USAID Q&A Letter - NOFO #No. 72068524RFA00013_USAID Sahel Resilience Activity 7.16.24 - AO (RA) signed.pdf

Subject: Questions & Answers (Q&A)

Reference: Notice of Funding Opportunity No. 72068524RFA00013

Program Title: USAID Sahel Regional Resilience Activity

Date: July 16, 2024

Dear Prospective Applicants:

The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) would like to thank you for submitting questions in response to the referenced Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO).

Your questions were reviewed, and we hereby provide answers/clarifications enclosed as

ATTACHMENT A.

The deadline for submission of technical and cost applications is now extended from August 02, 2024, to August 16, 2024, at 17:30 PM (GMT) Dakar, Senegal Time.

Issuance of this Q&A does not constitute an award commitment on the part of the U.S.

Government nor does it commit the U.S. Government to pay for any costs incurred in preparation or submission of applications. Applications are submitted at the risk of the applicant. All preparation and submission costs are at the applicant’s expense.

Thank you for your interest in USAID programs.

Sincerely, Robert Almosd Regional Agreement Officer

Enclosed:

ATTACHMENT A – Question & Answers

NOFO #72068524RFA00013/USAID- USAID Sahel Regional Resilience Activity

ATTACHMENT A

QUESTIONS & ANSWERS

General questions

1. Section B.1.Page 6 : Could USAID please confirm if indirect charges can be applied to the $20M rapid response in the Leader Award referenced on page 6?

USAID’s answer: Confirmed

2. Section D.3.Page.11 : Could USAID please confirm that only the proposed subrecipients of the Leader Award need to have their UEIs on the cover page of the application?

USAID’S answer: Confirmed

3. Section D.3.Page.11: Could USAID please confirm whether a 10-point font may be used for graphs and charts.

USAID’s answer: A 10-point font can be used for graphs and charts only. Tables, however, must comply with the 12-point Calibri requirement.

4. Page 30, Section F Federal Award Administration Information, Performance Reporting.

Can USAID please confirm that the relevant reference is 2 CFR 200-329 Monitoring and Reporting Program Performance, not 2 CFR 200-328 as stated in the NOFO?

USAID’s answer: The correct reference is 2 CFR 200.329, see amended NOFO.

a. Page 30, Section F Federal Award Administration Information, A. Quarterly Reports. Given the intent of the Paperwork Reduction Act, would USAID please consider a semi-annual reporting cycle?

USAID’s answer: No, please follow the requirement.

b. If a quarterly cycle is maintained, would USAID please confirm that the content of the fourth quarter is included in the Annual Report, not a separate quarterly report?

USAID’s answer: Yes.

c. If a semi-annual cycle is established, would USAID please confirm that the content of the second report is included in the Annual Report, not a separate semi- annual report?

USAID’s answer: USAID is maintaining quarterly reports.

5. On page 47, it is stated that the Sahel Regional Office (SRO) covers Mauritania, Burkina

Faso, Chad, The Gambia, Cabo Verde, and Guinea Bissau.

a. Would USAID please provide a complete list of countries eligible to benefit from Leader or Associate Award funding under this Activity?

USAID’s answer: LWAs allow all missions to apply for an Associate Award, although the Leader is focused on the Sahel.

b. Would USAID please clarify if there is still an anticipated allocation of funding for potential Associate Awards (i.e. does the 65% allocation to Burkina Faso listed in the Request for Information released in April 2023 still stand?)

USAID’s answer: Programming considerations for Burkina Faso and other Sahel countries are ongoing and no determination has been made on the level of funding for Associate Awards.

c. Can USAID please confirm that the annexes are not included in the 30-page limit?

USAID’s answer: Annexes are not included in the page limitation of the Technical Application as mentioned in Section D.5 “Technical Application format.”

d. Can USAID please clarify how many awards it expects applicants to provide for

History of Performance?

USAID’s answer: Please note that the applicant’s institutional capacity and experience should be included in the Technical Application, whereas history of performance (equivalent to past performance information) must be provided using Attachment F and submitted along with the Business (Cost) application.

There is no maximum limit on the number of awards the applicant may reference as long as the awards are recent and relevant. Please see the amended NOFO.

e. Can USAID please confirm that for the purposes of the cover page, as outlined on page 10, the prime only should include any proposed sub-recipients who would receive funding under the Leader Award, or all sub-recipients, including those who would be eligible for Associate Awards?

USAID’S answer: USAID expects to have all sub-recipients, those which would receive funding under the Leader Award, and those which would be eligible for Associate Awards.

f. On page 11 of the NOFO, USAID states that “10-point font can be used for graphs and charts. Tables, however, must comply with the 12-point Calibri requirement.”

Can USAID confirm that a 10-point font can be used for text in all graphics (e.g., textboxes, Theory of Change, etc.), not just for graphs and charts? Would USAID please consider allowing 10-point font for tables as well?

USAID’s answer: See Answer #3.

6. Can USAID please clarify how soon after the Leader Award is made that Associate Awards can be expected to be released?

USAID’s answer: This information is not available at this time.

7. On page 60 of the NOFO, USAID writes that “No further competition or waiver of competition is required for any Associate Award within the terms of the Leader Award.”

