AMDT1_WADI_(1).pdf

The purpose of this Amendment to Solicitation SOL-OAA-13-000033 is to incorporate the following changes and attachments as a result of the Questions and Answers.

1. On Page 34. F.5(I)(A)2, Performance Monitoring Reports, line two, please delete “quarterly” .

2. On Page 43, F.7(3)(ii), line one, For Task Orders estimated to be more than $500,000 and equal to or less than $2,000,000, please delete “$2,000,000” and replace with “$3,000,000.”

3. On Page 68, H.27, USAID Subcontracting Goals for FY 2013, please add the following goal:

Veteran Owned Small Business (VOSB): 3.0%

4. On Page 111, L.4, 52.233-2 please delete “Portia Persley” and replace with “Jami Rodgers”

5. On Page 111, L.5, NOTE: In the following proposal preparation instructions “major subcontractors” are those subcontractors expected to perform at least 20% of the technical effort under the contract under this RFP. Please add a second sentence to the note as follows: “The rate of measurement to be used is dollars.”

6. On Page 113, L.6(e), for Hand-Carried or Courier Service, please delete “Portia Persley at 202-567- 5083” and replace with “Jami Rodgers at 202-567-5318”

7. On Page 114, L.7, 2nd paragraph, delete first sentence starting with “Major subcontractors” and replace with “Major subcontractors” are those subcontractors expected to perform at least 20% of the technical effort (measured in dollars) under the contract under this RFP.”

8. On Page 114-115, L.7(a), 3rd paragraph, Not included in this page limitation are the following:

Delete bullet 9 and replace with “Past performance matrix” .

Delete bullet 10 and replace with “Participation target information for U.S. Small and small and disadvantaged businesses, U.S. small NGOs, and Local Organizations”.

Add the following items to the list:

“IDIQ Manager CV (2-page maximum) M&E Plan for Illustrative Task Order – Sample Project Design Broad Branding and Implementation Plan and Marking Plan Subcontractor Letters of Commitment

9. On Page 115, L.7 (a) after last bullet, delete the sentence “All information from appendices shall be referenced in the technical proposal and summarized and included in the annex section” and replace with “Unless otherwise specifically instructed, it is up to the Offeror to decide what to summarize or reference from its annexes in the 15- page main section of the proposal.”

10. On Page 116, 2.(A), delete “NOTE: “Major subcontractors” are those subcontractors expected to perform at least 20% of the technical effort under the contract under this RFP” and replace with “Major subcontractors” are those subcontractors expected to perform at least 20% of the technical effort (measured in dollars) under the contract under this RFP.”

11. On Page 118, L.7, delete 5(i) and (ii) and replace with: “5. Participation of U.S. Small and Small and Disadvantaged Business (SBD), U.S. small NGOs and Local Organizations [See Section M.2]

(i) Section M contains a source selection sub factor elated to the participation of U.S. Small and Small and Disadvantaged Business (SBD), U.S. small NGOs, and Local Organizations in the contract. In order to receive credit under this sub factor, the Offeror must describe how these entities will participate in this contract, should the Offeror be successful.

For the purposes of this Solicitation, the USAID definition for Local Organizations which will be used are organizations (not-for-profit and for-profit) that: 1) are organized under the laws of the country; 2) have their principal place of business in the country; 3) have a managing body with a majority of members who are citizens or legal permanent residents (not-for-profits) or be majority owned by citizens or legal permanent residents (for-profits); and 4) not be controlled by a foreign entity. For regional platforms, the definition includes organizations meeting the same conditions at the regional level.

International organizations in the region implementing directly for USAID may also be counted for regional platforms if their membership is mainly limited to countries in the region. (The term “controlled by” means a majority ownership or beneficiary interest as defined above, or the power, either directly or indirectly, whether exercised or exercisable, to control the election, appointment, or tenure of the organization’s managers or a majority of the organization’s governing body by any means, e.g., ownership, contract, or operation of law. “Foreign entity” means an organization that fails to meet any part of the “local organization” definition.)

For the purposes of this Solicitation, the definition used for a U.S. small NGO is one that has been awarded no more than $3 (three) million in total, USAID direct funding (assistance or acquisition) over the three fiscal years prior to the submission of this proposal.

(ii) Even if the Offeror must submit a Subcontracting Plan (for U.S. small and SDB) in the Price/Business proposal, it must address this sub-factor separately in its technical proposal. All Offerors must address this sub factor regardless of business status. For example, a small business concern prime Offeror must address it by including a target for the work it intends to perform as the prime contractor as well as any work it intends to subcontract to a small business, another SDB, small NGO, or Local Organization.

Offerors may propose a percentage utilization rate that reflects their anticipated teaming arrangements.

USAID will not provide specific percentage targets for utilization of U.S. small NGO’s or Local Organizations.

12. On Page 119, L.8(b), Please add the following sentence to Part 2- Proposed Costs/Prices, paragraph 1:

“The LOE chart and the CPFF proposal is for the first year (12 months) of the five year period of performance.

13. On Page 121, L.8 (e), Part 5:

-- Paragraph 1, replace the first sentence with “ If the Offeror is a U.S. business that does not fit the definition of a small or small and disadvantaged business, it must submit a Subcontracting Plan.”

--Delete the second paragraph and replace with “USAID’s Subcontracting Goals are listed at H.27.

