedures?

RESPONSE 45b: Yes. Offeror and major subcontractors must submit their policies, procedures and evidence of responsibility.

QUESTION 46: Page 119– Indirect Costs states “When possible based on the organizations structured accounting system, the Offeror must breakdown all direct and indirect costs to their components parts.” Would USAID please confirm that Offeror’s that possess a NICRA are not expected to break Indirect Costs down to their component parts?

RESPONSE 46: Offeror that possess a NICRA are not expected to break Indirect Costs down to their component parts.

QUESTION 47: Page 120 – DUNS Numbers states “The Offeror must provide DUNS numbers for the prime offeror and major subcontractors in the cost proposal.” Would USAID please clarify in what document / where in the cost application Offerors are to provide these DUNS numbers?

RESPONSE 47: The DUNS number must be part of the budget narrative document.

QUESTION 48: Page 120 – Cancellation Ceiling - Could USAID please clarify whether Offerors are to provide their own Cancellation Ceilings per project year or are Offerors expected to utilize the Cancellation Ceilings provided in section B.9, page 10 of the RFP?

RESPONSE 48: Offeror is to propose its own cancellation ceiling per project year.

QUESTION 49: Could USAID kindly share the equipment items that will transfer from CHASS to ECHO (e.g., list of lab equipment, diagnostics, cars, EPTS, etc.)

RESPONSE 49: CHASS activity is currently on-going and it is expected to overlap with ECHO during the first six (6) months of ECHO. Offeror must propose appropriate equipment and supplies that correspond to the offeror’s proposed approach.

QUESTION 50: Pages 1-2: The cover letter contains two different proposal submission due dates. Page 1 says May 21, 2018 and page 2 says May 19, 2018. Please confirm that the closing date for receipt of proposals is May 21, 2018 at 3:00pm (Maputo Time).

RESPONSE 50: Please see response for question number 2.

QUESTION 51: Page 8: Section B.4 provides an estimated GUC amount for Year 5 of $20,427,496. Yet, page 24, Section C 5 states, “All grants must be completed six months prior to the end of the contract.” This amount seems very high for a six-month assistance period considering that the amount for the previous 12-month period is almost $1 million less. Does the offeror have the ability to alter the estimates presented in the budget table?

RESPONSE 51: Please see response for question number 6.

QUESTION 52: Page 9: Section B.5 states that “Major Subcontractors” are “those subcontractors whose proposed cost exceeds 10% of the Offeror’s proposed total cost or perform a key element of the scope of work. USAID may request to review any proposed subcontractors below the 10% threshold. As applicable, any request to review proposed subcontractors below the 10% threshold will be communicated to the Offeror.” Please confirm that budgets and budget narratives are only required for major subcontractors per the definition provided on page 9 of the RFP.

RESPONSE 52: Yes. The proposed budgets and budget narratives are only required for the prime and the major subcontractors as defined in the RFP.

QUESTION 53: Page 10: Section B.9 provides estimated cancellation ceiling amounts and states, “[Amount and dates to be filled in at time of award].” Please clarify whether offerors should use the cancellation amounts provided on page 10 of the RFP or propose cancellation ceilings that are specific to their budget at the time of proposal submission?

RESPONSE 53: Please see response for question number 48.

QUESTION 54: Page 11: Section B.10 states, “A table of USAID/Mozambique’s Local Compensation Plan (LCP) is provided as Attachment in Section J of this solicitation.” However, the LCP was not included as an attachment. Would USAID please provide the USAID/Mozambique LCP?

RESPONSE 54: Please see response for question number 4.

QUESTION 55: Page 11: Section B.10 (b) states, “All local hired national personnel and other non- U.S. expatriates must be paid in accordance with AIDAR 722-170(a). TCNs and CCNs who are working in the United States or are legal residents of the United Stated at the time they are hired for under the contract, must be extended benefits, and the subject restrictions on the same basis as U.S.

citizens who work in the United States.” Please confirm that AIDAR 722- 170(a) is not applicable to TCNs and CCNs who are legal residents of the United States at their time of hire?

RESPONSE 55: AIDAR 722-170(a) is applicable to CCNs and TCNs who are hired abroad for work in a cooperating country. TCNs and CCNs who are hired to work in the United States shall be extended the benefits and subject to restrictions on the same basis as U.S. citizens who work in the United States.

