Amendment_II_of_SOL-OAA-14-00034.pdf

TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE IDIQ (RED BOX) -- GLOBAL HEALTH SUPPLY CHAIN--

SOL-OAA-14-00034 - AMENDMENT II

Please note the following Questions and Answers:

Q. 1 The RFP requires offerors to provide past performance references for themselves and each major subcontractor.

Offerors are to provide information for at least 3 but no more than 5 past performances. Are we correct in assuming that “offeror” means the team?

A. No, please provide 3-5 references for the prime and 3-5 references for each major subcontractor.

Q. 2 Questions are to be submitted no later than 12:00 PM EST, February 2, 2014. Are we correct in assuming that because February 2 is a Sunday that the questions are due the following business day—no later than 12:00 PM

EST, February 3, 2014 as implied by Section L.2 definition of “Time”?

A. Please see Amendment I.

Q. 3 Proposals are due no later than 12:00 PM EST, March 9, 2013. We assume that 2014 is meant. In addition, are we correct in assuming that because March 9 is a Sunday that the proposals are due the following business day—no later than 12:00 PM EST, March 10, 2014 as implied by Section L.2 definition of “Time”?

A. Please see Amendment I.

Q. 4 In the paragraph describing the specifications for creating the text pages of the proposal, the following is specified:

“Do not use a type smaller than 12 point.” Typically graphics and tables contain type that is smaller although no less than 8 point. Would the government approve those two exceptions?

A. Please see the revised Section L.8(a).

Q. 5 The exclusions for page count include “Free standing charts, such as Management Structure Organization

Chart(s).” Lacking other examples, are we correct in assuming the exclusions include other graphical or tabular large-scale information, such as matrixes?

A. Yes.

Q. 6 The RFP includes a “Procurement” technical assistance task (Page 18) and a “Procurement of Goods and Services” technical assistance task (Page 21). Are we correct that:

a) “Procurement” refers to providing technical expertise on the purchasing of medical supply commodities to flow within the supply chain; and

b) “Procurement of Goods and Services” refers to the purchase of support items to improve supply chain security, such as warehouse racking, paint, concrete, etc.?

A. Yes and yes. Your understanding of both references is correct. Per the scope of work, offerors will be expected to provide technical assistance to local partners in the procurement of health commodities, and procure the necessary goods and services required for system strengthening (warehouse racking, shelving, vehicles, etc.)

Procurement of pharmaceuticals and other essential health commodities is not included in this scope.

Q. 7 The checklist for the technical volume, Attachment L-4, does not seem to track with the instructions in Section

L.8. Are we correct in assuming that where conflicts exist, Section L.8 takes priority?

A. Yes, L.8 takes priority. The checklist is provided as a guide.

Q. 8 Do you expect your small business awardees to have the same (complete) breadth of capability that your unrestricted awardees have, or will niche capabilities be acceptable?

A. All offerors will be required to respond to the requirements of the RFP.

Q. 9 In part this section requires: “The Contractor’s draft IDIQ Performance Monitoring Plan (submitted with the

Contractor’s original proposal)...” The instructions do not seem to indicate where in the proposal the PMP should appear, nor do the evaluation criteria seem to enumerate the criteria by which the PMP will be evaluated. Please clarify.

A. There is no performance monitoring plan (PMP) required at the IDIQ level. The PMP will be submitted at the task order level.

Q. 10 Please clarify the instruction for receiving credit for SDB participation. The section states that “The targets may provide for participation by a prime offer, joint venture partner, teaming arrangement member, or subcontractor;

however, the targets for subcontractors must be listed separately.” Will the SDB participation be evaluated in the aggregate or will only the prime’s participation be evaluated for the target 23% participation?

A. The question is not entirely clear. However, any offeror other than a small business concern must meet the minimum target goals for FY 2014 as stated in Attachment J.7 and paragraph (e) of the solicitation. The percentages are of the total contract value.

Q. 11 Are we correct in assuming that the Service Level Agreements described in Section F and indicated as being part of the proposal are to be included NOT in the proposal for the IDIQ, but rather for each of the proposals for specific task orders?

