071323 USAID Salam RFP Amendment 02.pdf

SOL-720-688-23-R-00007 Amendment #02

ATTACHMENT A – Responses to Questions

GENERAL

1. On the cover page of the solicitation, USAID lists the RFP Closing Date as July 31, 2023. However, the cover letter also states that “The required closing date and time for receipt of proposals is USAID/Mali 5 p.m. Bamako local time on July 19, 2023, as mentioned above on the first page.” Can USAID please confirm that the closing date is July 31, 2023?

Response: USAID confirms that the proposals are due on July 31, 2023, at 5 p.m. Bamako, Mali (West Africa) local time as mentioned on the cover page. Page 2 of the cover letter is amended to state that ”The required closing date and time for receipt of proposals is USAID/Mali 5 p.m. Bamako local time on July 31, 2023.”

2. Responses to questions are not expected until July 13th at the earliest. Considering that the RFP has relatively unusual elements (e.g., a randomized control trial) that may prompt questions that require offerors to make significant adjustments after USAID’s responses are received, would USAID please consider extending the deadline by one week (Monday, August 7th at 5 PM Bamako time)?

Response: No. Proposals are due on July 31, 2023.

3. Would USAID please provide an exchange rate for estimating purposes?

Response: Offerors can use the exchange rate of CFA 550 = $1.

4. To assist offerors in preparation of the cost volume, would USAID kindly consider providing a plug figure for cash transfers?

Response: The estimated total amount of the transfer per household will be in the range of $200-$250.

5. Will USAID please clarify whether cash transfer funds should be included under Other Direct Costs or a separate line item in the budget?

Response: No, cash transfer funds will not be included under the Other Direct Cost. Offerors are requested to submit a separate line item to cover that.

6. Can USAID please confirm that the three-month Pilot Phase will take place after the 90-day mobilization phase?

Response: The mobilization phase and the pilot phase will have a fluid timeline over the first six months of programing, with a minimum of three months for the pilot phase.

7. Can USAID please provide the names of other USAID Mali activities operating in the target communes within Mopti and Segou that Mali Salam could potentially coordinate with over the life of project?

Response: The list of USAID/Mali activities in Mopti and Segou regions is attached to this amendment.

Page | 2

SECTION B

8. Section B.2 Contract Type and Contract Services (pg.7) states “the performance objectives and deliverables or outputs described in Section in accordance with performance standards specified herein.” The Section reference seems to be missing, but based on the mechanism of “cost plus fixed fee completion” can USAID confirm this was in reference to contract deliverables listed under Section F. Please clarify the Section referenced in B.2.

Response: USAID confirms that this was in reference to the performance objectives and deliverables or outputs in Sections C and F. With this Amendment, the RFP is revised to read: “This is a cost-plus-fixed-fee (CPFF) completion-type contract. For the consideration set forth below, the Contractor shall achieve the performance objectives and deliverables or outputs described in Sections C and F in accordance with the performance standards specified herein.”

9. Section B -Services and Price/Costs (pg.8) Can USAID please update Section B to include a subsection on the Payment of Fixed Fee?

Response: Section B has been updated to include a subsection on Payment of Fixed Fee. With this Amendment, the RFP is revised on page 9 to add a subsection on Payment of Fixed Fee.

SECTION C

10. Given the range of average village size and amount of money included in individual household cash transfers listed by USAID in Section C., assumptions about future USAID guidance on which villages receive cash transfer interventions cannot be verified at the proposal stage. This will create artificial variance within cost proposals.

Based on this, would USAID consider providing either a plug figure for the total direct cash transfers, or a total percentage of the program dedicated to cash transfers for offerors to incorporate?

Response: The total estimated amount for the cash transfer component is $2,900,000 for the five years implementation.

11. Section C.3.2 Conflict Sensitivity and Do No Harm (pg. 12) states that “The approach must include a robust “Do No Harm” analysis that demonstrates an understanding of the nuanced context of the conflict in each proposed targeted area and thoughtful consideration of any risks associated with the proposed assistance program, and participatory processes that challenge participants to do their own analysis and apply problem-solving skills to their situation.” Given the dynamic operating environment, can USAID confirm that offerors must articulate the process for conducting a Do No Harm analysis and not present current findings that could be outdated upon award?

Response: Offerors must use the mobilization and pilot phases to conduct a Do No Harm analysis in the selected communes. Offerors must provide the parameters of their analysis in their proposal.