14. On Page 122, L.8(h) – Letters of Commitment (Subcontractors): Delete this section in the Price/Business Proposal, and add it to Page 117, section L.7(b)4., at the second bullet

15. On Page 124, M.1, General Information, add the following at the end of this section:

(f) All proposals will first be considered and evaluated for the full and open unrestricted awards unless the small business proposal specifically indicates it is being submitted only for consideration of the set-aside award. If one or more small businesses are selected for award in the full and open unrestricted award pool, the next two highest ranked qualified small business proposal determined to be the best value to the Government based on evaluation of technical and cost criteria will be selected for the set-aside award unless the proposal is considered technically marginal or unacceptable.

16. On Page 125, M.2, 2, Past Performance, last two paragraphs: Please delete the following:

“then the Offeror will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on performance. The "neutral" rating assigned to any Offeror lacking relevant performance history is a score commensurate with the percentage of points received vs. possible points*. An exception to this neutral rating provision: the non-small businesses prime with no history of subcontracting with small business concerns. Prior to assigning a "neutral" past performance rating, the contracting officer may take into account a broad range of information related to an Offeror's performance.

* For example, a small business prime offeror will not be evaluated on its performance in using small business concerns. If this sub factor is worth a possible 10 points out of a total possible point value of 100 for the technical proposal, then the small business prime offeror’s technical proposal will have a maximum of 90 possible points. If it was assigned a score of 80 points out of the 90 maximum possible points, its technical score for evaluation against the other Offerors would be 88.89 (i.e., 80/90). USAID understands that there may be minor arithmetic differences in percentage terms as a result; however, it considers these differences to be minor and that they will not impact any best value decision made under this solicitation.”

And Replace with:

“then the Offeror will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on performance. A “neutral" rating will be assigned to any Offeror lacking relevant performance history. An exception to this neutral rating provision: the non-small businesses prime with no history of subcontracting with small business concerns. Prior to assigning a "neutral" past performance rating, the contracting officer may take into account a broad range of information related to an Offeror's performance.”

17. On Page 126, M.2, 5. Please delete this section in its entirety and replace with:

“5. Participation of U.S. Small, Small and Disadvantaged Business (SBD) Concerns, U.S.

Small NGOs, and Local Organizations

**Note 1: The sub-factors under this factor are considered to be of equal weight.

USAID will evaluate all proposals in accordance with the following factors for U.S. Small and SDB concerns, U.S. Small NGOs, and Local Organizations:

a. The extent of planned participation of U.S. SDB, NGOs, and Local Organizations in terms of the targets (percentage of expected total acquisition) and the complexity and variety of the work they are to perform;

b. The realism of the proposal.”

Attachment J.3

1. On Page 133, Note 4: Delete Note 4 in its entirety.

2. On Page 133, Note 5: Delete the first sentence and replace with: “For the positions set forth in the Offerors Price and LOE Matrix for the first year (12 months) of the expected five year period of performance, the price for these positions will be determined by using the CDR for all Senior positions; and the lower price proposed for less senior staff, and the prime offeror’s methodology for recovery of paid absences (leave and holidays).

3. On Page 134, first 5 sentences: Delete the following: “must use the labor categories as proposed in Section B.11 only when costing the labor for the illustrative task order. Offerors may propose rates lower than the ceiling rates in Section B.11. The Offeror will use its technical approach to the illustrative task order to determine the level of effort proposed for each of the labor categories during the five (5) year period of performance. See sample chart below.”

And replace with:

“must use the labor categories as proposed in Section B.11 only when costing the labor for the illustrative task order. Offerors may propose rates lower than the ceiling rates in Section B.1 for junior and mid-level personnel. The Offeror will use its technical approach to the illustrative task order to determine the level of effort proposed for each of the labor categories for the first year (12 months) of the five (5) year period of performance.

Page 135, delete:

“Fixed Fee (Not including Subgrants): ___% __________

Total Estimated Subgrant Costs __________ Fixed Fee (On Subgrant Costs): ___% __________ Fixed Fee (On Subgrant Costs w/LOC): ___% __________

Total Estimated Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee: __________”

And Replace with:

“Fixed Fee: ___% __________

Total Estimated Subgrant Costs __________

Total Estimated Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee: __________”

Solicitation Number: SOL-OAA-13-000033 Water and Development Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (WADI) Contract

Questions and Answers

Please note that questions are generally grouped by thematic focus. Some questions are similar and may cross-reference answers from previous question(s). Answers to essentially identical questions received are posted once herein, which accounts for the gaps in the numbering scheme below.

Ceiling Daily Rate (CDR) Questions

Q1. RFP section B.11.b defines 12 labor categories for the IDIQ. Section B.11.f discusses the possible need for staff meeting specific engineering qualifications in the scope of work for some Task Orders. Will the Government consider adding a labor category for specialized technical/engineering staff so price proposal evaluations will accurately reflect the cost to the Government of such labor?

A1. As per section C.6.3, the services under this IDIQ are not substantially or predominately architectural or engineering services. Specialized technical or engineering staff could be included in labor category 1003 - Water Resources Management Specialist, 1004 - Planning and Development Specialist, 1005 - Environmental Specialist, and/or 1006 - Utility Specialist.