A. Yes.

Q. 12 Section M.2.4 “Past Performance” Sub-factor 6 states “Proposed major Subcontractors, as defined in Section L.5, will be evaluated with the same criteria as the prime offer.” At the IDIQ level, determining if our principal subcontractor teammates may rise to the level of a “major subcontractor” as defined in the RFP is difficult at this time. Nonetheless, such principal subcontractors provide significant capabilities, expertise, and experience in the functional areas covered by this RFP, and will be key contributors to the success of the USAID Global Health

Supply Chain Program if our team wins an award. Therefore, we believe that the past performance of these principal subcontractors should be evaluated as part our RFP response even though they may not meet the RFP definition of a “major subcontractor.” Based on the above, is it correct to assume that an offeror may submit past performance information for its principal subcontractors that do not quite meet the RFP definition of a “major subcontractor” and that the government will evaluate such subcontractor past performance using the same evaluation criteria as for the prime offeror?

A. It is incorrect to assume that the government will evaluate the past performance of an offeror’s “principal subcontractor.” The definition of major subcontractor in Section B.5 (not L.5 as it is stated in the solicitation) is defined as those subcontractors expected to perform at least 20% of the technical effort.

Q. 13 Paragraph 4, second sentence of the RFP cover letter states “The orders that are issued in the amount $1,500,000 or less will be automatically be directed to the small business prime(s) under the IDIQ implementation.” The dollar threshold cited for orders to be reserved for small business is very high and is unduly restrictive with respect to competition and the fair opportunity to compete. To achieve the maximum competitive benefits of a multiple award IDIQ, we request the government remove or significantly lower the dollar threshold (e.g., to the simplified acquisition threshold) for orders to be reserved for small business.

A. Thank you for your request. It has been noted but it is not granted at this time.

Q. 14 For small business goals, the RFP states “offeror must provide, with its offer, targets, expressed as dollars and percentages of total contract value.” Section L.9 (e) states “percentage of the total contract value to be subcontracted.” These are quite different. Which does the government want?

A. Section L.5, paragraph b), states an instruction to an offeror. Whereas in Section L.9, paragraph (e) points-out that the goals listed above are expressed in percentages of the total contract value to be subcontracted.

Q. 15 For small business goals, the paragraph includes only SDBs. Does the government want offerors to provide targets for other types of small business?

A. Yes, please see Attachment J.7.

Q. 16 Does the government want offerors to include DBA costs as a part of allowances?

A. Yes, DBA insurance coverage is required for employees of contractors (and their subcontractors), unless a waiver has been obtained from the U.S. Department of Labor (See FAR 28.305); and for the purposes of an accurate price/cost analysis please do include a DBA costs.

Q. 17 Section C.2, page 17, states that “The contractor should use, wherever feasible, in-country supply chain systems and organization, whether public, private, or non-profit, rather than establishing an operating its own supply chain.

As directed by the client, the contractor may be called upon to directly manage a country supply chain in order to ensure that commodities reach their intended clients.” The RFP also includes a prohibition of directly procuring pharmaceuticals as directed per Section C.2.2, page 21, “Procurement of Goods and Services.” Could USAID please confirm that the contractor will not be called upon to procure pharmaceuticals under task orders even when asked to “directly manage a country supply chain?”

A. Please see response to question 6.

Q. 18 Section C.5(c), page 24, requires the contractor to comply with data standards established by USAID. Can USAID please provide the applicable data standards?

A. USAID is working on updating data standards. The applicable data standards will be provided to partners after the award is made to ensure that the data requested is made available for our Business Intelligence tool to access.

This will require a data mapping exercise on the part of both the vendor and the BI implementing partner.

Q. 19 As USAID is requiring the offeror to support DELIVER and SCMS legacy software applications, can USAID provide system requirements, database schemas, data dictionaries, design documents, and user manuals for these systems? What does USAID envision as the role and responsibilities of the current supplier to transition legacy systems in the event of an award to a new supplier?

A. Support means the offerors should be able to answer basic support questions or provide basic database administration for countries that use a legacy application such as Pipeline or Supply Chain Manager. Eventually, as with all systems, if the tools need to be modified or new, more mature tools are required, requirements should be documented and system decisions can be made on a case by case basis.