Can USAID please clarify this statement?

USAID’s answer: This means that future Associate Awards will not be competed, notice of funding opportunities will be sent only to the Leader.

8. Page 23, Section D Application and Submission Information, Naming. The NOFO indicates that the name of the proposal should not include abbreviations or acronyms. Would USAID please confirm that applicants may create an acronym for the name of the activity provided the words composing the acronym are, themselves, not acronyms or abbreviations?

USAID’s answer This Activity is named the USAID Sahel Regional Resilience Activity.

Applicants can suggest a different name; however, the standard naming structure is “USAID Project/Activity/Initiative/Program/etc.” Please make sure that the name selected is short, understandable, and translates well into local languages.

9. Page 24, Section D Application and Submission Information, Required Communication Materials, E. Biannual Communications Products. This section lists only one public close-out event, and not anything that would be done biannually. Would USAID please confirm that the only thing required for this is communications products related to the close-out event?

USAID’s answer: Confirmed

10. Page 76, Attachment B – USAID Branding and Marking Template, Exceptions to Marking Requirement. Would USAID please confirm that a waiver of marking is possible for field activities in high-risk, insecure areas?

USAID’s answer: Confirmed, a Branding and Marking waiver may be authorized on a case-by-case and under certains conditions.

Technical questions

11. Section D.5 Pages 13 & 27: On page 13, the NOFO states that the “Technical Approach” must include: A) background; B) activity goals and objectives; and C) major activities to be accomplished linking to expected results with timelines and incorporating all of the elements below, such as environment and gender, and the attached program description.”

On the same page, the NOFO states that the Applicant “must describe… potential solutions and proposed approaches that are technically sound, evidence-based, feasible, and context-appropriate…” as well as a Theory of Change. Since no Associate Awards have been designed yet, should the Technical Approach (incl. requirements A; B; C; potential solutions;

proposed approaches; and Theory of Change) apply to the Leader Award only? If the

Technical Approach is intended to be broader than the Leader Award, would USAID kindly clarify how applicants should address potential Associate Awards in their Technical Applications?

USAID’s answer: Please refer to the instructions section of the NOFO and the Merit Review Criteria as it provides guidance on how applications should be structured and will be evaluated. They incorporate elements related to both the Leader award and potential

12. Section D.5-Page 14: Could USAID please confirm that the Management Approach should focus solely on the Leader Award?

USAID’s answer: Yes, the Leader is expected to propose a management approach and specific process for responding to Associate Award solicitations that is inclusive of all relevant consortium members, fosters creative innovation, and results in sound and streamlined designs and partnerships.

13. Section D.7-Page 17: While Branding and Marking Plan reference on page 17 of the NOFO is only required for the Apparently Successful Applicant, could USAID please confirm that the indicative budget for branding and marking is based on the required communication materials timeline on page 24?

USAID’s answer: Yes, budgets should be inclusive of all Branding and Marking as well as any communication materials needed throughout the life of the activity.

14. Section D.7 Page 25 : Page 25 states, “Construction will not be authorized under this award;

however, this award may include non-structural, cosmetic work, including… An example of this may include rehabilitation of boreholes.” Can USAID please clarify what WASH related construction will be allowed under the LWA? Would reconstruction/rehabilitation of WASH infrastructure be allowed?

USAID’s answer: Any rehabilitation that does not affect structural elements is allowed, like rehabilitating boreholes.

15. Section E,Pages 26.27 (2. a) Merit Review Criterion 1): On page 26-27, under 2.a) Merit Review Criterion 1 is the extent to which the application “provides a technical approach that is tailored to the problem set and takes into consideration the specific country needs and natural, institutional, legal, and cultural contexts…” Since Associate Awards have not been designed yet, and specific “problem sets” have not been prioritized by participating Missions, does Criterion 1 refer only to the Leader Award? If not, would USAID kindly clarify how applicants should address specific “problem sets” in Associate Awards?

USAID’s answer: Yes, Merit Review Criterion 1 refers to the Leader Award.

16. Section F.C. Reporting Requirements Page 38 (GESI): Could USAID please confirm when the Gender Analysis is to be done, either proposal stage or post award, if the GESI Action Plan is due within 90 days of the award start date?

USAID’s answer: The gender analysis/assessment is mandatory. It feeds the GESI Plan, which is due within 90 days of the start date of the award.

17. Section F.C. Reporting Requirements Page 40: Could USAID please confirm where in the proposal the 6-month Initial Work Plan (Implementation Plan) should be included? Is this what USAID means by “timeline” on page 13 under Technical Approach, or should the Initial Work Plan be added to the list of Annexes?

USAID’s answer: The initial work plan covers a six-month inception period and is submitted with the Technical Approach, it is not an annex.

18. Section F.C. Reporting Requirements Page 42(AMEL): Could USAID please confirm whether a Draft MEAL plan (AMELP) is due with the technical application or if it is due post-award (60 or 90 days after)? If included in the technical application, could USAID please confirm that it should be added to the list of annexes, or will it be included in the 30-page max technical approach?

USAID’s answer: Please see the amended NOFO. Per the summary of reports/deliverables table on p. 41-42, the draft AMELP is due with the technical application as an annex. The final AMELP is due within 60 days after award.