12. Page 15, Section C.4.2., Intermediate Result 2: Households Capacity Increased to Address their Urgent Needs: Will USAID provide an illustrative plug figure for the cash transfers to be used for the cost application with the understanding that the amount will ultimately be determined during the household selection process and revisited over the life of the project?

Response: The total estimated amount of the transfer per household will be in the range of $200-$250.

13. Page 15, Section C.4.2, Intermediate Result 2: Households Capacity Increased to Address their Urgent Needs: In Section C.4.2, the RFP states that “the money will be distributed in two installments with an interval of roughly

Page | 3 one month between payments.” Can USAID confirm approximately how many distribution cycles are expected over the life of the project?

Response: The current program allows two to three installments over the lifetime of the project. But the overall goal is to finance cash transfers for four out the five years of programming. However, the results of the pilot phase will also impact the number of installments over the life of the project.

14. Page 16, Section C. 6, Pilot Phase: USAID states that the pilot period will be three months. The intent of the pilot seems similar in complexity to a project inception phase, many of which last six months. Could USAID please extend the pilot phase from three to six months to allow sufficient time for co-creating pilot interventions with key local stakeholders? Having six months for the pilot will also ensure that the findings from any foundational assessments/analysis can also inform the scale-up plan to full implementation.

Response: The mobilization phase and the pilot phase will have a fluid tieline over the first six months of programing, with a minimum of three months for the pilot phase.

15. Page 16, Section C. 6, Pilot Phase: USAID states the IR 1 interventions will be piloted in six villages, while IR 2 interventions will be piloted in four villages. Should the contractor assume that there will be zero, partial, or complete overlap between IR 1 and IR 2 pilot villages?

Response: There will be no overlap between the IR 1 and IR 2 pilot villages. Ten separate villages will be required for the pilot phase. USAID will work with the contractor to select those villages, which will be located in the project regions but outside of the set of villages being considered for inclusion in the main project implementation.

16. Page 17, Section C.7., Randomized Control Trial (RCT) Impact Evaluation: Can USAID please confirm whether the Contractor would be expected to narrow down the current 329 identified villages to the final 300 during the pilot phase? If so, will the Contractor be able to develop the criteria for identifying the final villages alongside USAID?

Response: Yes. USAID confirms that during the pilot phase, USAID, in collaboration with the independent evaluation team will assign villages to a specific treatment arm before the Contractor/Offeror starts work and share these assignments with the Contractor/Offeror as soon as possible.

17. Page 17, Section C.7, Baseline Citizen Survey: USAID states that an independent contract will conduct the baseline citizen survey consisting of, “information on intergroup relations, village-level dispute resolution mechanisms, perceptions of village leaders and governance structures, economic activities, and sociodemographic livelihoods, among other yet-to-be-determined topics.” Considering such consultations can be an important entry point and a strategy for building trust with local stakeholders, would USAID consider incorporating the citizen baseline survey into the Mali Salam project and increase the maximum budget ceiling to account for it?

Response: No, an independent contractor will conduct the citizen baseline survey. The findings and recommendations will be shared with the contractor.

18. Page 17, Section C.7, Randomized Control Trial (RCT) Impact Evaluation: Can USAID confirm that the four treatment arms of the RCT consist of: (treatment arm 1) 75 villages that receive IR1 interventions only; (treatment arm 2) 75 villages that receive IR2 interventions only; (treatment arm 3) 75 villages that receive both IR1 and IR2 interventions; and 75 villages that receive zero IR interventions (treatment arm 4, control group)?

Response: Yes, 75 villages will only receive the IR 1 intervention ; 75 villages will only receive the IR 2 intervention ; and 75 villages will receive both the IR 1 and IR 2 interventions simultaneously. The final set of 75 villages will serve as control villages and receive neither intervention. The contractor will be responsible for no

Page | 4 programming in the 75 control villages. The independent evaluators will collect baseline and endline data in the control villages, but there will be no programming undertaken.

19. Page 17, Section C.7, Randomized Control Trial (RCT) Impact Evaluation: What is the expected period of performance for the RCT?

Response: Although the programming is likely to extend beyond the RCT, the expected period of performance for the RCT in each treated village is one year. The impact evaluation will be conducted by independent evaluators.