Transition between projects will consist of the incumbent partner providing all available documentation and change/bug requests. In addition, the information system teams can meet to do a demonstration and discuss the typical support provided historically.

Q. 20 Could USAID please confirm, in accordance with 41 USC 254b(d)(2)(B), its implementing regulations at FAR

15.403-3(c)(2)(ii), and the FAR 52.244-6 clause incorporated in the RFP, that the requirement in RFP Section

B.7.3(2), page 11, to disclose components of a burdened rate is not applicable to subcontractors who are providing services that constitute commercial items as the term is defined in FAR 2.101?

A. Section B.7.3(2) is not requiring the contractor to disclose the components of the subcontractor’s rate; it is asking for disclosure of the prime offeror’s indirect and profit that is added onto the rate they are charging for the subcontractor’s labor, if that total exceeds the prime’s unburdened ceiling daily rate. So even if the subcontractor is providing a commercial item, the requirements of Section B.7.3(2) still apply.

Q. 21 Section H.11, page 55, states that “Subsequent task orders will specify the authorized geographic code.” Can

USAID clarify whether subsequent task orders may use a geographic code other than 935?

A. We have received a waiver for geographic code 935.

Q. 22 Could USAID please confirm that clauses incorporated by reference in Section I.1, which the FAR prescribes exclusively for fixed-price contracts, will be applicable only to FFP task orders, and that those prescribed exclusively for cost-reimbursable contracts are applicable only to CPFF task orders?

A. It is confirmed that all clauses listed in Section I.1 which are exclusively for fixed-price contracts will be applicable only to FFP task order and that all clauses prescribed exclusively for cost-reimbursable contracts are applicable only to CPFF task orders.

Q. 23 If an offeror or subcontractor’s government sales exceed $25 million, but the offeror or subcontractor’s government customers have not to date elected to review its purchasing system, how should such organizations respond to the certification in RFP Section K.12, page 79? The RFP does not appear to consider this as a possibility.

A. This certification has been deleted.

Q. 24 If an organization’s government customers have not to date elected to review their property administration system, how should such organizations respond to Section K.13, page 79, since the RFP presents only an “affirm” option?

A. This certification has been deleted.

Q. 25 Section L.8(3)(ii)(A), page 93, of the RFP asks for a complete biodata form for the IDIQ Project Director to be included in the Technical Volume as an appendix. As the biodata contains cost-related information, could USAID confirm that the biodata should only be included in the cost volume?

A. Biodata sheets should only be included in the cost proposal.

Q. 26 We greatly appreciate USAID providing a total allowances plug-in figure in Section L.9(b)(1), page 95, to support comparability among offers. To further ensure that all offerors are working from a common understanding, could

USAID please clarify the following:

a) What is the base of application for the 35 percent total allowances plug-in figure? For example, should it be on unburdened salaries of long-term expatriate personnel only or all salaries?

A. The base of application for allowances is the base salary of U.S. or Third Country Nationals living overseas.

Please reference the Department of State’s Standardized Regulations.

b) In addition to the list of allowances detailed in AIDAR 752.7028, could USAID please confirm that the 35 percent plug-in figure includes allowance-like travel and transportation costs detailed in

AIDAR 752.7002, such as to/from post travel, HHE shipment and storage, unaccompanied baggage, R&R travel, and home leave? If not, could USAID please advise on how those anticipated costs should be represented to support comparability among offers?

A. Yes. The 35% should include all costs that could be construed as allowances for staff working overseas. The allowance and allowance-like travel and transportation costs detailed in AIDAR 752.7002 and AIDAR 752.7028 are inclusive in the 35% plug.

Q. 27 Section M.3(a), page 103, states that “the cost/price evaluation will be conducted in accordance with the Case

Study Budget submitted by the offeror.” Does this mean the case study budget described in Section L.9(b) and

Attachment J.6 will be the evaluated price for purposes of the price/technical tradeoff described in Section M.5(b) of the RFP? If not, could USAID please clarify what price will constitute the evaluated price for purposes of the tradeoff process?

A. Yes, the case study budget submitted by the offeror will be evaluated in accordance with Section M.5(b).

Q. 28 Per Section H.20(d), page 57, please confirm that the sale of commercial software licenses (perpetual, SaaS, or other) under the BI&A contract would not preclude a company from participating as a subcontractor under this opportunity.