19. Section H Page46: Could you please confirm if Rapid Response programming under the Leader applies to Burkina-Faso, Chad and Mauritania only?

USAID’s answer: See answer #5.

20. Attachment A, Section B.Pages 50-52 (Materials on DEC): On pages 50-52, the NOFO identifies prior USAID investments in Burkina Faso, Mauritania, and Chad that are highly relevant to the anticipated SRRA. Yet, a comprehensive search of the USAID DEC revealed few documents about these wide-ranging activities (Yidgiri, TEV, VimPlus, SERVIR WA2, and Nafoore are exceptions; their documents have been posted on the DEC). In order for Applicants to prepare responsive applications for the Regional Resilience Activity, would USAID kindly provide access to relevant public documents, progress reports, and/or evaluations related to SCC, PREPARE-BURKINA, Bridge Youth Connect, TIFR-Nuru, and FAA?

USAID’s answer: Applicants should rely on documents that are publicly available on the

DEC.

21. Attachment A, Section B.Page 54: Sahel Alliance covers 5 countries of Burkina Faso, Chad, Mali, Mauritania, and Niger while countries mentioned in the NOFO are only 3 of these countries. Will the Associate Awards cover only the 3 countries in the NOFO or possibly include other countries in the Sahel region such as Cameroon, the Gambia, Mali, Niger, Nigeria, Senegal, or Guinea?

USAID’s answer: See answer #5

22. Attachment A, Section D,Pages 55-60: In the RFI #72068523RFI00001, USAID envisions 12 interventions, which are no longer reflected in NOFO #72068524RFA00013. Could USAID please clarify if USAID is still prioritizing these 12 interventions?

USAID’s answer: Activities must be related to the NOFO #72068524RFA00013. Other interventions may be addressed through Associate Awards.

23. Attachment A, Section D,Page 59: Could USAID please confirm if learning under the Leader, to be shared with key stakeholders in the Sahel, applies to Burkina-Faso, Chad and Mauritania only?

USAID’s answer: Learning under the LWA will be shared wherever the SRRP is being implemented.

24. Attachment A, Section D,Page 59( RFI): USAID’s RFI placed a heavy emphasis on Burkina Faso, anticipating that approximately two-thirds of Associate Award funding would likely target Burkina Faso. Since there is no such emphasis in the NOFO, could USAID kindly clarify whether USAID no longer anticipates a disproportionate emphasis on Burkina Faso for this

LWA?

USAID’s answer: Programming considerations for Burkina Faso and other Sahel countries are ongoing and no determination has been made on the level of funding for Associate Awards.

25. The cover letter states that “USAID intends to provide $200,000,000 in total USAID funding (LWA including any future Associate Award) over a five-year period. The competition covers both the initial Leader Award and all subsequent Associate Awards (total ceiling of $165,000,000).” The instructions in Section D for submission of the cost proposal provide information on the detailed budget for the Leader Award; however, it is unclear whether the application for funding should be inclusive of all Associate Awards or exclusive of this amount. Could USAID please confirm whether the applicant’s summary budget should reflect the total funding of $200,000,000, inclusive of the $165,000,000 for Associate Awards, or if the cost application should only reflect the $35,000,000 Leader Award?

USAID’s answer: The maximum estimated budget for the initial Leader award is $35M.

26. Would USAID consider changing the instructions in Section D.3 to allow 10-point Calibri font in text boxes and tables?

USAID’s answer: No. A 10-point font can be used for graphs and charts. Tables, however, must comply with the 12-point Calibri requirement.

27. Section D.6, Institutional Capacity and Experience, references History of Performance information to be included in annexes. As History of Performance appears under Section D.7(h), could USAID clarify if it should be included in the Business (Cost) Application, while Institutional Capacity and Experience is included in the Technical Application?

USAID’s answer: Institutional Capacity and Experience should be addressed in the Technical Application. The History of Performance (past performance information) should be included in the Business(Cost) Application and use Attachment F. See amended NOFO.

28. Section D.7, History of Performance, reads, “The Applicant (prime only) must provide information regarding its recent (not to exceed three years) history of performance on any cost-reimbursement contracts, grants, or cooperative agreements (not to exceed five years).” Could USAID please clarify if both instances should read “(not to exceed three years)” or “(not to exceed five years)”?

USAID’s answer: Please see the amended NOFO. Per ADS 303, an applicant must provide a list of all its cost-reimbursement contracts, grants, or cooperative agreements involving similar or related programs during the past three years. For the purposes of this NOFO, applicants may provide additional history of performance (Attachment F - Past Performance Information) that is similar and relevant going back up to 10 years.

29. Would USAID share the most recent RISE II midline/endline assessments not already available on the Development Experience Clearinghouse?

USAID’s answer: Applicants should rely on documents that are publicly available on the

DEC.

30. 6. On page 38, the NOFO states that a gender analysis/assessment is mandatory and will feed the GESI plan, due within 90 days of award. Has USAID conducted or will it conduct a gender analysis for this activity to share with the successful applicant? If USAID has not conducted its own analysis, would it consider extending the deadline for the gender analysis and GESI action plan to 120 days after award to allow time for a more comprehensive and informative gender analysis, including primary data collection?