20. Page 17, Section C.7., Randomized Control Trial (RCT) Impact Evaluation: Can USAID clarify if the evaluator, USAID, and/or the Contractor decide which villages are assigned to each treatment arm and when this decision will be made during the life of the Salam project? How will this decision be communicated to the villages, especially those in the control group?

Response: USAID, in collaboration with the independent evaluation team will assign villages to a specific treatment arm before the Contractor/Offeror starts work and share these assignments with the Contractor/Offeror as soon as possible. The assignments will take into account the geographic proximity of each study village, to ensure that no two villages in the study are too close together, causing the impact of the programming activities in one study village might spill over into another study village. USAID and the independent evaluation team, will work with the Contractor/Offeror on a communication strategy that protects participants’ and staff well-being as much as possible in situations in which someone asks the Contractor why their village has received a given treatment (or why their village did not receive a given treatment). The independent evaluation team does not have plans to inform control villages that they are in the control group; there is no expectation set regarding program delivery at time of the baseline survey.

21. Page 17, Section C.7. Randomized Control Trial (RCT) Impact Evaluation: Can USAID clarify the type of collaboration expected between the Contractor and the evaluator? Will the Contractor be solely providing data and background information to the evaluator or will the evaluator share preliminary findings from the RCT to inform project implementations and adaptations?

Response: The evaluator will share the results of the baseline survey with the Contractor/Offeror and work with the Contractor/Offeror prior to the program launch to finalize the programming to be implemented (in line with the findings of the pilot work, as outlined in the scope of work). The findings about the impact of the programming, however, will not be available until the conclusion of the program evaluation, which will not occur until after the Contractor/Offeror has concluded its program activities (by definition, the outcome data can only be measured once activities have concluded). The evaluation team would nevertheless be happy to share the evaluation results when they eventually come in to help the Contractor/Offeror tweak the activities it conducts after the evaluation has been completed.

22. Page 18-19, Section C.8., Key Personnel: USAID requires that the Deputy Chief of Party role possess French Level III (General Professional Proficiency) and English Level IV (Advanced Professional Proficiency). The English language requirement carries risk of excluding local candidates who are otherwise extremely well-qualified. Would USAID please change the required language proficiency for the Deputy Chief of Party to French Level III (General Professional Proficiency) and English Level III (General Professional Proficiency)?

Response: Yes. The RFP Section C.8 is amended for the Deputy Chief of Party qualification requirements to read:

“Demonstrated ability to exercise overall quality control, meeting high technical and editorial standards in written products. French Level III (General Professional Proficiency) and English Level III (General Professional Proficiency) are required of the candidate.”

Page | 5

SECTION F

23. Page 25, Section F.7.1 Annual Work Plan states “The first work plan covering activities from award date through September 30, 2023, shall be finalized within 30 days after award.” However, the USAID forecast lists the award date as December 29, 2023. For planning purposes, can USAID confirm an estimated start date?

Response: USAID confirms that the estimated start date of the award is January 31, 2024. In addition, with this Amendment, the RFP is modified to read: “The first work plan covering activities from award date through September 30th, 2024, shall be finalized within 30 days after award.”

24. Section F.7.2., Activity Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning (MEL) Plan (pg.26) states that the MEL “Indicators must be consistent with USAID/Mali’s 2022-2027 Performance Management Plan (PMP) and annual Performance Plan and Report (PPR): The contractor must include a reasonable and appropriate number of USAID Mali PMP and Foreign Assistance Framework (FAF) indicators as noted in the illustrative indicators section and may propose additional F and custom indicators as appropriate to proposed technical approach.” Can USAID/Mali please provide copies of its 2022-2027 PMP and FAF?

Response: USAID Mali approved Performance Management Plan (PMP) and the Foreign Assistance Framework (FAF) are attached to this amendment.

25. Page 26, Section F.7.4. Biweekly Progress Meetings: The RFP states that, “the Contractor will be responsible for attending biweekly meetings with the COR. Discussion items will include but not be limited to reporting on past and upcoming issues and accomplishments, planned events, and progress made during the period. USAID will develop a meeting schedule with the Contractor after award. The Contractor must also be prepared to make periodic, unplanned oral and written briefings to USAID as appropriate.” Can USAID please elaborate on how the Contractor can document that the biweekly progress meetings have taken place?

Response: A joint folder between the Contractor and USAID will be set up to archive meetings notes and agenda.