A. See RFP revisions in Section H.20.

Q. 29 Per Section H.20(d), page 57, please confirm that the sale of commercial IT hosting (i.e., Cloud or managed services) under the BI&A contract would not preclude a company from participating as a subcontractor under this opportunity.

A. Please see response to question 28.

Q. 30 In Section L.8(a), page 88, USAID notes the following items as ones that will not count towards the page limitation:

- “Contractor Performance Report Short-Forms (Attachment is in Section J.8)”

- “Past performance matrix and past performance report forms…”

Could USAID please confirm that “Contractor Performance Report Short-Forms" and “past performance report forms” are the same thing and are both referring to the Attachment in Section J.8?

A. Yes, “Contractor Performance Report Short-Forms" and “past performance report forms” are the same thing;

therefore it will not count against page limitation.

Q. 31 We would appreciate clarification related to the RFP requirements about the content, placement, and evaluation of small business subcontracting information. Please clarify whether we are correct in our understanding of the following:

a) The materials noted in Section L.8(b)(4)(v), page 94 are to be submitted as a separate appendix to the technical proposal on March 11, 2014, and should not be included in the Past Performance submission on February 25, 2014.

A. All past performance information must be submitted electronically on February 25, 2014. Past Performance information will also need to be submitted in hard-copy on March 11, 2014 as part of the technical proposal.

b) Section L.8(b)(4)(v), page 94, requests the offeror to “provide a list of the recent contracts within the past five years, for which you submitted subcontract reports to eSRS and a copy of any similarly recent subcontracting reports if they were not submitted to eSRS.” As most of our contracts are not in the eSRS, we respectfully request the option of submitting 10 relevant SF 294s for contracts that are not in the eSRS for USAID’s review. Alternatively, may we do one of the following:

Provide a list of all submitted SF 294s for the last three years, indicating which contracts are in the eSRS and which are not, or

Provide copies on CD-ROMs(s) of our SF 294s for all contracts that are not in the eSRS

(please note that five years’ worth will be a very large file — more than 500 pages).

A. If offerors have not submitted subcontracting reports to eSRS then you must provide recent and similar subcontracting reports. Please indicate which contracts are in eSRS and which ones are not, and provide the appropriate documentation for the reports that are not included. If providing SF-294’s, please provide only the final report per individual contract, if possible. The RFP is amended to reflect that only recent and similar subcontracting reports should be submitted.

Q. 32 It is our understanding that in Section L.8.a, page 89, of the technical volume, past performance summary, should include a narrative of each past performance submitted in J.8. Is this correct?

A. Yes, each submitted Attachment J.8 - Contractor Performance Report – Short Form should include a brief narrative; the narrative on the Past Performance is limited to five (5) pages.

Q. 33 Could the government clarify what is needed for the Past Performance Matrix described in Amendment 1, Page 2?

Does this vary from the information found in attachment J.8? Will the government issue a separate form/attachment for the past performance matrix?

A. Yes, information found in Attachment J.8 varies slightly from information found in the Past Performance

Matrix. Attached to this Amendment II is Attachment J.12 – Past Performance Matrix.

Q. 34 It is our understanding that the past performance narrative (limited to 5 pages, total) should be included in the technical volume. Is this correct?

A. Yes, past performance submitted electronically on February 25, 2014 should also be submitted in hard-copy on

March 11, 2014 as part of the technical proposal.

Q. 35 It is our understanding that J.8 contains the information required for references. Does there need to be a separate section just dedicated to references?

A. No, a separate section dedicated for references will not be needed.

Q. 36 The instructions cite submitting “...a complete bio-data form and current resume for the proposed IDIQ Project

Director.” We do not find a bio-data form in the RFP. Could the government please send us such a form to complete?

A. Yes, please see Attachment J.13 - Biographical Data Sheet.

Q. 37 The instructions state that the resume and references do not count against the page limit. However, no mention is made of the signed acknowledgement letter. Are we correct in assuming that it also should be attached as an annex and will not count against the page limit?