Q2. Section B.11 (page 9) – Please confirm that the unburdened ceiling daily rates may be comprised of rates from either USNs, TCNs or CCNs.

A2. There is one CDR for each labor category and it applies regardless of nationality.

Q3. Page 12, Section B.11 (g) – Please confirm that CDRs will NOT be applied to CCNs who are not working in the US or are legal residents of the United States at the time they are hired for a task order.

These CCNs will be held to the FSN scales of their respective country.

A3. The ceiling daily rate (CDR), which is a maximum rate, applies to all categories of personnel. Approvals for rates are required in accordance with AIDAR 752.7007 (RFP pg. 53-

54) and AIDAR 722.170(a), referenced on pg. 12 of the RFP but found in full at:

http://transition.usaid.gov/policy/ads/300/aidar.pdf

Q4. Pg. 8, Section B.11, states, “The CDRs set forth below are fixed for the term of the IDIQ award and are for an eight hour day, and apply to the prime contractor and all subcontractors…” However, Attachment J.3 PRICE AND LOE EVALUATION MATRIX FOR ILLUSTRATIVE TASK ORDER appears to show differing rates for the prime contractor and subcontractors. Will USAID please confirm that each Offeror will be proposing only one set of CDRs for its entire consortium?

A4. Yes, each Offeror shall propose only one set of ceiling daily rates (CDRs) for its entire consortium, per Section B.11.

Q5. Is it acceptable for the Offeror to propose ceiling daily rates that escalate annually?

A5. Yes.

Q6. In Section L.8 as part of the instructions for the preparation of the Cost Proposal, can the unburdened ceiling daily rates for all labor categories be presented per year with escalation built in? Or should the unburdened ceiling daily rates be the same for the entire period.

A6. It is up to the Offeror, either option is acceptable. The rates proposed will be included in any resulting contract. For evaluation purposes, an average rate for the five years will be used as per L.8 (b) Note 2.

Q7. Note 5 on page 133 indicates that the price for positions included in the table will be determined by using the CDR. Further on the same page, under “A. Labor”, the RFP says that “Offerors must use the labor categories as proposed in Section B.11 only when costing the labor for the illustrative task order.

Offerors may propose rates lower than the ceiling rates in Section B.11.” First, did you intend the language to read "Offerors must use the labor category rates". Second, can you please clarify whether Offerors should use the CDRs in the price evaluation matrix per Note 5 or rates that are lower than the CDRs, per J.3.A. Labor.

A7. Offerors must use only the 12 labor categories as described in B.11, though not everyone proposed will be at a senior level – this is dependent on each Offeror’s technical approach. For Senior positions, the Offeror must use their proposed CDR (whether U.S., CCN or TCN) for evaluation purposes. For personnel at levels less than senior, the Offeror must propose a wage for each position listed and describe their assumptions in the budget. No CVs or biodata forms are to be submitted. See L.8(b) 6 for information on budget narrative.

The LOE chart is for YEAR 1 of the illustrative task order which has a five year period of performance.

Q8. Attachment J.3, section A, Illustrative Budget states that, “Offerors may propose rates lower than the ceiling rates in Section B.11.” How will the Government evaluate the cost realism of proposed rates for illustrative expatriate personnel if Offerors use rates other than their proposed ceiling rates?

A8. For evaluation purposes, the proposed CDR for senior-level personnel will be used. For mid-level or junior personnel, it is up to the Offeror to propose rates for the positions listed and describe their assumptions in the budget. See Q7 above.

Section M.3(c) of the RFP describes the factors used to determine cost realism.

Q9. Note 2 in RFP Section H.2.1.d states, “Offerors may propose a single ceiling rate covering the term of award or a ceiling rate in each applicable contract year. If an annual ceiling rate is proposed, USAID will average the ceiling rates and use that figure for evaluation purposes.” Can the Government please confirm that Offerors may propose both annual ceiling indirect rates and annual ceiling daily rates (CDRs)?

A9. The Offeror may propose an annual CDR. The Offeror may propose an annual ceiling indirect cost rate. For evaluation purposes, the average of the annual ceiling indirect cost rate will be used.

Q10. The labor categories in B.11 only include senior staff levels. Are there requirements and ceiling rates for other levels? Can multiple category levels be included in the cost proposal?

A10. Only senior labor categories will have an established CDR in the IDIQ contracts. In the cost proposal, you can include mid or junior level labor categories and rates for the illustrative task order budget.

Indirect Cost Rate Questions

Q11. Page 4, Clause B.6, Ceiling Indirect Cost Rates, is intended to establish ceilings on the indirect cost rates. Question: This prohibition undermines the development of a sustainable business model, especially in local for-profit organizations, that is a Core Principle of USAID Forward. While the Offeror fully understands the need for allocable and allowable cost justifications, which are supported by an annual audit, the entire indirect cost structure should not be summarily prohibited. In addition, this could undermine the competitive nature of independently established subcontractors and subgrantees. Please remove this prohibition.

A11. The ceiling on indirect cost rates is a cost containment measure used by the government and will not be removed. It is up to each Offeror to decide if it is in their business interest to bid on or perform work under this specific contract vehicle.

The water and development work to be done under this IDIQ supports USAID FORWARD, including local organizations, in numerous ways as described in the Statement of Work.

Q12. Pages 3-5, Clause B.5 - B.7, incorporates several fill-in sections concerning indirect rates.