USAID’s answer: USAID will require the recipient to conduct a full gender analysis. USAID may consider extending the deadline from 90 days to 120 days after award, this will be negotiated with the Apparently Successful Applicant.

31. Section F, under Summary of Reports/Deliverables, indicates the AMELP “draft due with the technical application and final within 60 days after award.” However, the AMELP does not appear in the Technical Application instructions or evaluation criteria. Could USAID please confirm that the CLA approach is due with the technical application and that the full AMELP will be due 60 days after award?

USAID’s answer: Please see amended NOFO. A draft AMELP, which is part of the CLA Approach, is due with the technical application as an annex. The final AMELP will be due 60 days after the award.

32. Given that Attachment A indicates that this LWA will allow for both Associate Awards and buy-ins, could USAID provide additional information on the process for Associate Awards versus buy-ins under the LWA?

USAID’s answer: “Buy-ins” will be permitted under the LWA and all USAID operating units are allowed to issue Associate Awards for resilience programs. Please see the amended

NOFO.

33. In Attachment A on page 47, the NOFO states, “The Sahel Regional Resilience Program LWA allows all USAID operating units to issue Associate Awards for resilience programs within the Sahel.” Can you clarify if any portion of the pool of funds for associate awards will be allocated to RFSAs or other types of USAID assistance?

USAID’s answer: No portion of the funds is reserved for RFSAs or other types of USAID assistance though they remain eligible to use the LWA as long as they are within scope and approved. Collaboration with the RFSA partners will be particularly important during Year One of the SRRP and of any future RFSA awards, during which time RFSAs will be called upon to conduct analyses and assessments to refine their proposed activities.

34. Page 12-13, Section D Part 5, Technical Application Format, states, “the Technical Application must include the following sections and observe the indicated page limitations.

Note that Sections V. Technical Approach, VI. CLA Approach, VII. Management Approach, and VIII. Localization Approach, described below, must not exceed 30 pages combined.”

Would USAID please remove the Roman numerals for the referenced Sections – Section V.

Technical Approach, VI. CLA Approach, VII. Management Approach, and VII. Localization Approach – as these numerals do not otherwise appear in the NOFO?

USAID’s answer: See amended NOFO.

35. Page 13 includes the CLA Approach and Localization Approach with bold headers, but does not detail what they should include. Would USAID please clarify what information should specifically be included for the CLA Approach and Localization Approach outside of what would already be included in the Technical Approach and Management Approach?

USAID’s answer: In the CLA Approach the Applicant highlights the appropriate technical and managerial competencies to successfully implement the activity and addresses priorities of the NOFO, providing a strong plan and/or process to ensure strong adaptive management, collaboration, partnerships, and engagement with other relevant USAID activities, relevant local actors, institutions, other donors, etc. In the Localization Approach, the Applicant demonstrates a commitment to locally led development by explaining how they will empower local partners to play a leadership role in driving implementation, setting priorities, driving decision-making and co-creating activities. Additionally, see Attachment A - Program Description for supplemental information.

36. To foster a fully integrated approach, would USAID please consider housing the CLA and Localization Approach sections under the Technical Approach section?

USAID’s answer: No, please follow the requested format.

37. Page 13 includes the requirements of the Management Approach (Management Plan, Staffing Plan, Key Personnel, and Institutional Capacity and Experience) to be included in the Technical Approach, however, the Annexes listed on Page 13 also specify a Staffing Plan (matrix). Would USAID please clarify what information should be included in the Staffing Plan (matrix) Annex?

USAID’s answer: The Staffing Plan matrix must reflect all proposed positions (including key personnel) projected to implement all program components and cross cutting elements.

38. On page 34, Section D Other Reports, Initial Work Plan (Implementation Plan) refers to a “six-month inception period”. On the same page, the Annual Work Plan paragraph refers to an “inception period (if applicable)”.

a. Would USAID please clarify if the inception period is applicable?

USAID Answer: Yes, the inception period is applicable. Please see the amended NOFO.

b. If the inception period is applicable, would USAID please provide guidance on the requirements and expectations of the inception period?

USAID’s answer: The Applicant must provide a six-month inception period plan as an Initial Work Plan and submitted as an annex of their Technical Application. There are no requirements, but the Applicant is expected to demonstrate how they are planning to utilize the six-month inception period to establish the necessary programmatic and operational systems, as well as conduct the necessary engagements with key stakeholders to implement the program.

39. On page 35, Section D Other Reports, Annual Work Plans states, “USAID expects that all work plans will be developed in close formal and informal consultation with other USAID implementing partners, including CLA leader award and RFSA partners, wherever applicable. Collaboration with the RFSA partners will be particularly important during Year One of any future RFSA awards, during which time RFSAs will be called upon to conduct analyses and assessments to refine their proposed activities.”

a. Would USAID please clarify if the “CLA leader award” is an existing or upcoming activity?

USAID’s answer: The NOFO has been amended to clarify. The reference was meant to identify the LWA leader; there is no separate “CLA leader”.

40. Would USAID please clarify if and how the Regional Resilience award would be expected to directly support RFSA analyses and assessments?

