QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ON DRAFT GOLD RFP

1.

Could USAID please clarify the authorized geographic code for this procurement? Section H.5
indicates that a waiver has been approved for this procurement to allow GOLD to be
implemented from geographic code 935. However, Section H.4 indicates geographic code 937.
USAID has clarified authorized geographic code in the revised draft RFP. The authorized
geographic code for this procurement is code 935. However, please note that the authorized
geographic code is subject to USAID/BiH entering into a Joint Financing Agreement (JFA) or
similar Agreement for GOLD with the Swedish Embassy/Sida. In an unlikely event that the
Swedish Embassy/Sida decides not to contribute funds for GOLD and not enter into a GOLD JFA
or similar Agreement, per ADS 310.3.1.1, code 937 (the United States, the recipient country, and
developing countries other than advanced developing countries, but excluding any country that
is a prohibited source) will be the authorized geographic code for the procurement of
commodities and services for the GOLD Program.

2.

USAID references physical fitness examinations for local employees in Section H.16.(e). Could
USAID please provide information on what type of verification is required for these
examinations and the definition of contagious disease?
For more information on physical fitness examinations and requirements please refer to AIDAR
clause 752.7033 PHYSICAL FITNESS (JULY 1997), incorporated by reference under Section I.1 of
the RFP.

3.

Would USAID be open to offerors submitting courtesy hard copies via mail to ensure that
reviewers have copies in color during their review?
USAID will not accept courtesy hard copies of proposals.

4.

In Section L.8, could USAID please clarify whether the executive summary will count against the
page limit?
Please refer to Section L.8(c): Executive summary will count against the page limit.

5.

Section L.8.(d), page 62, notes that past performance information can be included as an annex.
Per Section L.8.6, past performance short forms for the offeror and each major subcontractor
should go into the annex. Could USAID please clarify whether the three small business
references could also be included in the annex?
SF 294 Subcontracting Report for Individual Contracts" may be enclosed as an annex and will
not be considered in the page limit.

6.

In Section L.8.(e), could USAID please clarify whether the acronym list will also be excluded from
the page limitation?
Acronym list will be excluded from the page limitation.

7.

8.

In Section M.4.4, page 73, Key Personnel section is given 30 points. Given that offerors are
allowed to propose 1 to 5 key personnel, could USAID please advise how it plans to weigh the
points across the key personnel proposed? Additionally, will the Chief of Party be awarded a
higher percentage of points within this section?
USAID revised Section M.4.4. of the draft RFP: 15 points will be allocated to the COP and 15
points to other key personnel.
In attachment J.3, page 95, could USAID please clarify the definition of net salary referenced in
the Mission Local Compensation Plan?
Definition of net salary is now included under Attachment J.3 of the RFP. Net salary means the
amount the employee receives on hand after all deductions. Please note that from the net
salary ranges stated above the employee must pay 10% personal income tax according to local
labor law.

9.

Would USAID please confirm whether there is a uniform exchange rate, for budgeting purposes?
There is no uniform exchange rate for budgeting purposes.

10.

Per the RFP, page 66, Section L.9.2.1. states, "Offerors shall submit a salary scale which reflects
its proposed staffing plan and covering all planned non-US (CCN/TCN) positions together with
Offeror's compensation policies." Can USAID confirm if Offerors are to use the FSN scale for
Bosnia as salary guidance?
Offerors may use the FSN scale for Bosnia and Herzegovina as salary guidance for compensation
of all planned non-US positions.

11.

Page 83 of the RFP states (under Objective 1) the program will facilitate partnerships between
BiH municipalities and municipalities/regions located in the EU (new) member states and the
Southeast Europe region. On the same page under Illustrative activities in the last bullet, it
says "if/once the twinning program that is expected to be funded and managed by Sida is in
place, through this twinning program between selected Swedish public sector partners and
selected BiH public sector partners facilitate development of sustainable mechanisms for
transfer of best practices in local economic development with the focus on linkages and
twinning between municipalities/cities, however other forms of twining will also be explored.
Can USAID please clarify expectations of the contractor regarding twinning? Is the contractor
expected to organize twinning activities with EU new member states and Southeast Europe or
will all twinning be done by SIDA?
It is anticipated that formal twining activities will be carried out by Sida, if Sida pursues this
element of the program; at this point this is not certain. The implementer is not expected to
lead these twining activities, but rather play a facilitative role, and if applicable, integrate
twinning activities in portfolio of GOLD activities once the activities for a particular locality are
identified and agreed. However, beyond the formal twinning program(s) that may be approved
by Sida, the offerors should also consider partnerships (as defined in broad sense, not limited to
twinning, rather any forms that facilitate knowledge transfers and experience sharing)
2

between BiH municipalities and municipalities/regions located in the EU (new) member states
and the Southeast Europe region.

