STARR Amendment No. 1 122111.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

1. CONTRACT ID CODE

PAGE OF PAGES

1 12

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION

NO. 1

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

12/21/2011

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO

5. PROJECT NO. (If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY CODE 7. ADMINISTERED BY (IF OTHER THAN ITEM 6) CODE

U.S. Agency for International Development Office of Acquisition and Assistance, M/OAA/EGAT

Rm. 562-K, SA-44

1300 Pennsylvania Ave, NW Washington, DC 20523

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street, County, State, and Zip Code)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

SOL-OAA-00-11-00075

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

11/18/11

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

CODE:

FACILITY CODE:

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

The above numbered, solicitation is amended as set forth in item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers is extended is not extended.

Offers must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended by one of the following methods:

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted; or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers, FAILURE OF YOUR

ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY

RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If Required)

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS,

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO., AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14

A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify Authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT

ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43,103 (b).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is NOT is required to sign this document and return copy to the issuing office.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.

The purpose of this amendment is to:

1. The RFP is hereby amended as set forth on the following pages;

2. Insert Attachment 1 provides answers to questions received in response to the RFP.

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER

Joseph Lentini

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR 15C. DATE

SIGNED

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

16C. DATE

SIGNED

(Signature of person authorized to sign) (Signature of Contracting Officer)

NSN 7540-01-152-8070 STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 10-83)

Previous Edition Unusable Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

The STARR RFP is hereby amended as set forth below:

1) Section B.5, CEILING ON FIXED FEE – CPFF TASK ORDERS, DELETE “The offeror shall not propose, and the contractor will not receive, a fee/profit for Grants Under Contract(s).”

2) Section C.III.E, Grant Management (Grants under Contracts “GUCs”), DELETE “Profit/fee will not be applied to such funds.”

3) Section C.VI, THE STAFFING PLAN, DELETE the stated “Minimum Education for Senior Positions” for each labor category in paragraphs A-I.

4) Section C.VI(J), IQC MANAGEMENT, DELETE the 4 th paragraph in its entirety and insert in lieu thereof the following:

“The IQC Program Manager and Deputy IQC Program Manager shall have a Master‟s Degree in a relevant field and a minimum of ten (10) years international experience. International experience is defined as devoting the majority of the candidate‟s primary work time to international activities working in developing countries. International experience may include consulting abroad while maintaining a home base in the

U.S. or working/living internationally for extended periods. Preference is given to longer-term fieldwork compared to short-term consultancies.”

5) Section H.4(d), Annual Salary Increases, DELETE in its entirety and insert in lieu thereof the following:

“(d) Annual Salary Increases

One annual salary increase (includes promotional increase) of not more than five percent (5%) may be granted after the employee's completion of each twelve month period of satisfactory services under the contract. Annual salary increases of any kind exceeding these limitations or exceeding the maximum salary in Section H.3 may be granted only with the advance written approval of the Contracting Officer.”

6) Section H.27, USE OF SYNCHRONIZED PRE-DEPLOYMENT AND OPERATIONAL TRACKER

(SPOT) FOR CONTRACTORS SUPPORTING A DIPLOMATIC OR CONSULAR MISSION OUTSIDE

THE UNITED STATES (SUPPLEMENT TO FAR 52.225-19), DELETE in its entirety.

7) Section H.29, SUBCONTRACTING CONSENT, DELETE in its entirety and insert in lieu thereof the following:

“Approved Subcontractors: The following list constitutes the approved subcontractors under this

Contract:

TBD at time of award”

8) Section L.9.II.2.(iii), Illustrative Technical Specialists, DELETE in its entirety and insert in lieu thereof the

“The Offeror shall provide complete and current resumes for one (1) candidate for each of the following

Labor Categories. The proposal should demonstrate that proposed candidates‟ ability to perform the respective position description set forth in Section C.VI, The Staffing Plan. In addition, proposed candidates must also meet the respective minimum academic qualifications set forth below and have at least five (5) years of relevant work experience (international experience is preferred). International experience is defined as devoting the majority of the candidate‟s primary work time to international activities in developing countries and may include consulting abroad while maintaining a home base in the U.S. or working/living internationally for extended periods. Technical Specialists with recognized leadership in the subject area, experience in a broad range of developing countries, and foreign language skill(s) (i.e., fluency

– reading, writing, speaking – in a language in addition to English.) are desired.