A. A signed acknowledgement letter will not count against the page limitation.

Q. 38 Does USAID anticipate task orders under this IDIQ that would involve actual procurement of goods (beyond technical assistance related to procurement)?

A. See response to question #6.

Q. 39 Does USAID anticipate task orders under this IDIQ that involve ownership or operation of elements of the supply chain including performing shipping, transportation, logistics, warehouse management activities, etc. (beyond providing advisory technical assistance related to these areas)? If awarded, would USAID anticipate that offerors take responsibility for government assets including medicines and vaccines? Does USAID anticipate that the title and ownership of these goods to be held by the offeror at any time?

A. Operating an in-country supply chain is a possibility under individual task orders, at USAID Mission request, in addition to providing advisory technical assistance to these areas. It is a possibility that offerors take responsibility for government assets including pharmaceuticals and other essential health commodities. It is also a possibility that the title and ownership of these goods would be held by the offeror.

Q. 40 Throughout section C of the RFP, USAID describes several areas of scope related to regulation mechanisms in developing countries. Is knowledge of regulatory requirements (WHO pre qualification, taxes, tariffs, licensing of health care professionals, etc.) in implementation countries important to the scope of this work? How will this be an evaluation factor for award?

A. Evaluation will be in accordance with Section M, as part of the overall capability of the offeror.

Q. 41 Does experience and understanding of new product pipeline for local pharmaceutical and medical device industry, and the associated impact to local supply chains factor into USAID’s evaluation of offerors?

A. See response to question #40.

Q. 42 Does USAID consider experience working with other donors and NGOs in the Public Health space critical to

SCMS

A. See response to question #40.

Q. 43 On page 8, section L.8 (a) USAID states: “Do not use a type smaller than 12 point. Information submitted over the page limits will not be evaluated.” Would USAID consider allowing graphics and tables to have a font size smaller than 12 as long as they remain legible?

A. Please see response to question 4.

Q. 44 On page 81, section L.8 (a), the RFP initially describes the technical proposal as the “technical understanding, capability statement, management, and past performance”, but then states that “Following those sections [referring to the above], the offer should include a Management Implementation Plan, Qualifications for Key Personnel, Staffing Plan, and a Past Performance Statement.” The second reference seems to imply that the Capability

Statement, Management Section, and Past Performance Statement are not considered part of the Technical proposal and subject to the 50/65 page limitation.

a) Is the Capability Statement part of the 50/65 page limitation?

b) Is the Management section part of the 50/65 page limitation?

c) Is the Past Performance statement part of the 50/65 page limitation?

A. Please see revision on page 88. Technical understanding to Statement of Work, Capability Statement, Management, and Past Performance are a part of the 50 page limitation. Technical understanding to the case study has a 15 page limitation. The technical proposal should not be more than a combined 65 pages total.

Q. 45 On Page 93, Section L.8 (b) (3) USAID outlines the requirements for the Key Personnel and Staffing Plan sections.

a) Can resumes of staff other than the IDIQ project director be provided as part of the Staffing Plan or

Key Personnel sections?

A. Only the IDIQ Project Director will be evaluated.

b) Can offerors propose two candidates, at no additional cost, for the IDIQ Project Director role to provide USAID with a broader understanding of the technical scope described in the RFP?

A. Only one (1) IDIQ Project Director must be submitted and one will be evaluated.

Q. 46 On Page 90, section L.8 (b) (1) Subpart B: Case Study (i)‐(iv), USAID describes the requirements for the case study. Should all parts be included in the section: ‘1. Technical Understanding, 1b. Technical approach to Case

Study’ versus the other sections of the technical proposal including the capabilities statement or management sections?

A. No. The case study will only be evaluated in accordance with Section M.2.1B - Case Study.

Q. 47 On Page 90, section L.8 (b) (1) Subpart B: Case Study (iv), USAID describes the requirements for the case study including: “A detailed implementation plan for year one, including staffing and other assistance requirements.” On page 95, section L.9 (b) (2) (ii) USAID describes the cost proposal instructions including: “Contractor Employee

Biographical Data Sheet are required for each key person being proposed.”

a) Does USAID have specific Key Personnel positions for the case study or should contractors propose key personnel positions?