26. Page 27, Section F.7.6, Annual Report: The RFP states that the report will include the annex that stipulates “A list of equipment and materials purchased, including items purchased, destination of equipment and amount expended.”

Can USAID confirm that this list must only include equipment and materials purchased for beneficiaries and not project operations?

Response: No. The list must include both equipment and materials purchased for beneficiaries and for project operations.

27. Page 28, F.7.9 Financial Report - USAID states that, “On a monthly basis, the contractor will submit a financial report......The report will be submitted thirty (30) calendar days after the end of each quarter.” Can USAID clarify whether the financial reports are due monthly or quarterly?

Response: USAID confirms that the financial reports are due on a monthly basis. The RFP subsection F.7.9 is modified to read: “On a monthly basis, the contractor will submit a financial report and invoice/voucher detailing expenditures by budget line item. The report will be submitted within two weeks after the end of the reporting period to the COR.”

Page | 6

SECTION H

28. Section H.13 Value Added Tax and Customs Duties (pg.39). Please describe how tax exemption will be administered. Will costs be reimbursable, or will the exemption be applicable at the time of purchase?

Response: All USAID programs are tax exempt, and the successful offeror has the responsibility to work with USAID to have their procurement exoneration approval. More detail will be provided after award.

29. Page 39, Section H.15 AIDAR 752.245-71 Title to and Care of Property (Apr 1984): Section H.15 of the RFP (sub-section b) states “Contractor shall prepare and establish a program to be approved by the Mission, for the receipt, use, maintenance, protection, custody, and care of non-expendable property for which it has custodial responsibility, including the establishment of reasonable controls to enforce such program.” Can USAID please clarify what should be approved by Mission? Would the Contractor submit its internal inventory management policy?

Response: At the completion of the contract, the Contractor must submit a closeout plan including the inventory list for USAID approval.

30. Section H.36 (p. 46) states, “the contractor agrees to use an electronic payment system for any payments under this award to beneficiaries, subcontractors, or grants under contracts, where applicable.” Would USAID explicitly state that the cash transfer component under Intermediate Result 2 is eligible for an exception to this requirement?

Response: Yes, the cash transfer component under Intermediate Result 2 is eligible for an exception to use an electronic payment system. The Offeror must propose alternative methods of cash payment to villages without sufficient connectivity.

31. Page 46, Section H.36 ELECTRONIC PAYMENTS SYSTEM, c. Exceptions. The Contractor is allowed the following exceptions, provided the Contractor documents its contract file with the appropriate justification: 1. Cash payments made while establishing electronic payment systems, provided that this exception is not used for more than six months from the effective date of this award.” Given USAID’s description in “Section C.4.2” of, “The offeror should propose overseeing the distribution of the mobile money payments and overseeing the cash payments for the (small number of) households that are not able to accept mobile money,” would USAID consider providing a blanket waiver to provide cash payments to recipients for the duration of the program due to the lack of technology for some of the most vulnerable recipients of the cash transfers?

Response: The Contractor and USAID will discuss specific circumstances where physical payment for longer than six months may be necessary. These cases will be resolved on an individual basis.

SECTION L

32. Section L.6 (p. 69) states that cost and technical proposals must be separate from each other, but instructions for technical annexes in Section L.8.2.v (p. 70) stipulate that Annex 1 and Annex 3 should include a budget of costs associated with each activity. Would USAID kindly clarify whether this information should be included in the cost volume? If so, should the cost information for these annexes be presented separately from the other cost information?

Response: No. The draft work plan must not include associated costs and with this Amendment, the RFP Section L.8.2 is modified to state: “Annex 1-Draft work plan (in table format) with a more detailed Year 1 work plan.”

Page | 7

33. On page 69, Section L.7 Format and Presentation, USAID states “The technical proposal must be written in English and be presented in a readable font size.” Can USAID clarify the required typeface and font size for this proposal?

Can USAID confirm that a smaller and/or different font will be allowed for text boxes, tables, and graphics?

Response: Calibri 11 is the acceptable font and size for proposals preparation, but offerors may use Calibri 9 or 10 for graphics, tables, and text boxes. The RFP is revised to add that: “Calibri 11 is the acceptable font and size for proposals preparation, but offerors may use Calibri 9 or 10 for graphics, tables, and text boxes.”

34. Page 72, Section L.8.1, Management Plan: Can USAID confirm that the 90-day mobilization plan requirement (included in the Management Plan) is to be occurring simultaneously with the pilot phase?