Land Tenure Specialist

Minimum Education for Senior Positions: Master‟s Degree in a tenure-related field, or appropriate social science.

Land Lawyer

Minimum Education for Senior Positions: JD or LLM law degree.

Land Administration Specialist

Minimum Education for Senior Positions: Master‟s Degree in land administration, surveying/mapping, GIS, remote sensing or related field.

Post-Conflict/Post-Disaster Land Tenure Specialist

Minimum Education for Senior Positions: Master‟s Degree in anthropology, political science, geography, economics or other related social sciences.

Climate Change and Tenure Specialist

Minimum Education for Senior Positions: Master‟s Degree in environmental sciences, natural resource management or a related field.

Agricultural Economist

Minimum Education for Senior Positions: Master‟s Degree in agricultural economics or a related field;

Ph.D. preferred.

Gender Specialist

Minimum Education for Senior Positions: Master‟s Degree in anthropology, economics, or other relevant social science.

Public Communications Specialist

Minimum Education for Senior Positions: Bachelor‟s Degree in public communications, marketing or a related field.

Monitoring and Evaluation Specialist

Minimum Education for Senior Positions: Master‟s Degree in economics or a related field; Ph.D.

preferred.”

9) Section L.9.II.4(ii)(b), ADD the following sentence at the end of the paragraph: “A maximum of twenty

(20) SF 294 reports may be included in the proposal.”

10) Section L.10(h), Part 8 - LETTERS OF COMMITMENT (IQC Manager, Technical Specialists, Subcontractors), DELETE in its entirety and insert in lieu thereof the following:

“(h) Part 8 - Letters of Commitment (Subcontractors)

The Cost/Business Proposal must include a letter, on subcontractor letterhead, and signed by an authorized representative of each subcontractor, which specifically indicates the subcontractor's agreement to be included in the offeror's proposed teaming arrangement.”

11) Section L.10, INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE PREPARATION OF THE COST/BUSINESS PROPOSAL, ADD the following at the end of this Section:

“(l) Part 11 - Information to Support Consent to Subcontractors

The offeror must address each of the elements in FAR 44.202-2 in order for proposed subcontractors to be considered by the contracting officer for consent of subcontractors to be granted with the initial award.”

12) Section L.10(b)(3), ADD the following at the end of the paragraph:

“Note: Pursuant to FAR 52.219-14, Limitations on Subcontracting, small business prime offerors are reminded that at least 50 percent of the cost of contract performance incurred for personnel must be expended for employees of the small business prime offeror. As such, the Labor Distribution Chart must reflect that the small business prime offeror is performing at least 50% of the effort.”

13) Section M.2(b)(iii), DELETE “(NTE 5 points)” and insert in lieu thereof “(NTE 7 points)”.

14) Section M.2, TECHNICAL EVALUATION FACTORS, DELETE the Note at the end of the section and insert in lieu thereof the following:

“Note: The total scoring available to small businesses is 93 points since sub-criterion M.2(d)(ii), Past

Performance in Using Small Business Concerns, and M.2(e), SDB Participation Program Targets, are not applicable to small businesses. Small business offerors will receive a “Neutral” score for these criteria. The final technical score will be commensurate with the percentage of points received vs. possible points. For example, if a small business prime offeror received a score of 76 points out of the 93 maximum possible points, its technical score for evaluation purposes would be 81.72 (i.e., 76/93). USAID understands that there may be minor arithmetic differences in percentage terms as a result. However, these differences are considered to be minor and will not impact any best value decision made under this solicitation.”