Question: Please confirm that applicants are not required to include these sections in their Price/Business Proposal, rather provide only the information to enable USAID to complete the sections in the awarded contract.

A12. This confirms that the Offeror must provide all information in their proposal which will allow USAID to complete Clause B.5 – B.7 at contract award.

Q13. In Section B.5, can you please clarify what is meant by “source” in the indirect cost rates table?

A13. Where did the rates come from - NICRA, other negotiated rates by cognizant federal agency, 133 audit, Financial statements, etc.

Q14. Page 133, Attachment J.3 Sample Budget, provides separate line items for subcontractor indirects. Questions: As indirect cost rates may differ from subcontractor to subcontractor, how should subcontractor indirects be presented if more than one subcontractor is proposed? If subcontractor indirects are to be aggregated for each line item, how should the applicable bases (i.e. sub travel, sub allowances, sub ODCs, sub grants) be divided between subcontractors?

A14. The Offeror should present aggregated figures, and describe how they arrived at the figures and the assumptions in their budget narrative.

Q15. In Section L.8 (b), there are two separate instructions for Offerors presenting ceiling indirect cost rates:

3. “The prime Offeror and each major subcontractor must propose ceiling indirect cost rates. The proposed ceiling indirect cost rates will be incorporated into the contract as maximum rates per Section B.5. Only the prime Offeror’s applicable ceiling indirect costs will be utilized for evaluation purposes in the Price and LOE Evaluation Matrix.”

5. Indirect Cost Information: While only the prime Offeror’s applicable indirect costs will be utilized for evaluation purposes, the prime and all major subcontractors must propose ceiling indirect cost rates pursuant to their Negotiated Indirect Cost Rate Agreement (NICRA). These ceiling indirect cost rates will be incorporated into the contract (See Section B.6.).

(a) Since Section B.6. provides the format for presenting ceiling indirect cost rates, can we assume that Section L.8.5 provides the correct instructions and reference? (b) Could USAID please clarify whether Section B.5 or B.6 is the correct reference? (c) Where would USAID prefer to see the ceiling indirect cost rates in the price/business proposal outline?

A15. (a) Yes, Section L.8.5 provides the correct reference. (b) Section B.5 refers to current indirect cost rates and B.6 refers to future indirect cost rates proposed. (c) The Offeror may include ceiling indirect cost rates in any portion of its cost/business proposal.

Q16. In Section L.8(b), Part 2 – Proposed Costs/Prices, Number 3, related to the ceiling for indirect cost rates, does USAID need this information only for the Prime Contractor/Offeror and major subcontractor, or for all consortium members?

A16. It is requested for the prime Offeror and major subcontractors.

Q17. B. 6, page 4: Will USAID consider NOT establishing ceiling indirect rates for contractors or subcontractors with demonstrated stable indirect cost history with the U.S. Government? (Imposing ceiling indirect rates introduces a level of risk to CPFF contracting that is not offset by commensurate increases in fee/profit.)

A17. No.

Section B Questions

Q18. B.11, Page 9 provides a table of labor categories for which unburdened ceiling daily rates are requested as part of the cost proposal. Are resumes for these labor categories also requested as part of the technical proposal? If so, are only senior level candidates requested, or should bidders provide resumes for candidates in the senior, mid-level and junior categories?

A18. Resumes for personnel in the labor categories in Section B.11 are not requested as part of the response to the Water and Development IDIQ RFP. Key personnel will be evaluated on a Task Order-specific basis.

Q19. Pgs. 8 – 12, Section B.11 LABOR CATEGORIES – UNBURDENED CEILING DAILY RATES defines 12 labor categories for the WADI IDIQ. Would USAID consider including additional labor categories, or perhaps one “Other labor categories”, in the RFP to address all the IDIQ Cross-Cutting Services, Performance Technical Areas, and other considerations?

A19. The labor categories in Section B.11 address the Cross-Cutting Services and Performance Technical Areas in Section C.

Q20. Page 9, B 11. Labor Categories: There is no labor category described for WASH-Health Specialist, yet a significant emphasis of the agency’s water strategy and this IDIQ are focused on health impacts. Please clarify.

A20. A WASH-Health Specialist would be covered under labor category 1005 – Environmental Specialist. See the definition of this labor category on page 10 of the WADI RFP.

Q21. Page 6, Section B.8 (b) – Central management costs are not authorized under this IDIQ contract or under task orders. However, if the IDIQ Manager can play a technical role on a task order, can the IDIQ Manager be proposed under one of the labor categories?

A21. The IDIQ Manager may play a technical role on Task Orders. The IDIQ Manager’s qualifications for such a technical role will be evaluated as part of the Request for Task Order Proposals evaluation process.

Q22. B.7, page 5: Does USAID have a form for implementing the Weighted Guidelines similar to DoD or other agencies for the ceiling on Fixed Fee? The factors in FAR 15.404-4 do not provide specific weights.

A22. Per ADS 302.3.6.9, USAID Contracting Officers can use another agency’s structured approach for negotiating profit or fee. USAID does not have its own structured approach.

Letters of Commitment for Subcontractors and Personnel Questions

Q23. Should Letters of Commitment be included in both the Technical and the Cost volume and can you confirm that they do not count towards the page count?