Response: The mobilization phase and the pilot phase will have a fluid timeline over the first six months of programing, with a minimum of three months for the pilot phase.

35.

● Page 70, Section L.8.2, Format of Technical Proposal: Can USAID confirm the number of past performance reports should be included in Annex 7, Past Performance Reports (PPR)? Can USAID also confirm the page length for this Annex and provide a PPR template?

● On page 71, L.8.2, Format of Technical Proposal, USAID states that Annex 7-Past Performance Reports with contact information” shall not exceed 3 pages. Can USAID please confirm whether this is three pages per past performance listed or three pages in total for up to five past performance reports?

● L.8.2 (p. 71) states that Past Performance Reports (PPR) should not exceed three pages. Would USAID confirm whether the three-page limit is per PPR or for the entire annex?

Response: No change to the RFP. As stated under subsection L.8.3.C(3), “Offerors must provide information on up to five (5) recently (within the past 3 years) performed contracts or on-going contracts as a prime or as a major subcontractor, team or consortium member that demonstrate past experience in carrying out tasks similar in content, magnitude and complexity to this requirement.”

No change to the RFP. USAID confirmed that the number of pages for Past Performance Reports must not exceed three (3) pages per performance for up to five (5) reports. A PPR template is provided in Attachment D of this Amendment. The RFP is amended to include this Attachment.

36.

● Page 70, Section L.8.2, Format of Technical Proposal: The RFP states that Annex 4 includes “an organizational chart showing lines of reporting among long-term team members. The third chart will be a Staffing Plan showing titles and names that will form part of the activity team.” Can USAID confirm what the second chart is if the first is the organizational chart and the third is the Staffing Plan.

● L.8.2(v) (p. 70) states that, for the Annex 4: Organizational Chart and Staffing Plan Matrix, there will be an organizational chart first, and that “the third chart will be a Staffing Plan.” Would USAID clarify that the staffing plan is the second chart for this annex, not the third, or specify the two preceding charts?

● Section L.8.2. Format of Technical Proposal (pg.70) Annex 4, USAID states “the third chart will be a staffing plan showing titles and names that will form part of the activity team.” The description of Annex 4 only lists two charts. Can USAID please clarify what the desired three charts are for Annex 4?

Response: There is no third chart required in the RFP. With this Amendment, the RFP is modified to read: “Annex 4:

Organizational Chart and Staffing Plan Matrix: (Not to exceed 5 pages). The Offeror will submit an organizational chart showing lines of reporting among long-term team members. The second chart will be a Staffing Plan showing titles and names that will form part of the activity team.”

37.

Page | 8

● Page 70, Section L.8.2., Format of Technical Proposal: On page 70, under Section L.8.2., the RFP states that the Executive Summary is required to be no longer than one page. In Section L.8.3, the RFP specifies that the Executive Summary should be no longer than three pages. Can USAID clarify if the Executive Summary is one or three pages?

● Section L.8.2 (p. 70) states the executive summary must be “one” or “one to two” pages, but Section L.8.3.b states that the executive summary is limited to three pages. Would USAID kindly confirm that the page limit for the executive summary is two pages?

● On page 70, L.8.2.(iv) Executive Summary, the RFP states a requirement for “1 page maximum” for the Executive Summary, however, on page 71, L.8.3.B. Executive Summary, the RFP states that Executive Summary can be up to 3 pages; please clarify the maximum allowable pages allotted to the Executive Summary.

● The final sentence of L.8.3.B (p. 71) appears to be incomplete. Would USAID please confirm that the rest of this sentence should match the instructions for the executive summary at L.8.2. (iv) (p.70).

Response: USAID confirms that the Executive Summary should be one (1) to two (2) pages. The RFP subsection L.8.2(iv) is modified accordingly.

38. Page 70, Section L.8.2, Format of Technical Proposal): (Page 71, Section L.8.2, Format of Technical Proposal): Can USAID clarify that the past performance reports (Annex 7) that do not have CPARs are to be included in the annex?

Response: USAID confirms that the past performance reports that do not have CPARs must be included in the annex.

39. Section L.8.2. Format of Technical Proposal (pg.70) Annex 1 and Annex 3 both state that the plans must include a budget of “associated costs per activity.” Given that cost information should not be included in the technical volume, would USAID please remove this requirement?