USAID’s answer: As the NOFO states, collaboration with the RFSA partners will be particularly important during Year One of any future RFSA awards, during which time RFSAs will be called upon to conduct analyses and assessments to refine their proposed activities.

41. Would USAID please clarify if the purpose of collaboration with the future RFSAs will be to address resilience needs during a period before the RFSAs are able to implement their own activities?

USAID’s answer: USAID has not pre-determined the purpose or method of collaboration between SRRP and the RFSAs. Partners can propose different methods of potential collaboration.

42. Pages 35–37, Section D Other Reports, Activity Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning Plan (AMELP). Would USAID please confirm that the AMELP is to cover the Leader Award only, and that any subsequent Associate Awards would develop their own AMELPs?

USAID’s answer: Correct. The draft AMELP is for the Leader Award’s Technical Application and the final AMELP is due within 60 days after award. AMELPs for Associate Awards will be defined when these are designed.

43. On page 38, Section D Other Reports, Gender Analysis and Gender and Social Inclusion (GESI) Action Plan states, “All people-level indicators must be disaggregated by age, sex, groups and included in activity reports.” Would USAID please clarify by which groups applicants should disaggregate (apart from age and sex)?

USAID’s answer: It depends on the target groups. It could be smallholder producers, civil society organizations members, local communities, government officials, extension service providers, etc.

44. On page 40, Section F, Federal Award Administration Information, the Initial Work Plan (Implementation) is listed as required to be submitted with the technical application and covering the six-month inception period. Below that, the Draft Year One Work Plan is due “Within 60 calendar days after award or within 30 days after the completion of the inception period.” Then, on page 45, Section H. Other Information, Post-award Co- Creation, the NOFO states, “Based on findings from the inception period, the Awardee will co-create with USAID and other relevant stakeholders to develop the initial work plan and the AMELP.” Would USAID please clarify if the Initial Work Plan or the Draft Year One Work Plan will be the focus of the co-creation period based on findings from the inception period?

USAID’s answer: Please see answer to question #42.

45. Given that the Initial Work Plan (Implementation Plan) will be the focus of the co- creation period, would USAID please remove the requirement that this is due with the Technical Application?

USAID’s answer: No, the Initial Work Plan must be submitted with the Technical Application as this provides insight into the applicant’s implementation process.

46. On page 42, the Activity Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Plan (AMELP) draft is listed as required to be submitted with the Technical Application. However, it is not described in Section D, Application and Submission Information, part 5, Technical Application Format.

Would USAID please consider removing the requirement of the draft AMELP at the proposal stage?

USAID’s answer: The NOFO has been amended. The draft AMELP is due with the Technical Application and is included in the annexes.

47. If a draft AMELP is required at the proposal stage, would USAID please clarify the page limits, if any, and confirm it should be included as an annex?

USAID’s answer: The NOFO has been amended. Yes, the draft AMELP will be included as an annex and have a maximum of five (5) pages.

48. On page 45, Section H Other Information, 2. Post-award Co-Creation includes a paragraph about what the CLA section must address. Would USAID please indicate the document in which the CLA section will appear post-award?

USAID’s answer: The reference to CLA on page 45 is meant to address how CLA principles and considerations will be incorporated into the AMELP and Annual Work Plans.

49. On page 46, Section H Other Information, Difference between Rapid Response and Crisis

Modifier, Rapid Response. The NOFO states, “Rapid response activities will be no more than $500,000.00 in size, implemented with the bulk of the direct funds going to local organizations, supported with funding under the Leader Award, and responsive to specific criteria (to be co-created with Leader and USAID).” Would USAID please confirm that the funds allocated to rapid response activities may be used not only for the local implementing partners carrying out the direct response, but also for technical assistance or management by the Leader Award implementing partners or sub-partners directly related to the purpose of the rapid response activity?

USAID’s answer: Correct. Rapid Response programming is the responsibility of the Leader and needs to address specific, targeted needs that can be addressed through a short-term intervention. The Leader can work directly through local partners, through sub-partners, or through consortium partners.

50. Would USAID please confirm that possible implementing partners of the direct activities for the rapid response activities need not be named in the application, as the specific requirements will be determined based on the needs at the time of the response?

USAID’s answer: Correct, they do not need to be named.

51. Would USAID consider raising the maximum amount of funds allowed for each rapid response activity to afford more flexibility and to reduce administrative and management burdens for the Leader Award Recipient and USAID?

USAID’s answer: For purposes of this NOFO, the Rapid Response funds will follow the stated requirements. USAID may consider increases to the Rapid Response threshold on a case-by-case basis. Please see the amended NOFO.

52. On page 50, Attachment A – Program Description, B. Background provides a link to the Bridge Technical Approach Working Paper. In the Technical Approach, “Development Objective 1: Legitimacy of violent extremist organizations and ideology weakened” is described as being the Project Purpose of the NEW-CVE Project. Are other active projects or activities carrying out Objectives 2 and 3 of Bridge?

USAID’s answer: No, the Bridge activity is scheduled to end in 2025 and USAID has not determined follow-on activities at this time.