A23. Only include Organizational Letters of Commitment in the Technical Proposal. These letters may be included as an annex to the Technical Proposal. The annex containing Organizational Letters of Commitment will not count towards the page limit.

Q29. Please clarify that the following statement on Page 118 applies to all bidders, large and small, and is not limited to local country partners: “Please note that USAID will not recognize any [provision of a] Letter of Commitment that appears to limit a team member to an exclusive arrangement.”

A29. The referenced statement on page 118 applies to all Offerors. The exclusivity of commitments will not be factored into the evaluation.

Q30. Are Letters of Commitment required from personnel proposed in the personnel summary matrix?

A30. No.

Q31. Is a Letter of Commitment required from the IDIQ Manager?

A31. No.

Consortium/Teaming Questions

Q34. Per Section C. 2 p. 14 “The provision of services and tasks in sections C.3.9 “Knowledge Management, Information Sharing, Cooperation and Coordination” and C.3.10 “Performance Monitoring and Evaluation” have been set aside for small businesses with specific expertise in these two technical areas as they relate to the implementation of the Water and Development strategy”. Are these services to be provided by the Small Business primes only, or can be provided by other members of their consortium when necessary?

A34. All members of the consortium.

Q35. Section C.2, p.14. Will small businesses primes be restricted to bid only on Task orders primarily in the technical areas of Knowledge Management and Monitoring and Evaluation or will they be allowed to bid on all technical areas?

A35. Small business primes may propose on all technical areas.

Q36. Pg. 14, Section C STATEMENT OF WORK, C.2 Objective, states that “The provision of services and tasks in sections C.3.9 (Knowledge Management, Information Sharing, Cooperation, and Coordination) and C.3.10 (Performance Monitoring and Evaluation) have been set aside for small businesses with specific expertise in these technical areas.” Also, “Small business primes must be capable of providing all of the services outlined in Section C and not just the two technical areas discussed above.” Please confirm that the two sentences quoted above refer to small business-led consortia, inclusive of all subcontractors, and not just the small business prime (e.g., it would be difficult for any one small business to cover all of the technical scope of work areas).

A36. The quoted sentences refer to small business-led consortia.

Q37. Pg. 117, L.7 (b) CONTENT OF THE TECHNICAL PROPOSAL, 3. Consortium Technical Capability requires the Offeror to “submit a Personnel summary matrix that describes the composition of the consortium or team and describes the qualifications of the personnel that demonstrate the technical expertise required to perform the services set forth in Section C.” Can the Agency clarify what is meant by “composition of the consortium or team”? How does that relate to personnel and personnel qualifications? Should the Personnel summary matrix describe a selection of staff and consultants?

A37. If an Offeror proposes a consortium approach, the Offeror must describe the formal relationship between/among firms with differing capabilities required to meet the requirements set forth in Section C. The personnel summary matrix is a table that briefly describes the qualifications of the technical lead(s) for each of the major technical services requested in the SOW (cross-cutting technical areas and major categories of the performance technical areas).

The personnel summary matrix must include the following information: Technical Service in the SOW, Name of the Individual, Organization, Education, Years of Experience, and Qualifications Highlights. No more than five (5) brief – each no more than two (2) sentences – bullet points should be provided for the qualifications highlights. No more than two (2) individuals should be identified for each of the major technical services requested in the SOW. See Amendment #1.

Letters of commitment from the Organization, but not the individual, are requested as part of the technical package. CVs and salary information or other biodata are not requested as part of the submission. Per the instructions on pages 114 and 115, the personnel summary matrix is not included in the 15 page limit for the technical proposal.

Q38. Please clarify what is meant by “team member” on page 118. “Please note that USAID will not recognize any [provision of] Letter of Commitment that appears to limit a team member to an exclusive arrangement”. Does this refer to international partner organizations, local organizations, or both? If team member refers to international partner organizations, can USAID please clarify the evaluation criteria it will use to rate proposed consortiums for comparison.

A38. Team member refers to all members of the consortium, whether small or large, U.S. or non U.S. Evaluation of the proposal is as described in Section M.

Q39. Please clarify the sentence on pg. 42 which states: “If the small business is awarded as a Set- Aside, the small business must perform at least 50% of the services for the task order.” Specifically, please clarify if this pertains to task orders Small Business contractors/awardees compete on in the full and open as well as task orders Small Business contractors/awardees complete on that are set-aside for small business.

A39. Small businesses must perform at least 50% of the services of the overall contract in the aggregate, not necessarily under any one task order.

Q40. F.7 (b) (5), Small business set aside (P42) provides that: “If the small business is awarded as a Set-Aside, the small business must perform at least 50% of the services for the task order” Is performing the 50% of the work required for each task order individually or for the total of the task orders?

A40. The 50% is in the aggregate for all of the task orders performed by the small business.

Q41. H.27, USAID Subcontracting Goals for FY 2013 (P68) Please confirm that Small Business prime contractors are not required to meet these goals.

A41. Small business prime contractors are not required to meet USAID’s subcontracting goals.