ATTACHMENT #1

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

1) Question: Section C.F on page 34 states that the minimum education for the Agricultural Economist is a

Ph.D. in agricultural economics. Would a related field, such as economics, be considered?

Response: The RFP Amendment addresses this issue.

2) Question: Section C.I on page 35 states that the minimum education for the Monitoring and Evaluation

Specialist is a Master‟s Degree or Ph.D. in economics. Would a related field, such as statistics or program evaluation, be considered?

3) Question: Section M.2, Technical Evaluation Factors, (b) Staffing Plan (p. 116). Is this section worth 31 points as noted, or 29 points (the total of the parts)?

Response: The RFP Amendment reflects a revision to the scoring weight of M.2(b)(iii) from 5 points to

7 points.

4) Question: Our SF 294 report submissions for the past three years constitute more than 500 pages and 20 MB.

May we submit 10 of the most recent and relevant SF 294 reports? Alternatively, may we provide the SF 294 reports for the past three years in the CD-ROM copy of our technical proposal only?

5) Question: Please clarify the point total for small businesses. Page 117 of RFP says SB total is 89, but the points do not add up. What is the point total for b) staffing plan? RFP p. 116 says 31 points, but section (i) is

12, (ii) is 12, and (iii) is 5 for a total of 29 points. If the points added together for (a) technical 40 points, (b) staffing plan (RFP says 31 points), (c) Corporate Capability 12 points, (d) past performance 10 points for SB the total is 93 points.

6) Question: Do technical specialists and IQC Manager/Deputy Manager need to be United States citizens?

Response: The only restriction on this matter is the Authorized Geographic Code of 000.

7) Question: The RFP lists 10 labor categories for staffing, as well as descriptions of the IQC Program Manager and IQC Deputy Program Manager on pages 33-36 (C.VI, Staffing Plan). Each labor category includes a description of Minimum Education for Senior Positions and Position Description. Please clarify the

a. As is standard USAID practice, is equivalent professional experience acceptable as a substitute for advanced degrees to meet the minimum education requirements? For example, could an agricultural economist with a Masters Degree and over twenty years professional experience be considered as meeting the

Ph.D. requirements, etc.

http://c.vi/

Response: The Amendment addresses this issue.

b. The labor categories required by the RFP track those listed in Section C, Statement of Work, except for

Global Health, Poverty and Infectious Diseases (item 5, pages 21-22). Please clarify whether this important category of work is intended to be covered by one of the other requested experts? If so, please provide clarification as to the details. If not, please confirm whether substitutions are acceptable or if this list is intended to be prescriptive.

Response: This effort would be covered under the existing labor categories.

8) Question: Section L.10 (h), Part 8, Letters of Commitment on page 113 of the RFP requires signed letters of commitment for all staff except the Deputy IQC Program Manager. Was this an omission?

9) Question: Section L.9 (II) (2) (i), IQC Management on page 106 of the RFP states that the Offeror shall submit three (3) references for the proposed IQC Program Manager. Can you please confirm that no references are required for the other IQC Primary Point of contact, the Deputy Program Manager?

Response: Per the RFP, references are only required for the IQC Program Manager.

10) Question: Section L.10 (j), Part 9, Biographical Data Sheets. The Contractor understands the requirement for signed Biographical Data Sheets for the IQC Program Manager and the Deputy IQC Program Manager;

however, are signed Biographical Data Sheets (i.e., fully negotiated) required for the illustrative nine

Technical Specialists?

Response: Yes, per the RFP, Biographical Data Sheets are required for all proposed personnel.

11) Question: Section M.2 (b) (i), Staffing Plan on page 116 of the RFP requests demonstrated professional capability and appropriate academic credentials of the proposed IQC Program Manager and Deputy IQC

Program Manager. However, the RFP does not include minimum education requirements for either the IQC

Program Manager or the Deputy IQC Program Manager. Was this an omission?