12.

Would USAID consider substituting education requirements listed for the COP for additional
years of experience?
Yes, offerors may substitute advanced academic degree requirement with 7 additional years of
relevant work experience.

13.

In Section F.8.1, Reports Submission Schedule on page 16, the RFP states that the Grants
manual will be submitted to the Joint Management Committee (USAID and SIDA) for review
within 75 calendar days from the date of contract award. In Section F.8.4, Grants Manual on
page 17, the RFP states that the Contractor is not required to submit a Grants Management
Manual for USAID approval. Please clarify.
Grants Manual will need to be submitted for JMC and CO review and approval. Sections F.8.1
and F.8.4 of the draft RFP are revised accordingly.

14.

The draft SOW indicates that the Joint Management Committee (JMC) will be responsible for
strategic management and oversight of the Technical Assistance Contract but that USAID is
responsible for the technical assistance procurement administration. Furthermore, on page 24,
the RFP states that, The COR must accept and approve all deliverables before receipt of final
payment. Please confirm which, if any, deliverables might need to be approved by the JMC.
USAID will provide answer to this question once the Agreement with Sida is finalized.

15.
-

Please confirm if the title headings presented in Section L.8 (b) of the RFP on pages 61-2 must be
presented in the exact order provided in the RFP, which is:
Executive Summary
Statement of Work
Draft Work Plan
Draft Performance Management Plan
Key Personnel
Management Approach and Experience
Past Performance.
USAID confirms that the title headings must be presented in the exact order provided in the
RFP.

16.
-

Please confirm if the annexes are limited to those listed in Section L.8 (d) of the RFP, which are:
Draft Work Plan
Draft Performance Management Plan (including ROI)
Resumes, references, and tables that summarize qualifications for proposed personnel
Statement of intention and availability of key personnel
Past performance references
3

For example, later in the RFP, on page 65, the RFP states that SF 294 reports may be enclosed
as an annex and will not be considered in the page limit.
Please refer to Question No. 05 above. Annexes are limited to those listed in Section L.8 (d) of
the revised draft RFP.

17.

Will there be any page limits imposed on the length of key and non-key personnel CVs?
As an annex to the technical proposal, offerors must provide resumes for all proposed key
personnel. Resumes for non-key personnel shall not be submitted. There is no page limit on the
submitted resumes.

18.

Of the 30 evaluation points allocated to key personnel, what portion will be dependent upon the
Chief of Party? What portion of the evaluation points will be dependent on the other 4 potential
key personnel positions? Additionally, will long term experts be taken into consideration in the
evaluation?
See response to Question No. 07. Long-term experts will be taken into consideration in the
evaluation, ONLY if they are designated as key personnel.

19.

Please confirm that email submissions of the technical proposal may be in PDF format; passage
L.7.2 (d) indicates that only pages that include signatures should be submitted in PDF format,
while L.7.2 (i) has more general language regarding the submission of PDF attachments.
In accordance with Section L.7.2 (d), USAID confirm that the offeror must convert its documents
into Microsoft Word (for narrative text), Microsoft Excel (for budgets and other relevant tables),
or PDF format (for documents requiring signatures) before the offeror sends any documents to
USAID.

20.

Section L.8.6 (a) 1 on page 64 asks for, up to 5 of the most recent and relevant contracts for
efforts similar to the work in the subject proposal for the offeror and each major
subcontractor. Please clarify if this means:
(1)
up to 5 contracts for the main contractor and up to 5 contracts for each major
subcontractor; or
(2)
up to 5 contracts total for the offerors consortium as a whole (including the prime
contractor and its major subcontractors)
USAID confirms that up to 5 contracts for the main contractor and up to 5 contracts for each
major subcontractor shall be submitted.