Q42. Pg. 119, section L.8 INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE PREPARATION OF THE PRICE/BUSINESS PROPOSAL, (b) Part 2 – Proposed Costs/Prices, Item 1: In relation to the detailed cost-plus-fixed-fee (CPFF) proposal and Level of Effort (LOE) chart for the illustrative Task Order, it is noted that “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.” As per F.7 FAIR OPPORTUNITY TO BE CONSIDERED, Item (b), 5, and our understanding of the FAR, this small business limitation only applies to small business set-aside task orders. Please confirm that small business primes will not necessarily need to perform at least 50% of the effort for task orders that are competed among all holders of the IDIQ, large and small.

A42. See Q39.

Q43. Pg. 118, L.7 (b) CONTENT OF THE TECHNICAL PROPOSAL, 5. On the participation of “NGOS and Local Organizations”. Would the Agency please clearly define the use of the terms “NGOs” and “Local Organizations?” Would NGOs include for-profit organizations? How about non-profit organizations that are required by Circular A-122 to follow FAR cost principles for commercial concerns?

Does the term NGOs here refer US organizations only? USAID’s website, under PVO FAQ (http://idea.usaid.gov/ls/pvo-faq), states the following: “The term nongovernmental organization (NGO) encompasses any private or nonprofit organization that is formed or organized independently from a national or local government entity.” This broad definition would seem to cover most all Offerors and their consortium members.

A43. USAID FORWARD has a component called Local Solutions. There are two relevant objectives with respect to this question: LS2 # and LS #3. LS #2 calls for investing in local organizations to improve aid effectiveness and sustainability. LS#3 calls for increasing competition and broadening USAID’s partner base by increasing the number of prime contract awards and percentage of total dollars obligated to U.S. based small businesses and small NGOs.

The USAID definition for Local Organizations which will be used for this solicitation are organizations (not-for-profit and for-profit) that: 1) are organized under the laws of the country;

2) have their principal place of business in the country; 3) have a managing body with a majority of members who are citizens or legal permanent residents (not-for-profits) or be majority owned by citizens or legal permanent residents (for-profits); and 4) not be controlled by a foreign entity.

For regional platforms, the definition includes organizations meeting the same conditions at the regional level. International organizations in the region implementing directly for USAID may also be counted for regional platforms if their membership is mainly limited to countries in the region. (The term “controlled by” means a majority ownership or beneficiary interest as defined above, or the power, either directly or indirectly, whether exercised or exercisable, to control the election, appointment, or tenure of the organization’s managers or a majority of the rganization’s governing body by any means, e.g., ownership, contract, or operation of law. “Foreign entity” means an organization that fails to meet any part of the “local organization” definition.)

There is not a similar definition for U.S. small NGOs developed under USAID FORWARD. For the purposes of this solicitation, the definition used for a U.S. small NGO is one that has been awarded no more than $3 million in total, USAID direct funding (assistance or acquisition) over the three fiscal years prior to the submission of this proposal.

Q44. Pg. 118, L.7 (b) CONTENT OF THE TECHNICAL PROPOSAL, 5. On the participation of “NGOS and Local Organizations”: Will the Offeror be expected to provide one target for NGOs and one target for ‘local organizations”, or one aggregate target for “NGOs and local organizations”?

A44. It is up to the Offeror on how it clearly describes its targets reflecting its anticipated teaming arrangements.

Section C and General Technical Questions

Q45. What are the WADI target countries?

A45. The Water and Development IDIQ is intended to be the primary centrally-funded mechanism for implementation of the Water and Development Strategy. The IDIQ is not specifically targeted towards any particular country or region.

Q46. May years of experience substitute for degrees in regards to minimum qualifications for the labor categories?

A46. The education and experience requirements for the Senior level are listed in the table beginning on page 11 of the RFP.

Q47. Pg. 21 – 22, Section C – STATEMENT OF WORK, states that Task Orders predominantly in the technical areas of C.3.9 (Knowledge Management, Information Sharing, Cooperation, and Coordination) and C.3.10 (Performance Monitoring and Evaluation) are reserved for small business set-aside. Could USAID please clarify the criteria that will be used to determine if a Task Order will be considered predominantly (or not) covering these technical areas (e.g., 50% of the total TO budget), especially considering some of the other crossing-cutting services (C.3.1: Data Collection and Management, C.3.2:

Assessment and Analysis, and C.3.3: Strategic Planning and Program Design) are closely related to and/or overlap with C.3.9 and C.3.10?

A47. The Task Order Contracting Officer (TOCO) will determine this on a task order by task order basis based on the nature of the task order requirement.

Q48. Pg. 30, D.2 BRANDING POLICY, (b) “The contractor shall develop a broad Branding Implementation Plan (BIP) and Marking Plan (MP) for the IDIQ”. Please clarify if the Offeror should develop and submit a BIP and MP for the IDIQ as part of the proposal. If yes, should that be submitted as part of the Technical Proposal (not counted as part of the page limit and included in an annex) or as part of the Price/Business Proposal?

A48. Yes, these broad plans shall be submitted as part of the annex to the Technical Proposal and will not count against the page limitation.

Q49. D.2(b), page 30 states that “the contractor shall develop a broad Branding Implementation Plan (BIP) and Marking Plan (MP) for the IDIQ…” Are bidders required to provide a BIP and MP as part of the technical proposal submissions? If so please confirm that the BIP and MP are to be placed in an annex and are not counted toward the page limitation.

A49. Yes, it is confirmed that the broad Branding Implementation Plan (BIP) and Marking Plan (MP) are to be placed in an annex in the Technical Proposal and are not counted toward the page limitation.