Response: The draft work plan must not include associated costs and with this Amendment, the RFP Section L.8.2 is modified to state: “Annex 1-Draft work plan (in table format) with a more detailed Year 1 work plan.”

40. Section L.8.2. Format of Technical Proposal (pg.70) Annex 5, USAID states that offerors should prepare resumes of Key Personnel and “other professionals who will work on the project.” Can USAID please confirm that offerors are only required to propose candidates for, and subsequently evaluated on, Key Personnel positions?

Response: No change to the RFP. Offerors must provide information on all Key personnel and other professionals who will work on the project.

41. Page 70, Section L.8.2., Format of Technical Proposal): Since the MEL Plan is a draft that will require finalization upon award and after the pilot phase, would USAID be amenable to removing the MEL Plan’s requirement to include targets?

Response: No. Offerors must propose a target for key results which are not linked to the baseline survey.

42. Page 70, Section L.8.2, Format of Technical Proposal): The RFP states that the Contractor should provide a draft workplan in Annex 1 that indicates associated costs per activity. Can USAID elaborate on whether the Contractor should provide a percentage of costs allocated by IR/sub-IRs?

Response: Offerors must provide a percentage of cost allocated by IR and sub-IR.

43. Section L.8.2. Format of Technical Proposal (pg.70) Annex 1 states that offerors should submit a “Annex 1-Draft work plan (in table format) with a more detailed Year 1 work plan.” Can USAID confirm that offerors must include only Year 1 in the draft work plan?

Page | 9

Response: USAID confirms that Offerors must submit only the work plan for year 1.

44. On page 70, L.8.2.(v) Annexes, the RFP requires the proposal to provide a “draft work plan (in table format) with a more detailed Year 1 work plan within Annex 1," however, on page 71, L.8.3.C. Technical Proposal Body, the RFP requires the body of the technical proposal to “present a realistic draft workplan and timeline;” can USAID please clarify what level of workplan detail should be included in the body of the technical proposal versus what level of detail should be included in Annex 1?

Response: There is no workplan in the body of the technical proposal. The proposal must contain the offeror’s response to the entire RFP and the workplan consists of the activities for Year 1 only.

45. On page 70, L.8.2. Format of Technical Proposal, USAID states “Annex 1-Draft work plan (in table format) with a more detailed Year 1 work plan. The workplan must indicate associated costs per activity (not to exceed 10 pages).” Does USAID want this to be included in the Cost Section rather than the Technical Section due to the costs to be listed alongside the workplan details?

Response: No. The draft work plan must not include associated costs and with this Amendment, the RFP Section L.8.2 is modified to state: “Annex 1-Draft work plan (in table format) with a more detailed Year 1 work plan.”

46. Page 71, Section L.8.3, Contents of the Proposal: Can USAID confirm that we will include all organizations that are members of the partnership (as applicable) on the cover page, or should the Contractor include only major subcontractors?

Response: No change to the RFP. Offerors are required to include all organizations that are members of the partnership on the cover page.

47.

● Page 72, Section L.8.3, Contents of the Technical Proposal: Can USAID clarify the required information to be included in the past performance section in the technical proposal (section three in the 30-page technical approach volume)? Should it include summarized information in the past performance annex, as well as other relevant corporate capabilities?

● Section L.8.3.C.3 Past Performance (pg. 73) states that this section shall include “(i) the name of the organization, (ii) the project name, (iii) a brief project description, (iv) the period of performance, (v) the contract amount, and (vi) the name and telephone number and e-mail address of at least two contacts at the organization for which the service was performed. In addition to the technical quality of the Offeror’s performance and deliverables, the assessment of past performance will include project management, customer satisfaction, cost control and quality of home office support. If the Offeror encountered problems on any of the referenced task orders or contracts, they may provide a short explanation and describe the corrective action taken. Offerors shall not provide general information on their performance.” Could USAID please clarify how the Past Performance narrative in the Technical Approach should differ from the Past Performance Report of Annex 7?

Response: No change to the RFP. The information to be provided for Annex 7 is detailed under the instructions provided under subsection L.8.3.C(3).

48. L.8.3 (p.73) requested only 1) the name of the organization, 2) the project name, 3) a brief project description, 4) the period of performance, 5) the contract amount, and 6) the name, telephone number, and email address of at

Page | 10 least two contacts at the organization for which the service was performed. Would USAID please confirm whether it requires only these details or whether offerors have the liberty to expand on past projects?