53. Would USAID clarify if the current NOFO is intended to address any of the three Development Objectives of Bridge?

USAID’s answer: The current NOFO and the Bridge activity may have similar objectives insofar as they both intend to build or strengthen local sources of resilience.

54. Page 10, Section D.6: "At a minimum, the Chief of Party (or equivalent) must be key personnel. Other key personnel positions may be negotiated with the Apparently Successful Applicant prior to award. No more than five key personnel positions may be proposed." Would USAID please clarify how proposed Key Personnel positions will factor into the evaluation criteria, specifically providing guidance on whether more proposed positions are scored higher or lower? Please explain the evaluation methodology for proposals involving 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5 key personnel, as this detail is not addressed in Section E.2.Criterion 3.

USAID’s answer: Key personnel is an element that will be considered when evaluating Management Approach and the focus is on their skills, experience, qualifications and other core capabilities needed to perform their proposed duties under the award.

55. Page 13, Section Part 6, Management Approach, Staffing Plan states, “The applicant is to include CVs, letter of commitment signed by each key personnel that he/she will provide services for the entire period of performance of the award, and a minimum of three references (not family members) who can attest to the person’s knowledge, skills and abilities that will lead to successful activity implementation.” In the FY24 Q2 Business Forecast Q&A responses, USAID stated that naming key personnel is not an indicator for determining the successful implementation of USAID’s work. Would USAID please consider allowing applicants to propose positions that should be Key Personnel without naming specific individuals to fill those positions.

USAID’s answer: See response above. USAID expects applicants to specify key personnel (names, CVs, references, etc.) who reflect the core capabilities needed to perform their proposed duties under the award and the management structure best suited to implementing their activity. For the purposes of this NOFO, USAID is not changing the merit review criteria for Management Approach.

56. Page 15, Section D Part 6, Management Approach, Key Personnel, states, “the applicant is to include… letter of commitment signed by each key personnel that he/she will provide services for the entire period of performance of the award.” Would USAID please confirm key personnel may commit exclusively to an applicant, to ensure commitment for the entire period of performance?

USAID’s answer: The decision of what type of commitment key personnel make to an applicant is between the applicant and the personnel. Per the NOFO, the applicant is required to include a letter of commitment signed by each key personnel that he/she will provide services for the entire period of performance of the award.

57. Page 15, Section D Part 6, Management Approach, Staffing Plan states the applicant, “must identify other significant full or part-time technical professional staff, consultants (if any), and implementing sub-partners, and describe how they will complement the skills and expertise of the team.” Would USAID please confirm that applicants need only identify the positions, and not the candidates for “non-key but significant full or part-time technical professional staff and consultants (if any)”?

USAID’s answer: Yes. In the staffing plan, Applicants must indicate significant technical professional staff positions, their function, and whether they will be local or expatriate hires.

58. The NOFO does not provide descriptions of the CLA Approach and Localization Approach sections beyond the evaluation criteria. Can USAID please provide descriptions for what it wants reflected in the CLA Approach and Localization Approach sections?

USAID’s answer: Please see answer #39 and also refer to the CLA Approach (Criterion 2) and Localization Approach (Criterion 4) in the NOFO. Additionally, see Attachment A - Program Description for supplemental information.

59. Can USAID please clarify how it expects objectives 1 and 2 to be addressed in the technical approach, given that the Leader Award is focused on the cross-cutting objective?

USAID’s answer: The Leader’s Technical Approach should specify how objectives 1 and 2 will be addressed via Associate Awards. The Leader Award will directly implement the CLA and Rapid Response activities while also managing the consortium to deliver on all objectives of the SRRP.

60. On page 14 of the NOFO, USAID states, “Applicants must provide a clear theory of change that directly leads to the program outcomes/objectives and successful achievement of the program description outlined in the NOFO.” Can USAID please confirm if the Theory of Change in the submission is expected to cover all 3 objectives, or only the cross-cutting objective underpinning the Leader Award?

USAID’s answer: Applicants must provide a clear Theory of Change that directly leads to the program outcomes/objectives and successful achievement of the program description outlined in the NOFO, cross-cutting objectives included.

61. On page 25 of the NOFO, USAID writes, “Construction will not be authorized under this award.” Under Objective 2 of the program description, anticipated results include “Investments in water infrastructure, such as wells, boreholes, and irrigation systems, resulting in more efficient and equitable distribution of water.” Can USAID please clarify if this applies to the Leader Award exclusively? Are recipients of Associate Awards allowed to construct water infrastructure, such as wells, boreholes, and irrigation systems, considering that terms and conditions are flowed down from the Leader Award to the Associate Awards?

USAID’s answer: Country-specific Associate Awards may conduct certain rehabilitation activities that are not considered construction and do not affect structural elements; this may include limited water infrastructure activities such as rehabilitation of boreholes.

USAID will work with the recipient in the post award co-creation period to determine the technical interventions that will be managed by the Leader.

62. On page 37 of the NOFO, USAID writes, “The activity will be expected to collaborate closely with USAID's M&E mechanism.” Can USAID clarify if this mechanism is the Monitoring, Reporting, and Capacity Strengthening (MRCS) for Burkina Faso and if this mechanism covers Mauritania and Chad as well?