Response: The Amendment addresses this issue.

12) Question: Section L(4)(a) on page 107 of the RFP states “The contracts/projects provided as references must be relevant to one or more of the five (5) specified technical areas.” Section C (II) (c) (starting on page 14) under the header Resource Tenure in Key USG Strategic Objectives and IQC Technical Areas notes seven technical areas (pages 14-24), which are synthesized in Subsection III to five Technical Areas (p. 24-31), covered under subsections (A) to (E). Please clarify that the PPRs must be relevant to the technical areas on pages 24-31 of the RFP.

Response: The proposed references must be relevant to the five (5) technical areas set forth in

Subsection III (Pages 24-31).

13) Question: Would USAID consider allowing additional appendices other than those listed under L.9 (I) on page 105 that would not count toward the 25-page limit, as long as they are clearly referenced in the technical proposal?

Response: No additional appendices or attachments may be provided.

14) Question: If one or more of the proposed staff comes through a subcontractor, how would the prime offeror present that to USAID in the cost proposal? The template USAID provided only allows for Prime‟s direct staff (and rates) to be proposed in the budget. Also, how should rates be presented for subcontractors who will not be providing one of the technical specialists or IQC management positions?

Response: Per the RFP, only the primes indirect cost rates will be utilized for evaluation purposes.

Subcontractor salaries should be presented unburdened in the budget.

15) Question: Section L.10(b) Part 2- Proposed Costs (p.110). Proposed Costs of the RFP provides a Task Order

Template against which offerors are to provide their pricing. We wish to point out that contractors use different cost structures and apply various methodologies for calculating indirect rates, such as overhead. The current task order template does not provide for the correct application and calculation of different overhead rates (field staff, consultants, home office overhead) and as such, the pricing may be very different among contractors given the differences in NICRA structures. As such, the proposed template for the illustrative task order budget will leave room for inequity. We recommend that in order to ensure consistency in the cost evaluation, USAID allows contractors to budget in accordance with their NICRA rates and against a blended staffing profile, i.e. all bidders are to assume a percentage of field-based employees, home office employees, and consultants, such as 20/70/10 or some variation

Response: Note #2 on Page 111 clarifies that offerors may adjust the indirect rate application in the template pursuant to the rate structure set forth in their NICRA.

16) Question: L.10 (b) Instructions for the Preparation of the Cost/Business Proposal, Part 2 – Proposed Costs

(pages 110/111). Illustrative Task Order Budget Proposal Template:

a) Please confirm that the Offerors should include data for Year 4 and for Year 5 in the template

(and should use the same plug figures as listed for Years 1, 2 and 3).

b) Please confirm that Allowances are considered to be in the Miscellaneous ODCs line.

Response: The cost evaluation under the RFP is based on the 3-year illustrative task order budget.

There is no 4 th or 5 th year in the budget template. The plug figure for Miscellaneous ODCs covers all other direct costs and offerors should not propose additional ODCs in their budget proposal.

17) Question: Can subcontractors to the prime submit their official NICRA separately and confidentially to

USAID as an ANNEX to the basic cost proposal?

Response: Yes.

18) Question: Sections B.5 on page 7 and C.III.E on page 31 state that no fee/profit can be proposed or received for Grants under Contract. This appears to be inconsistent with FAR 15.404-4 and ADS 302.3.6.9, which state, inter alia, that pre-negotiation fee objectives must be determined according to a structured approach that considers contractor effort, risk, and other special factors. Grants require significant effort to administer and carry risks for the contractor. Additionally, the statutory underpinnings of fixed fee at 10 USC 2306(d) and 41

USC 254(b) discuss fee definitions and limitations in terms of total estimated cost, which would include grants in this case. Given this, we respectfully request that USAID reconsider its agency pre-negotiation fee objective of zero percent on grants and allow offerors to charge a fee that is reasonable and consistent with federal regulations.