Response: No change to the RFP. Offerors are required to follow the instructions provided under subsection L.8.3.

49. Page 73, Section L.9, Instructions for the Preparation of the Cost/Business Proposal: In Section L.9 (h), USAID states that “Individual subcontractors proposed as part of the offer should include the same cost element breakdowns in their budget as their prime’s, as applicable.” Can USAID confirm that detailed budgets are required only from major subcontractors?

Response: No change to the RFP. Offerors must provide the same cost element breakdowns for all subcontractors.

50.

● Page 74, Section L.9.(e). Travel and Transportation: Can USAID confirm that the enclosed “consolidated travel chart” should include both international and in-country travel?

● If yes, should it include both air travel and ground travel? Could USAID confirm if the chart should include an itemized list of “other costs” connected to each trip or would they like it rolled up into one figure?

Response: - USAID confirms that enclosed “consolidated travel chart” should include both international and in-country travel.

- Yes. The chart should include an itemized list of “other costs” connected to each trip.

51.

● Section L.9(l) (pg. 75) states “The offeror must propose a fee distribution schedule for review and approval by

USAID. Percentage of fee proposed for each deliverable must be commensurate with the progress toward accomplishment of the results and reports.” Can USAID please confirm if the deliverables for the fee schedule are exclusively those listed in Section F.7?

● Section L.9(l) (pg. 75) states “The offeror must propose a fee distribution schedule for review and approval by USAID. Percentage of fee proposed for each deliverable must be commensurate with the progress toward accomplishment of the results and reports.” Can USAID please confirm if the deliverables for the fee schedule are exclusively those listed in Section F.7?

Response: No. The deliverables for the fee schedule will also include the tasks listed under Section C.

52. Section L.9(g) (pg. 75) requires that “Cost should be broken down by types and include an analysis that it is more advantageous to purchase than lease”. Would USAID consider requiring a purchase v. lease analysis for only high-value items such as vehicles?

Response: USAID confirms that costs should be broken down by types and include an analysis that it is more advantageous to purchase than lease.

53.

● Page 77, Section L.10, Instructions for the Preparation of the Branding Implementation (BIP) and Marking

Plans: Due to the security and operational context in Mali, would USAID be amenable to removing the BIP and Marking Plans requirement?

● Page 77, Section L.10, Instructions for the Preparation of the Branding Implementation (BIP) and Marking Plans: Due to the security and operational context in Mali, would USAID be amenable to removing the BIP and Marking Plans requirement?

Response: No. The BIP and Marking Plans exceptions will be reviewed and approved on the case by case basis.

Page | 11

SECTION M

54. Page 80, Section M.3.1, Technical Approach: Can USAID confirm whether the evaluation criteria under M.3.1.

Technical Approach, are weighted equally?

Response: USAID confirms that the evaluation criteria under M.3.1 Technical Approach are of equal weight. The RFP is amended to read: “The evaluation criteria under the Technical Approach are weighted equally.”

55. Section M.3.1. Technical Approach (pg. 80) states that offerors will be evaluated on “the extent to which the Offeror demonstrates capacity to implement conflict prevention and resolution interventions in a selected village” as well as “the extent to which the Offeror demonstrates capacity to conduct a pilot phase of the Activity.” Section L does not ask for statements of an offeror’s capacity. Can USAID please clarify if offerors should include examples of their capacity to implement IR 1 and the Pilot Activity in the Technical Approach?

Response: Examples of Offeror capacity to implement any IRIs and the pilot phase must be provided under the Offeror past performance section.

56. On page 81, M.3.2. Management Approach and Key Personnel, the RFP calls for the successful implementer to plan “to mobilize within 90 days;” can USAID please confirm that this initial 90-day mobilization period initiates upon award and not following the 3-month pilot phase?

Response: The mobilization phase and the pilot phase will have a fluid timeline over the first six months of programing, with a minimum of three months for the pilot phase.

ATTACHMENTS

57. Attachment J.2 - Can USAID please confirm that offers may modify Attachment J.2 Detailed budget to accommodate line items under main cost elements? For example, under Subcontracts, US NGOs and Local NGOs are listed, but not US-based or locally based businesses.

Response: No. Offerors are required to adapt to the template provided.

58. Page 84, Attachment J.4, Illustrative Local Compensation Plan: Can you please clarify if this is “illustrative” as the title infers or if the Contractor must comply with this LCP?