21.

What is the expected size of the G2G program (both in monetary terms and number of partner
municipalities)?
Subject to funds availability and congressional appropriations, the size of G2G component is
estimated at approximately up to US$ 4-5 million during the period of performance of GOLD. It
4

is expected that individual G2G agreements will range from $100,000 to $400,000 and not
exceed US$500,000. The exact structure (total fund size and also individual size of G2G
agreements) as well as programmatic criteria for the G2G will be defined at a later stage, below
are some considerations:
the number of localities/partner local governments [Note that the RFP calls for offerors to
propose both the number and selection criteria for localities (i.e. partner local governments that
will form the locality); the JMC will review and USAID provide final approval]. USAID/BiH
envisages that G2G fund act as an incentive fund, so while all partner-local governments are
expected to have a chance to apply, there are going to be programmatic requirements that will
need to be met (impact, reforms and other), also specific USAID ADS G2G requirements will
need to be met; there is no certainty that all partner- local governments will be able to meet
these requirements (see below on need to plan for TA);
type of possible projects that would be co-financed, ability of partner-local governments to
meet cost share requirements from budget or borrowing, as applicable; also alignment of LED
projects with local government strategies and other;
other donor and private sector funding for LED projects that can be leveraged.
As noted in the draft RFP, the contractor will be expected to provide technical assistance to local
governments related to structuring their proposals and enhancing their skills and practices to
access the G2G/Incentive Fund. The contractor is also expected to provide advice on the
selection of G2G projects.
If the initially allocated G2G funding gets exhausted, and if this G2G model proves to be an
effective development tool in terms of impact, the Mission may consider augmenting the G2G
incentive fund in future, subject to funds availability.
22.

Please provide more details on the anticipated design of the potential Commercial Financing
DCA Facility cited on page 78 of the draft RFP?
At this point, USAID is unable to provide any additional information on the possible DCA facility
beyond what was already provided in the draft RFP. For additional general information on how
DCA works, please review USAID web page, DCA office.

23.

What is the expected composition of the Advisory Board and would its members be
compensated for their work? If compensated, how should that be budgeted for?
The Advisory Board is expected to be composed of representatives of relevant stakeholders
both from the public and private sector with relevant experience as outlined in the draft RFP. At
this stage it is anticipated that the board members are not going to be compensated for their
work, details on board composition and operation are expected to be discussed/defined in the
work plan once the contract is awarded.

24.

Please confirm that the Cost proposal format in Attachment J.6 on page 98 is only illustrative
and the Contractor can present the budget in an alternate format consistent with their
accounting policy & procedures, particularly as relates to labor categories.
USAID confirms that cost proposal format in Attachment J.6 on page 98 is only illustrative.

25.

Section L.9.2.1, on page 66, requires The Offeror shall submit a salary scale which reflects its
proposed staffing plan covering all planned non-US (CCN/TCN) positions together with Offeror's
compensation policies. The compensation plan shall cover all proposed initial salaries and salary
ranges for all positions for approval by the Contracting Officer...
We assume this plan is for the personnel identified in the budget. Would USAID have a certain
format/template in mind for this?
USAID would like to clarify that this plan is not only for the personnel identified in the budget
but also for all positions proposed by the offeror. USAID does not have a certain
format/template in mind for this.

26.

With reference to RFP Page 9, Section B.9 - Cancellation Ceiling and Dates under Multi-Year
Contracts (OCT 1997), this provision does not appear to be applicable to, nor appropriate for,
the anticipated Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee contract type as indicated in FAR 17.106-1(b) and 52.301.
Will USAID consider removing this Section B.9 in its entirety?
Section B.9 has been removed from the RFP.

27.

With reference to RFP Pages 7-8, Section B.6 Ceiling on Indirect Cost Rates, we respectfully
request that this section be deleted in its entirety as there is no regulatory requirement to
provide ceilings on indirect costs rates at the initial proposal phase.
Section B.6 will remain in the RFP. According to Section L.9.2.10, The offerors are requested to
include the ceiling indirect cost rates for Prime and Major Subcontractors.