USAID’s answer: Yes, the MRCS provides Monitoring, Reporting, and Capacity Strengthening (MRCS) support to complement and augment USAID’s Sahel Regional Office (SRO) performance management activities for all of the countries within its portfolio.

63. Could USAID please clarify the expected relationship, if any, between the anticipated Leader

Award and the West Africa Collaborating, Learning & Adapting and Monitoring Platform?

USAID’s answer: Collaboration could be on CLA, lessons learned, implementation challenges and successes, among many others.

64. On page 16 of the NOFO, USAID writes, “The Applicant must provide a concise description of their organization, and all proposed sub- recipients/associates, including reasons for their inclusion as proposed sub-recipients/associates and other organizations if it is a consortium.

Within the application, the Applicants must provide summary information about significant past and current activities/projects, for themselves and each sub- recipient/associate, related to the set of activities and responsibilities specified in this NOFO.” Additionally, USAID uses the term associate to describe an organization in Criterion 3 on page 27. Can USAID please clarify the difference between the terms “Associate,” “Subawardee” and “Subrecipient?”

USAID’s answer: For the purposes of this NOFO, subawardee and subrecipient are being used interchangeably. The word Associate in Criterion 3: Management Approach refers to Associate Award. In concrete terms, the Leader may organize a consortium of organizations to provide the necessary capacity to implement and achieve the objectives of the SRRP/A.

To achieve certain parts of the program, the Leader Award or subsequent Associate Awards may require the additional services of another organization outside the consortium.

65. On page 60 of the NOFO, it states, “USAID anticipates potential transition awards under Associate Awards.” According to ADS 303mbb, the NOFO must include a distinct programmatic activity for the subrecipient. Could USAID please clarify if “Mentoring local sub-entities to bolster technical, management and financial capacities so that they may eventually take on direct USAID awards” would position local partners for a potential future transition award?

USAID’s answer: Yes, depending on the level of their technical and operational expertise.

66. On page 65 of the NOFO, it states, “USAID expects the Leader to outline a process for identifying and including organizations that meet the USAID definition of “local” (ADS 303) as part of the consortium following the award. In the application, the Leader will identify the types of activities “set aside” for local organizations to advance USAID’s localization objectives. Examples of potential “set aside” activities include assessments, recurrent monitoring surveys, communications support, Associate evaluations, etc. This should not https://www.usaid.gov/about-us/agency-policy/series-300/303 be construed to limit local organizations to only those activities. The Leader should allow and consider local organizations for the implementation of other Associate Awards across the technical sectors, depending on the level of technical and operational expertise.” Can USAID please confirm that local groups can be identified to receive Associate Awards who aren’t explicitly named in the prime’s proposal at the time of application?

USAID’s answer: Yes, the Leader may propose adding local organizations to implement Associate Awards pending approval by the AO. The Associate Awards application follows a different process after the Leader Award is finalized.

a. Can organizations who are not named in the proposal be part of future

Associate Awards issued under this activity?

USAID’s answer: Yes, pending AO approval.

b. Can organizations who are not named in the proposal be part of any future awards issued under the $20M rapid response supplemental?

USAID’s answer: Yes, pending AO approval.

67. On page 22 of the NOFO, for History of Past Performance, USAID writes, “The Applicant

(prime only) must provide information regarding its recent (not to exceed three years) history of performance on any cost-reimbursement contracts, grants, or cooperative agreements (not to exceed five years) involving similar or related programs...” Can USAID please clarify if recent means 3 years or 5 years?

USAID’s answer: Please see answer #28.

68. On page 34 of the NOFO, USAID states, “Work plans should include a brief component describing how the activity is reducing waste and its overall carbon footprint produced as a result of the activity.” Is USAID referring here to the annual workplans developed post-inception? If the initial workplan should include this description, can USAID please confirm that should relate only to the Leader’s activities?

USAID’s answer: Both the initial Work Plan and the Annual Work Plan will include this description and it should reflect activities under the Leader as well as activities under the

69. On page 40 of the NOFO, USAID writes that the initial work plan (implementation plan) covering a six-month inception period is to be submitted with the technical application.

However, USAID makes no mention of the initial workplan being part of the submission requirements anywhere else. In addition, on page 45, USAID states, “Based on findings from the inception period, the Awardee will co-create with USAID and other relevant stakeholders to develop the initial work plan and the AMELP.” Can USAID please clarify if the draft AMELP and the initial workplan are required as part of the proposal submission or will they be developed following the six-month inception period?

USAID’s answer: The draft AMELP and the initial work plan are required as part of the technical application submission and will be both included in the annexes. (Please see amended NOFO).

70. Within the countries of Burkina Faso, Chad, and Mauritania, has USAID identified specific geographic zones of intervention for the Associate Awards?

USAID’s answer: No, Associate Award zones of interventions are within the entire Sahel region.

71. Can USAID please clarify whether the prime of the Leader award or implementers of Associate Awards would be precluded from bidding on any future Resilience Food Security Activity (RFSA) applications?

USAID’s answer: No.

72. What are USAID’s expectations around pre-identification of partners at the application stage, including for localization “set asides”? Are applicants expected to sign on partners at the Leader application stage or include illustrative partners that may be involved in the implementation of Associate Awards?