A. Please note the revision on page 90. No key personnel positions are required for the case study.

b) Does USAID want specific individuals proposed as Key Personnel for the Sample Case Study? If so, should offerors include resumes, bios, or brief statement of experience for these individuals? Should these be included in an appendix or in the Technical Approach? How will resumes for the Case Study be evaluated?

A. No specific individuals need to be submitted for the case study evaluation.

c) Does USAID want biographical data sheets for proposed Key Personnel or should offerors propose salaries based on the offerror’s policies and experience in the market?

A. See above responses.

Q. 48 On page 93, Section L.8 (b) (4), USAID describes the requirements for the Past Performance section including:

“The offeror (including all partners of a joint venture) must provide past performance references for itself and each major Subcontractor” and “List in an annex to the technical proposal at least 3 but no more than 5 of the most recent and relevant contracts for efforts similar to the work in the subject proposal”. Does USAID want a total of

3‐5 past performance references from offeror teams or 3‐5 past performance references from the Prime, and 3‐5 past performance references from each major subcontractor?

A. Please provide 3-5 references for the prime and 3-5 references for each major subcontractor.

Q. 49 On page 8, USAID notes that “’major subcontractors’ are those subcontractors expected to perform at least 20% of the technical effort.” For the purposes of past performance information. is the ‘20% of the technical effort’ referring to 20% of the effort outlined in the RFP case study, or overall anticipated and estimated effort of work on future task orders?

A. Major subcontractors represent 20% of the overall anticipated effort of work on future task orders.

Q. 50 On Page 95, section L.9 (b) (1), USAID states: “Offerors will use the following level of effort, in hours to estimate and illustrate costs therein: the case study will require no more than 50,000 hours of effort in the first year of the project, with escalation costs capped at 3%.”

a) Could the Government clarify if it is their expectation that the response will include piloting and implementation across the 5 years or just the design and assessment work in year 1 to meet the objectives over 5 years?

A. The case study will require a maximum of 50,000 hours of effort per year for a period of five years.

b) Is the LOE cap of 50,000 hours for all 5 years of the period of performance, or for just year 1?

A. See above response.

c) Does USAID assume a stable LOE at 50,000 hours over the full term of the period of performance for a total of 250,000 hours?

A. The offeror may propose a LOE up to 250,000 hours for a period of five years, with no year being more than

50,000 hours.

Q. 51 On page 101, Section M.2.2 USAID states that offerors will be evaluated according to their capability to “Manage and operate complex developing country supply chain systems.” Would USAID consider modifying this to

“Advise on management and operation of complex developing country supply chains” since the bulk of the services requested in the scope of the IDIQ involve advisory services related to supply chains rather than actual operation of supply chains?

A. We acknowledge this comment. Specific scopes of work for future individual task orders are unknown at this stage and the contractor must be prepared to provide technical assistance to countries on managing their supply chains, as well as a capacity to operate a supply chain if a future scope of work requires this assistance.

Q. 52 On page 93, section L.8 (b) (3) (iii), USAID states the instructions for the staffing plan including: “Finally, the offeror should also describe the organizational structure of proposed key personnel and their relationship to any subsequent hiring of staff.” On page 102, section M.2.3 Management, USAID states that offerors will be evaluated on the “Lines of authority and responsibilities for staff of the prime offeror” and “organizational structure of key personnel”. As there is only one key personnel required by the RFP, can USAID clarify what it is expecting regarding organizational structure and reporting lines for both sections M and L?

A. Please see the revised Section L.8 (b)(3)(iii) and Section M.2.3.

Q. 53 On page 102, section M.2.4 (6), USAID states that contractor past performance information will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably if: “The offeror is a member of a class of offerors here there is provision not to rate the class against a sub factor.” Can USAID clarify what it means by a ‘class of offerors’?

A. Please see the revised Section M.2.4(6).

Q. 54 On page 9 and 10 of the RFP, section B.7.1, USAID describes and provides a labor category table for unburdened ceiling daily rates. However, this table is not listed in sections L or M. How would USAID like contractors to provide this table? How will USAID evaluate contractor ceiling direct labor rates provided in this table?