Q50. Will USAID please confirm that a draft branding and marking plan is not requested as part of this

RFP?

A50. A broad Branding and Implementation Plan and Marking Plan for the IDIQ is required per Section D.2.

Q51. Page 44 states that there are no key personnel associated with this IQC. Is the IQC manager considered Key Personnel?

A51. The IDIQ Manager is not considered key personnel.

Q52. Pg. 117, L.7 (b) CONTENT OF THE TECHNICAL PROPOSAL, 3. Consortium Technical Capability, requests that the Offeror “describe the team’s approach for monitoring and evaluating the tasks performed under this IDIQ.” The last paragraph states “The monitoring and evaluation plan must be unbiased and transparent…” Please clarify if USAID is requesting a description of the team’s approach to monitoring and evaluating various types of activities under the IDIQ or if the Offeror needs to propose an M&E plan for the IDIQ itself.

A52. A description of the team’s approach to monitoring and evaluating the activities conducted under Task Orders issued under the IDIQ is requested.

Q53. Recent literature reviews have shown the possible association between WASH and maternal infection, but there is not uniform agreement in the scientific community that this association is causal.

Given that the principal causes of maternal mortality are post-partum hemorrhage and obstructed labor, it is not clear how WASH efforts can reduce maternal mortality by 100 - 125 maternal deaths per 100,000 live births. How does USAID foresee that WASH activities under WADI will lead to this expected target?

A53. The target reduction of 100 to 125 maternal deaths per 100,000 live births is associated with the hypothetical task order. Offerors are asked to conceptually design a project to meet this and the other targets on page 139 of the RFP.

Q54. Will the focus on Ethiopia in the case study provide local incumbents or others an advantage?

A54. No.

Q55. Could USAID clarify the level of evidence or proof required before scale-up of WASH interventions? Will USAID support time and resources for appropriate local adaptation and evaluation of interventions to ensure relevance to local contexts?

A55. The level of evidence or proof required before scale-up of WASH interventions, as well as USAID’s support for appropriate local adaptation and evaluation, will be dependent upon the context of the Task Order in which the interventions are contemplated.

Q56. C.6.4, page 29: Does USAID have an estimate of the amount of grants that may be awarded/administered? It appears that the grant amounts may or may not be included in the award ceiling. Please confirm.

A56. The amount of grants that may be awarded/administered will be Task Order-dependent.

Any grant amounts are already included in the WADI $1 billion ceiling.

Q57. Do companies have to have expertise in all areas of the SOW world-wide or can the focus be in a specific geographic region?

A57. The consortium as a whole should have expertise or be able to obtain it as needed for this world-wide contract. IDIQ-holders will not be regionally focused.

Page Limits, Annexes and CV Questions

Q58. Can we assume that the following sections listed in page 115 of the RFP may be included in the Annex Section of the Technical Proposal?

a. Personnel summary matrix (per Section L.8 (b) 3) on the expertise of staff, consultants, and other personnel specialists

b. Contractor Performance Report - Short-Form (see Attachment in Section J)

c. Management Structure Organizational Chart(s)

d. Past performance matrix and past performance report forms, references, SF294s and subcontracting plans, Past Performance information in using small business concerns (per Section L)

e. Small Disadvantaged Business participation program targets information (per Section L)

f. Sample Project Design [10 page maximum]

A58. Yes. The Annex Section will also include the broad Branding Implementation Plan and Marking Plan.

Q59. The technical proposal is to be organized in accordance with the technical evaluation criteria listed in Section M (page 124). In Section M, the (1) Sample Project Design is listed, although it does not count against the total number of pages allowed. Should it be included in the technical proposal as an annex?

A59. The Sample Project Design may be included as an annex.

Q60. Is the Executive Summary included in the 15-page technical proposal page limit?

A60. The 15-page limit is inclusive of an Executive Summary if the Offerors choose to submit one.

Q63. May Offerors provide the CV of the proposed IDIQ Manager as an annex to the technical proposal?

A63. Per the instructions on pages 117 and 118, the qualifications and roles and responsibilities of the IDIQ manager must be described in the technical proposal. Should the Offeror choose to include one, a short (no more than two-page) CV for the IDIQ Manager may be included as an annex to the technical proposal. This annex will not be counted towards the 15-page limit for the technical proposal. References, a Letter of Commitment, salary information, or a USAID form 1420 are not requested as part of this submission.

Q71. Section L.7(a), page 115 requests a personnel summary matrix on “the expertise of staff, consultants and other personnel specialists”. Please clarify whether the individuals shown in this matrix should

•Be identified by the labor categories listed in section B.11 •Should be of senior, mid or junior level (and how many experts per senior, mid and junior category) •Should be the individuals utilized in the cost estimate for the sample project design or should indicate the broader geographic experience of the bidder

A71. See Q37. The individuals must be identified by the labor categories specified in Section B.11. It is up to the Offeror’s discretion as to whether the technical leads would be classified at the senior, mid, or junior level. It is up to the Offeror’s discretion as to whether to include these individuals in the cost estimate for the sample project design.

Q74. Do we need to submit CVs/biodatas for the sample LOE chart (pg 134) for the illustrative TO?

A74. CVs and/or biodata for labor categories in the LOE chart are not required.