USAID’s answer: USAID encourages Applicants to involve local partners in the proposal development and implementation phases of the SRRA/P (Sahel Regional Resilience Activity/Program).

73. Is there an expectation for the Leader award to report on the expected outcomes for

Objectives 1 and 2, or will this be done through the Associate Awards measurement and reporting?

USAID’s answer: The Leader Award must report on the expected outcomes for Objectives 1 and 2 as per this NOFO. Associate Award reporting requirements may be different and will be defined in those specific awards.

74. Does USAID expect applicants to present the Anticipated Results as they are stated in the

NOFO under each Objective, or can applicants propose adjustments?

USAID’s answer: Applicants can propose adjustments as long as they help meet the overall goal of the SRRA/P.

75. Page 7 of the NOFO states that as part of USAID Substantial Involvement, USAID will provide “technical input and ultimate approval of Rapid Response actions and subawards up to the amount of $100,000. Rapid response actions above this threshold require AO approval.” On page 46, the NOFO states that rapid response activities will be up to $500,000. Can USAID confirm that the specific process and criteria for managing the rapid response actions will be co-created during the Leader inception phase?

USAID’s answer: Correct. Additionally, rapid response activities will be co-created with the Leader and USAID when the need arises on a case-by-case basis.

76. On Page 14 of the NOFO, USAID states that, “Applicants must provide a clear theory of change that directly leads to the program outcomes/objectives and successful achievement of the program description outlined in the NOFO.” On Page 56, USAID provides a Development Hypothesis. Does USAID expect applicants to modify this development hypothesis as the Theory of Change, or would USAID expect applicants to develop a more detailed Theory of Change?

USAID’s answer: Applicants can provide a more detailed Theory of Change.

77. In Section D, page 15, the instructions for the Management Plan require that the

“application must demonstrate technical staffing expertise in presenting a staffing plan that includes an overall matrix. This matrix will reflect all proposed positions (including key personnel) projected to implement all program components and cross cutting elements.”

Can USAID please confirm that staffing details, including all proposed positions, should be included in Annex B: Staffing Plan (matrix), while a shorter staffing summary can be included in the Staffing Plan section of the main Technical Application?

USAID’s answer: Yes, confirmed.

78. Page 35: Could USAID confirm if there is a page limit for the Shock Response Plan?

USAID’s answer: No page limit has been indicated for the Shock Response Plan which is expected post award.

79. In Section F of the NOFO, in the SUMMARY OF REPORTS/DELIVERABLES table (pages 40-43), USAID indicates Initial Work Plan (Implementation Plan) is due with the technical application. However, this plan does not appear in the list of required sections for the Technical Application in Section D (page 13) and it is included in the Post-award Co-creation phase (page 45). Can USAID please clarify if an Initial Work Plan (Implementation Plan) is required at this stage, and if so, provide instructions regarding format?

USAID’s answer: The initial work plan must be submitted with the technical application as an annex. Please see the amended NOFO. No format has been indicated for the Initial Work Plan, but it should focus on the key deliverables to be produced during that refinement phase to inform longer-term planning.

80. In Section F of the NOFO, in the SUMMARY OF REPORTS/DELIVERABLES table (pages 40-43), USAID indicates that a draft of the Activity Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning Plan (AMELP) is due with the technical application. However, this plan does not appear in the list of required sections for the Technical Application in Section D (page 13) and elsewhere it is noted that it will be due after award (pages 36 and 45). Can USAID please clarify if applicants must include a draft AMELP as part of their applications, and if so, provide instructions regarding format?

USAID’s answer: Yes, Applicants are required to submit a draft AMELP as part of their Technical Application and as an annex. The NOFO has been amended. Please see answer to #18.

81. Section D: Application and Submission Information, lists the CLA Approach as a key section of the Technical Application but does not provide specific instructions regarding content for this section. Section H: Other Information includes a section titled “CLA section must address,” followed by several requirements. Can USAID please confirm if these Section H points are requirements for the CLA Approach section of the Technical Application?

USAID’s answer: The NOFO has been amended. Yes, Section H has aspects that the CLA Approach should address in the Technical Application. The CLA Approach requirements addressed by this question is now included under Section D.5 of the amended NOFO.

82. Page 46: USAID states that “Rapid response activities will be no more than $500,000.00 in size, implemented with the bulk of the direct funds going to local organizations, supported with funding under the Leader Award, and responsive to specific criteria (to be co-created with Leader and USAID).” Does this $500,000 encompass the full amount of resources USAID is willing to allocate to any single rapid response, or is it a limit on the amount the Leader can allocate to any one partner?

USAID’s answer: USAID expects rapid response activities will be no more than $500,000.00 in size. Any proposed rapid response actions above this threshold require USAID approval.

83. Is USAID anticipating that the whole design of the rapid response supplemental is specifically for response, or might USAID consider Anticipatory Action interventions as well?

USAID’s answer: Rapid Response programming under the Leader will respond to unanticipated needs, emerging opportunities, and critical gaps in programming.

Anticipatory action interventions–depending on how this is defined, may be considered and like all responses will require a case-by-case review.

84. Page 47: USAID refers to mission “buy-ins” for resilience programs within the Sahel: can

USAID…