19) Question: RFP Section B.8(b) states “IQC management costs under this IQC shall not be reimbursed by direct charge allocations.” Can USAID please confirm that the 50 and 30 person-days/per year specified for the IQC Program Manager and Deputy IQC Program Manager, respectively, in the illustrative task order budget proposal template (on pages 110-111) are for billable scopes of work?

Response: Contractors will not be allowed to recover central management costs directly under the contract. However, the IQC Program Manager and Deputy IQC Program Manager may be proposed to work directly under task orders in one of the stated labor categories. The effort in the illustrative task order budget accounts for that effort.

20) Question: To facilitate comparison of the bidders‟ illustrative task order budgets, is USAID willing to provide plug figures for annual salaries for each of the labor categories included in the RFP‟s illustrative task order budget? If no plug figures are provided, could USAID please provide guidance on how salaries for illustrate budget are to be determined?

Response: Offerors have been requested to propose eleven personnel (11) in the Technical Proposal and those eleven positions are stated in the Illustrative Task Order Budget template. The salaries set forth in the budget proposal should be commensurate with the salary history of the proposed candidates set forth in the respective Biographical Data Sheets requested in the Cost/Business Proposal.

21) Question: Can USAID please confirm whether the level of effort included in the RFP‟s illustrative task order budget proposal template is inclusive or exclusive of home-office backstopping required for implementation of the illustrative task order? If exclusive, can USAID provide guidance to offerors on how to include these costs in the illustrative task order budget?

Response: Offerors may utilize only the level of effort set forth in the Illustrative Task Order Budget

Template.

22) Question: On page 52, under Section H.4 Additional Requirements for Personnel Compensation, the RFP states “(d) Annual Salary Increases. One annual salary increase (includes promotional increase) of not more than the annual Cost of Living Increase Adjustment (COLA) received by Federal General Schedule (GS)

Employees percent may be granted after the employee's completion of each twelve month period of satisfactory services under the contract.” We respectfully request that the above-mentioned restriction for salary increases of not more than the annual COLA received by Federal GS Employees be removed from the

RFP as it appears to be inconsistent with AIDAR 752.7007 Personnel Compensation, incorporated in the contract under Section H.3 (page 51), which stipulates that personnel compensation be in accordance with the contractor‟s established policies, procedures, and practices, with reimbursement subject only to the USAID

Contractor Salary Threshold. This inconsistency may preclude contractors from following their established policies, procedures, and practices, as required by AIDAR 752.700.

23) Question: Must the nine illustrative technical specialists to be presented under (b)(iii) be the same as those used to cost the Illustrative Task Order?

Response: Yes.

24) Question: L.10.b.(3) refers to the Labor Distribution Chart in Attachment J.5. How are offerors to complete this information at an IQC level, to provide a reasonable basis of comparison between offerors?

Response: Offerors may estimate labor utilization in the Chart. The Chart is used for information purposes only and will not be evaluated.

25) Question: As firm fixed price (FFP) task orders shift the risk burden to the contractor, would the Government be willing to permit offerors to propose a different fee percentage for FFP as opposed to cost-plus-fixed-fee

Task Orders? ( 10% for FFP, 8% for CPFF)

Response: The fixed fee ceiling for CPFF task orders will not apply to FFP task orders.

26) Question: Please confirm that offerors must submit a 3-year illustrative budget.

Response: Correct.

27) Question: If firms propose indirect ceiling rates per year (Years 1 - 5), may the offeror apply an average of those indirect ceiling rates to its illustrative budget?

Response: Yes, USAID will average the annual ceilings for evaluation purposes.

28) Question: Please provide the option year prices for the contract.

Response: There are no option years.