Response: USAID confirms that offerors are required to comply with the LCP.

59. Attachment J.4 is titled Illustrative Local Compensation Plan. Can USAID please clarify why it is identified as illustrative and confirm if the FSN 12 Salary Maximum in J.4 is the same as the maximum salary referenced in Section H.9(b)?

Response: With this Amendment, the RFP is modified to remove “illustrative”. Therefore Attachment J.4 is titled “Local Compensation Plan”. Yes. The FSN 12 Salary Maximum in J.4 is the same as the maximum salary referenced in Section H.9(b).

[END OF AMENDMENT #2]

Page | 12

ATTACHMENT B: LIST OF CHANGES TO THE TEXT OF THE RFP

Cover Page

Fourth and fifth paragraphs of the second page were revised to read: “Offerors are strongly encouraged to submit any comments or questions concerning this RFP by no later than June 30, 2023. These should be directed by email to bamakoaao@usaid.gov .

The required closing date and time for receipt of proposals is USAID/Mali 5 p.m. Bamako local time on July 31, 2023, as mentioned above on the first page.”

SECTION B

Section B.2, Page 8, Contract Type And Contract Services, delete in its entirety and replace with: “This is a cost-plus-fixed-fee (CPFF) completion-type contract. For the consideration set forth below, the Contractor shall achieve the performance objectives and deliverables or outputs described in Sections C and F in accordance with the performance standards specified herein.”

Section B -Services and Price/Costs (pg.8), Subsection B.9 Fee Schedule is added on Page 9 to cover information on Payment of Fixed Fee.

SECTION C

Section C.8.1.B, Deputy COP (DCOP), page 19, the paragraph on language proficiency is deleted and replaced with:

Demonstrated ability to exercise overall quality control, meeting high technical and editorial standards in written products. French Level III (General Professional Proficiency) and English Level III (General Professional Proficiency) are required of the candidate.”

SECTION F

Section F.7.1 Annual Work Plan, Page 25, the second sentence of the first paragraph deleted and replaced with: “The first work plan covering activities from award date through September 30th, 2024, shall be finalized within 30 days after award.”

F.7.9 Financial Report, Page 28, the first paragraph deleted and replaced with: “On a monthly basis, the contractor will submit a financial report and invoice/voucher detailing expenditures by budget line item. The report will be submitted within two weeks after the end of the reporting period to the COR.”

SECTION L

Section L.7 Format and Presentation, Page 69, the second paragraph is modified to add: “Calibri 11 is the acceptable font and size for proposals preparation, but offerors may use Calibri 9 or 10 for graphics, tables, and text boxes.”

Section L.8.2.(iv) Executive Summary, Page 69 the paragraph is deleted and replaced with: “Executive Summary (1 to 2 pages maximum not included in the 30-page limit). The summary must briefly describe in one to two pages how the Offeror proposes to meet the program objectives, carry out the program approaches, and achieve the anticipated results. Briefly describe the technical and managerial resources of the Offeror’s organization and describe how the overall program will be managed. ‘

Section L.8.2.(v) Annexes, Page 69 Annex 1, the paragraph is deleted and replaced with: “Annex 1-Draft work plan (in table format) with a more detailed Year 1 work plan.”

Page | 13 mailto:bamakoaao@usaid.gov

Section L.8.2.(v) Annexes, Page 69 Annex 4, the paragraph is deleted and replaced with: “Organizational Chart and Staffing Plan Matrix: (Not to exceed 5 pages). The Offeror will submit an organizational chart showing lines of reporting among long-term team members. The second chart will be a Staffing Plan showing titles and names that will form part of the activity team.”

Section L.8.3.B Executive Summary, Page 70, the paragraph is deleted and replaced with: “The summary must briefly describe in one to two pages how the Offeror proposes to meet the program objectives, carry out the program approaches, and achieve the anticipated results. Briefly describe the technical and managerial resources of the Offeror’s organization and describe how the overall program will be managed.”

SECTION M

Section M.3.1, Page 80, Technical Approach is revised to add: “The evaluation criteria under the Technical Approach are weighted equally.”

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment J.4 title is modified to read: “Local Compensation Plan”.

Page | 14

ATTACHMENT C: REVISED RFP (this will be added separately)

Page | 15

ATTACHMENT D: Past Performance Report Template

Page | 16