QUESTION 56: Page 13: Section C.1 states that “ECHO will support grants under contract (GUC) to government and non-government bodies in Mozambique at the provincial, district and facility levels” and page 24, Section C.5 states, “The Contractor will provide grants to government bodies in Mozambique at the provincial, district and clinic levels.” However, further down on page 24 the following statement appears: “No cash or in kinds grants will be made to the Government of Mozambique, including regional and district level authorities." Please clarify what, if any, restrictions USAID has put on GUCs to government entities under ECHO.

RESPONSE 56: Please see response for question number 6.

QUESTION 57: Pages 17-18: The table of districts is not consistent with current GRM districting (e.g., Manica and Tete have additional districts not listed here). Should offerors assume that these new districts will have the same PEPFAR prioritization as the districts from which they were divided?

RESPONSE 57: Yes. Please refer to response to question number 5 for updated districts.

QUESTION 58: Page 20: Please confirm that “community viral load suppression of 73% in all ECHO designated districts” should be reached by 2023.

RESPONSE 58: ECHO is required to achieve community viral load suppression of 73% in all ECHO designated districts by 2023.

QUESTION 59: Page 41: The GUC threshold sub-section states, “Partner Government Entities: The total value of all GUCs that provide funds (as opposed to in-kind assistance) to a particular partner government entity (for example, ministry, municipality, district, etc.) must not exceed $300,000 for the duration of the prime contract.” Would USAID kindly consider removing the $300,000 limit?

RESPONSE 59: See response to question number 42.

QUESTION 60: Page 52: Section G.1(b) addresses local currency payment. Our understanding is that USAID is not currently providing local currency to contractors. As such, we request confirmation of this practice, and, if USAID is not providing local currency, that this subsection be removed.

RESPONSE 60: USAID provides local currency payments.

QUESTION 61: Page 57: Section H.5 defines the Geographic Code as 935, but includes the definition for 937. We kindly request that USAID remove the language pertaining to 937 and provide the 935 definition.

RESPONSE 61: Section H.5 of the solicitation is deleted in its entirety and replaced by:

H.5 Authorized geographic Code

The authorized geographic code for this award is 935 defined as (any area or country including the recipient country, but excluding any country that is a prohibited source) is the authorized USAID Principal Geographic Code for procurement of commodities and services:

a. Using funds that are covered by the statutory exemption for the DFA;

b. Whenever a waiver is authorized under SubPart D of 22 CFR Section 228 and ADS 310.3.4.

c. For Procurements under a grants or cooperative agreement when the total procurement element in the award budget is $250,000 or less.

For accurate identification of developing countries, advanced developing countries, and prohibited sources, please refer to Automated Directive System (ADS) 310 entitled – Source and Nationality.

QUESTION 62: Page 64: Section H.15 states, “(1) If, during contract performance, the contractor proposes salary or wages for a new individual(s) that exceeds 5% 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. (2) In addition, there is a ceiling on the reimbursable base salary or wage paid to personnel under the Contract equivalent to the maximum annual salary rate specified in Section H.14 above unless an advance written waiver is granted by the USAID Procurement Executive.” This section contradicts the requirements in AIDAR 752.7007 that allow rates to be proposed in accordance with Contractor’s established policies, procedures, and practices and the applicable cost principle. Please consider removing the salary increase ceiling so contractors can attract and retain the most technically qualified personnel in accordance with the market value of their positions and, instead, require contractors to comply with the standards of reasonableness found in 2 CFR 200.430 as applied to contracts with a nonprofit institution via FAR 31.7 and also require Contracting Officer approval for those salaries above the AWCPS or LCP thresholds.

RESPONSE 62: USAID is willing to allow. The offeror must propose salaries that are fair and reasonable. Furthermore, Section H.15(a) (1) is removed in its entirety and replaced by:

(a) Limitations:

(1) If, during contract performance, the contractor proposes salary or wages for a new individual(s) that exceeds ÁIDAR established threshold 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.

QUESTION 63: Page 112: The instructions for Annex 6 state that the Monitoring Evaluation and Learning Plan (MELP) should not exceed 10 pages. However, the MELP template provided in Attachment J.18 is 11 pages without substantial text. Do offerors have the discretion to modify the template to meet the page limit or will USAID consider increasing the page limit?

RESPONSE 63: Please see response for question number 15.

QUESTION 64: Page 112: The…