29) Question: As per L.10.(b) 3), The offeror must also provide a Labor Distribution Chart (See Attachment J.5) as an annex to the Cost/Business Proposal identifying the anticipated labor utilization for the prime and all subcontractors. As presented in Attachment J.5 – Labor Distribution Chart on page 134, the offeror‟s percentage of total labor indicates the Prime at 50%. Please reconsider the percentage of effort expected to be performed by the major subcontractor as it appears to be counter-productive to small business bids.

Response: The percentages included in the Labor Distribution Chart are illustrative and only serve to demonstrate how to complete the Chart. The 20% for Major Subcontractors will remain unchanged.

30) Question: Please clarify if offerors are required to send 2 budgets –one for the Illustrative Task Order and one for the IQC– or if offerors need only to send the Illustrative Task Order budget.

Response: Only the Illustrative Task Order Budget is required.

31) Question: FAR Part 12 encourages the acquisition of commercial items. For this proposal, would USAID consent to a small business subcontractor that uses commercial fixed burdened labor rates? (As this small business does not have a NICRA but does have a commercial price list, we propose using fixed burdened rates offered on a time and material basis instead of a CPFF arrangement. Market research would support the proposed rates, and as the STARR IQC is being competed as well as subsequent Task Orders, competition requirements are met.) Would utilizing the commercial rates of the proposed subcontractor in lieu of a NICRA and EBDs and cost buildup be considered responsive for the illustrative budget?

Response: Offerors must submit proposals directly in accordance with the RFP.

32) Question: Section L.9 (II) (4) (i) on page 107 of the RFP refers to major subcontractors as those subcontractors providing “20% of the effort”. Would USAID please clarify whether this is intended to mean

20% of the level of effort, or 20% of the total dollar value?

Response: It is 20% of the effort – per the Labor Distribution Chart. It is understood that these are only estimates.

33) Question: It is our understanding that firms that have been awarded a small business award on the STARR

IQC are eligible to bid on all Task Orders (not just those set aside for qualified small businesses). Is this correct? If so, what happens if a qualified small business is awarded a larger Task Order? Will it no longer be eligible for Task Orders that come out under the small business set aside?

Response: Small businesses are eligible to bid on all task orders. Task orders under $1M are reserved solely for small businesses.

34) Question: Previous IQCs have required qualified small businesses to provide at least 51 percent of the effort on any Task Orders released under the small business set aside. Is this also the case with the STARR IQC? If so, are small business IQC holders still required to follow the 51 percent rule when bidding on larger Task

Orders (i.e. larger than $1,000,000)?

35) Question: On page 64, under Section H.29 Subcontracting Consent, the RFP states: “Use of subcontracts must be approved in advance, in writing, by the Contracting Officer.” The clause implies that consent to subcontract will be required for all subcontracts, rather than only for subcontracts over the simplified acquisition threshold of $150,000 required by FAR Subpart 44.2—Consent to Subcontracts. Can USAID please confirm that consent to subcontract will only be required as stipulated in FAR Subpart 44.2.

Response: Section L of the RFP has been modified to require this information in the Cost/Business

Proposal for all proposed subcontractors. Section H.29 has been revised to provide USAID Missions and Bureaus with a list of subcontractors that have been consented to by the USAID IQC Contractor

Officer.

36) Question: H.27 Use of Synchronized Pre-Deployment and Operational Tracker (SPOT) for Contractors Supporting a

Diplomatic or Consular Mission Outside the United States (page 64). Please confirm that this Clause pertains to this

Solicitation. The Clause contains a phrase “for this contract in Afghanistan.

37) Question: Considering that a week of work will be lost as a result of the holidays, might a one week extension of the proposal due date be granted? (Questioned posed by two potential offerors.)

Response: No extension to the due date will be granted.