A. Please see the revised Section L.9(l) and Section M.3, paragraph b).

Q. 55 On page 9 and 10 of the RFP, section B.7.1, USAID describes and provides a labor category table for unburdened ceiling daily rates. However, in section B.7.1 (5) “Definition of labor categories/ grouping”, USAID has included the description “** To be inserted **.” Will USAID be providing labor category descriptions or should contractors propose descriptions?

A. Offerors must provide a synopsis for each labor category in B.7.1(5) based on the table in B.7.1(4). Offerors are free to propose other labor categories as needed; as result, the offeror must then also provide a synopsis for the other labor categories. Please see the revised Section B.7, Section L.9(l), and Section M.3, paragraph b).

Q. 56 On page 9 and 10 of the RFP, section B.7.1, USAID describes and provides a labor category table for unburdened ceiling daily rates. The labor categories in the table are market as “illustrative”, and the table also lists an example subject matter specialist. The RFP also states: “If junior‐level personnel are required under task orders, they must be proposed at rates below the mid‐level unburdened ceiling daily rate.”

a) Are offerors able to add additional labor categories of subject matter specialists to provide a greater diversity of experts?

A. Yes, offerors are encouraged to increase the number of labor categories under subject matter experts.

b) Are offerors able to provide a greater number of personnel seniorities including junior-level staff?

A. Yes. Please see the revised Section B.7.2.

Q. 57 On page 34, Section F.5.2 d) Section No.4: Financial Reports, USAID provides instructions related to financial reports. Can USAID clarify the requirements of this section? Are the financial reports requested specific to the

Task Orders performed or are they Company‐level financial reports?

A. Financial reports are specific to individual task orders.

Q. 58 The cover letter of the solicitation indicates a 935 geographic code. On page 55, section H.11, the RFP also indicates a 935 Geographic code. However, page 53, section H.8, the RFP indicates a 937 geographic code. Which geographic code is authorized for this procurement?

A. Please see response to question 21.

Q. 59 Pages 40 and 41 make several references to a contractor’s adequate system. Pages 11 also references subcontractor cost accounting systems. In our experience many specialist and local companies do not have adequate cost accounting systems in line with US Government requirements.

a) Can offerors propose qualified and capable subcontractors that do not have cost accounting systems that meet US Government Cost Accounting Standards?

A. In order for the prime offeror to be eligible for cost-reimbursement contracts, there must be an accounting system that is adequate for determining costs applicable to the contract or order. (See FAR 16.301-3(a)(3))

USAID does not enforce the authority of this statute to a subcontractor. However, should there be any non-compliance by the subcontractor, the prime will be held accountable.

b) Are offerors able to propose qualified local and international subcontractors on a fully burdened, commercial item basis without cost build or cost‐based information?

A. If circumstances provide commercial acquisitions under a task order, then offerors would be able to propose qualified local and international subcontractors.

Q. 60 If an offeror does not know, with certainty, the value of task orders it may receive under the IDIQ, how is the value of the IDIQ to be determined for the purposes of determining dollar thresholds for Cost Accounting Standards

(CAS) applicability?

A. Unless exempt, CAS is applicable.

Q. 61 Would USAID consider identifying the primary program countries and making the relevant and applicable bilateral treaties available to contractors so that offerors can begin performing due diligence on the tax and registration requirements for each country?

A. Specific countries using this mechanism will not be known until individual task orders are issued.

Q. 62 Page 7, section B.3, Minimum Order Guarantee, states: The minimum order guarantee for this contract is $25,000

USAID is required to order and the Contractor is required to furnish the minimum order amount of services.

However, section I.5 52.216‐19, Ordering Limitations, states: When the Government requires supplies or services covered by this contract in the amount of less than $50,000, the Government is not obligated to purchase, nor is the

Contractor obligated to furnish, those supplies or services under the contract. Can the government please clarify the minimum order guarantee for this contract?

A. The minimum order guarantee in B.3 is different from the minimum order limitation in 52.216-19. The former provides the minimum amount that a contractor awarded an IDIQ can expect to receive under the award. The later provides that if individual task orders are below the minimum order limitation, then the contractor is not obligated to accept the task order. The two clauses are not related.

[END OF AMENDMENT II]