Q75. L.8 (b) [Note], should the LOE distribution chart be included in an Annex to the Cost proposal?

A75. The LOE chart should be included in the price/business proposal.

Q77. Is the required Monitoring and Evaluation Plan (pg 124) included in the page limit (10 pages)?

A77. The Monitoring and Evaluation Plan for the sample Task Order may be included as an annex to the Technical Proposal. The Monitoring and Evaluation Plan must not exceed four (4) pages and will not count towards the page limits for the Technical Proposal or the sample Task Order.

Q78. Are any charts and graphs included in the TO page limit?

A78. Yes.

Q79. May Offerors include additional annexes than the ones presented on pages 114-115?

A79. The only additional annexes in the Technical proposal to be included are discussed in this Q&A or Amendment #1 and include: CV of IDIQ Manager (not mandatory), M&E Plan for the sample Task Order, and the broad Branding and Implementation Plan and Marking Plan.

Illustrative Task Order - Sample Performance Work Statement Questions

Q80. Can USAID provide some more structure for the Sample TO? Our concern with the sample TO is that the scope of work is not fully written in its current form. Requiring that Offerors develop the components, outputs, results framework, and indicators in 10 pages may not result in comparable sample TO responses from the Offerors, especially considering the desired far-reaching results.

A80. The Sample Performance Work Statement is complete as written. All Offerors are asked to conceptually design a Project that achieves the targets on page 139. The elements of the conceptual design including, but not limited to, the development hypothesis, the specific interventions, and the anticipated LOE/costs to achieve those targets are at the discretion of the Offeror.

Q81. While Attachment J.4 has important background information and specifies the objectives to be achieved in a 5-year period, applicants might need guidance on some policy and implementation parameters for the proposed program. Examples of guidance are:

a. What is the range of budget that USAID thinks would be necessary to achieve the stated goals and how much of it would be allocated to grants?

b. Assuming there is a limited budget for a country wide approach, would USAID find acceptable to implement a phased program starting in certain regions consolidating pilot programs and then extending to other regions until meeting the limit of available resources?

c. Will this Program only have national-level activities (e.g. policy guidance, analytical studies, advocacy, high-level training, and national-level systems development)? Or will it also manage field programs in sub-national areas, e.g. Grants Under Contracts?

A81. See Q80.

Q82. Attachment J.4, page 139: Could USAID please clarify whether the targets provided on page 139 for the illustrative task order are to be achieved solely by the illustrative TO or do these targets assume additional resources from other USAID projects or other donors/ partners?

A82. See Q80.

Q83. Attachment J.4, page 139: Would USAID share the basis for calculating the targets of the expected results?

A83. The targets were calculated in collaboration with relevant technical experts within

USAID.

Q84. Is Ethiopia an illustrative country or the specific country and context Offerors need to use to illustrate the Program Design section?

A84. Ethiopia is the specific country and context that Offerors must use in the sample Project Design.

Q85. Attachment J.4, p.136, “Development Challenges”: There appears to be a fourth criteria missing.

Please clarify.

A85. This is a typographical error. There is no fourth criterion.

Q86. Regarding Attachment J.3 of the RFP (pages 133-135), to ensure a level playing field for all Offerors, could USAID please provide a target ceiling or range—either in terms of value or LOE—for the Illustrative Task Order?

A86. See Q80.

Q87. Regarding Attachment J.3 of the RFP (pages 133-135), may Offerors add other labor types (e.g., ST Field-Based Personnel (employees of the Offeror) to the Level of Effort Chart for the illustrative task order?

A87. Offerors must only use the 12 labor categories described in Section B.11.

Q88. Attachment J.4 of the RFP (page 139) lists six results for the sample task order. Please confirm that the Offeror will not be responsible for tracking the last three results and that aggregation and attribution results via U.S. Government and/or Government of Ethiopia standardized data collection methods (e.g., DHS survey) will be sufficient.

A88. Offerors must submit a Monitoring and Evaluation plan for the sample Task Order. This Monitoring and Evaluation plan must track progress towards all results that are expected to be achieved under the hypothetical project. The specifics of how the results are tracked, aggregated, and attributed are at the discretion of the Offeror.

Q89. In crafting our sample project design for the illustrative task order, would USAID like us to take into account actual ongoing USAID or other donor efforts in the water sector in Ethiopia, or should we assume that this hypothetical activity is unaffected by actual/current activities on the ground at this time?

A89. See Q80 and Q84.

Q91. Pg. 115, L.7 (b) CONTENT OF THE TECHNICAL PROPOSAL, 1. Sample Project Design, does USAID expect the Offeror to provide a staffing plan for the sample project design and propose experts to complete the proposed work? If so, would Offerors need to include the CVs of these experts in a separate annex? And would the Offeror be expected to propose a Level of Effort chart for all personnel proposed to respond to the Sample Project Design in the Technical Proposal?

A91. The Offeror is not required to provide a staffing plan for the Sample Project Design and is not required to propose experts to complete the proposed work for the Technical Proposal. For the Price/Business proposal, the Offeror is required to provide a LOE chart. Specific personnel and their resumes are not required for the LOE chart, only labor categories.

Q95. Section L.7(b)1, page 115 Directs Offerors “not to contact the Ethiopia Mission, the Government of Ethiopia, local governments or local organizations”.