38) Question: In the definition of a “small disadvantaged business” in AIDAR 726.7002(e), it states “Small disadvantaged business” means a small business concern (as defined in FAR 19.001) that is at least 51 percent unconditionally owned by one or more individuals who are both socially and economically disadvantaged (as defined in this section), or a publicly owned business that has at least 51 percent of its stock unconditionally owned by one or more socially and economically disadvantaged individuals (as defined in this section) and that has its management and daily business controlled by one or more such individuals. (See FAR 19.001).” In

AIDAR 726.7002(f), it states “Socially disadvantaged individuals” has the same meaning as in FAR 19.001, except that the term also includes women. Could USAID please clarify that the reference to “Socially disadvantaged individuals” in the small disadvantaged business definition includes woman-owned small businesses?

Response: The definition of SDBs can be found in FAR 2.101.

39) Question: Would USAID consider raising or eliminating the grants threshold amount at the IQC level to allow for flexibility at the task order level based on ADS 303 guidance from November 2010 which sets no maximum for grants to non-US organizations?

Response: The threshold will remain unchanged.

40) Question: Per Section F.5(b)(5), the small business set-aside is contemplated for Task Orders under $1.0M.

However, no such set-aside language appears in Section F.5(c) regarding the size of prospective Task

Orders. Please advise.

Response: The text in F.5(c) places limits on the amount of information USAID Missions and Bureaus may request in task order RFPs. These thresholds are not directly related to the $1M small business set-aside threshold.

41) Question: Please reconsider the authorized geographic code for this IQC. The current 000 code contravenes

USAID objectives for the STARR IQC by preventing offerors from employing third-country nationals, or engaging services and good providers, from the region where a task order will be implemented.

Response: The 000 code will remain for the IQC. However, individual USAID Missions and Bureaus may process waivers for their task orders to authorize a different AGC.

42) Question: I was wondering if you could tell me if there is an incumbent contractor currently performing work for this requirement? If so, could you please provide their company name and contract number?

Response: Several contractors are performing similar work but this is a new IQC sector so there are no incumbent contractors for this requirement.

43) Question: The RFP calls for “approximately six awards of which approximately three may be awarded to qualifying small business (S/B).” Please clarify if USAID considers it permissible for S/B offerors to subcontract to large offerors while simultaneously submitting a proposal as a S/B prime contractor. Similarly, is it permissible for large offerors to subcontract to a S/B offer while simultaneously submitting a proposal as a prime contractor? If so, are there any restrictions or requirements concerning the awards of which the offerors need to be aware?

Response: There are no restrictions in this regard.

44) Question: The RFP indicates that the STARR IQC will have a shared ceiling of up to $700 million, of which up to $250 million will be reserved for CPC countries and $450 million for non-CPC countries. How strictly will these reserved amounts for CPC and non-CPC countries be adhered to?

Response: These ceilings will be monitored and strictly adhered to.

45) Question: Page 56, Section H.13 states that „The Contractor shall be ineligible to furnish, as a prime or subcontractor or otherwise, implementation services under any contract or task order that results in response to findings, proposals, or recommendations in an evaluation report written by the contractor.“ Would USAID clarify on the following point: Would subcontractors who did not participate in said activity, but are members of the prime contractor‟s consortium, also be excluded from bidding for the work? Would this be applicable if the implementation services work was bid outside the STARR IQC, or if the Prime contractor opted to release their consortia members and allow them to join other teams?

Response: A subcontractor that was not involved in an evaluation activity and had no access to the reports or information would not typically be precluded. However, these determinations would be made on a case-by-case basis.

46) Question: Page 32, Section IV Environmental Analysis, states that “all training will include principles of sustainable land use management.” Could USAID please clarify what it means by that statement?

Response: This means training implemented under this RFP that has the potential to directly impact the environment must explicitly include discussion and presentation of information that informs trainees of activities and actions that can be taken to promote sustainable land use management.

47) Question: With regard to Section B.10(a) Firm Fixed Price Task Orders on page 9, what will be the basis of determination for using FFP Task Orders?

Response: Task Order Contracting Officers will determine the appropriate contract type on a case-by-case basis.