Description
MODIFICATION No. 4. The purpose of this modification is to answer additional questions regarding the subject RFP, as follows: MIDAS RFP #514-05-011: Questions & Answers. Modification #4 Q23: Section L9(c) refers to the “Managing/monitoring/accounting of the loan capitol fund”, however Section C does not mention that fund? Does this refer to grants issued under the contract as outlined under Section C, or is the loan fund different? A: Please refer to the answer for previous Question 19: This a separate fund that is not envisioned under the MIDAS effort. “Q19: Paragraph L.9.c, Page No. 67 states that overhead expenses for loan capital funds are not allowable. Please clarify this statement; specifically, does it apply to initial startup expenses of microfinancing organizations? Additionally, are MHO expenses allowable? A: The language regarding loan capital funds should be deleted in its’ entirety;” Q24: Section J, Attachment 4 for the RFP provides a Resume Format, but there is no guidance in the RFP about using this resume format. Also, the format asks for information such as “Annual Salary and Proposed Labor Category”, neither of which are appropriate for a technical submission for a CPFF completion type contract. Please clarify if and how this Resume Format should be used? A. The Resume Format found in the RFP is a “Suggested Resume Format, which is usually adequate for most purposes”. Of course, we feel it is unnecessary to dictate to our audience any level of strict conformance with a specified format for such a requirement in view of the fact that there are a myriad of such formats available. Q25: Please clarify the precise estimated completion dates for each of the programs that will eventually be assumed into the MIDAS contract. Also if possible, it would be helpful to receive LOP, or most recent annual work plans for those programs? A. Of course, we realize, appreciate, and understand that offering any “precise estimated completion dates” for any of the proposed activities is currently beyond our abilities of our very competent technical staff. The Mission will make a decision on the future of current programs at the earliest possible juncture after the MIDAS contract award, in collaboration with the successful offeror. Just a note: In many cases our on-going programs have no potential for synergy with, and therefore no possibility for merging into any of the proposed MIDAS activities. We encourage offerors to simply focus on submitting innovative responses to the RFP. Otherwise, please see Q11 and the related answer at Modification No. 3 to the RFP: Q11: Will offerors have access to documents that were generated by the implementers who are currently under contract to USAID? A: The RFP and Annexes were designed to minimize the extent to which any offeror would need additional background documentation. We suggest that any offeror who may need additional information pursue it via a “Freedom of Information Act” Request. Q26: Section C3 of the RFDP states, “Neither program ($10 Million Specialty Coffee Program, and the $10 Million Dairy Industry Program) will be included in the overall effort”. Please provide additional clarifications to this statement? A. We feel that the statement is quite clear. Neither of the stated programs will be a part of the proposed MIDAS effort. Q27: Section H.17 “Grants under Contracts”, and Section L.9(d) “Summary of Budget Elements” suggest that the contractor will be responsible for a sizeable grants program. Can USAID offer guidance as to the amount of grant funding anticipated, or the magnitude of the grants funding relative to technical assistance? Or, does the contractor have complete latitude to propose amounts and mix of TA/grants consistent with proposed approaches? A. Please refer to our answer to the previous Q4 noted in the answers at Modification No. 3. Q4: With regard to the allocation of funds on this procurement, what percentage of the $160 million will be allocated for grants and what percentage will be identified for technical assistance? A: The Mission has not made a determination with regard to any amount(s) that may be allocated to Grants. Each of the four major components under the RFP requires a different mix of technical and other assistance, and the Mission encourages all bidders to submit creative and realistic proposals. Q28: Given the exceptionally long (90) day proposal development period, we suggest that USAID consider a second round of questions and answers, at perhaps the midpoint of the process. We believe that after conducting field research for the MIDAS proposal, contractors will have several additional informed questions and issues for USAID. Responses and/or guidance from USAID to these will result in more responsive, stronger proposals for MIDAS implementation? A. A special thank you for this question. Please be advised that we surely do appreciate the degree of effort that will be involved in the preparation of responses to the MIDAS RFP. Further, we are confident, and fully believe that our current approach will result in very strong and competitive responses to the RFP. Q29: Section L.10(4)(v)(A) states, “..Successful use of small business concerns will be considered as part of the evaluation of past performance in Section M”, however, Section M.5.1.4, Past Performance, does not assign a factor to the use of small businesses. Please clarify if a specific evaluation factor will be applied to the use of small businesses, and if this information can be presented in an Annex? A. The evaluation of Past Performance will include an assessment of the degree to which such businesses have been utilized in the past by the offeror. The specific evaluation factor to be addressed in Section M at Past Performance is at M.4.1.4.1, Quality of Performance, where the extent to which small businesses added to the achievement of this factor. Q30: Section L.10 cannot be removed in entirety because there is relevant information to proposal development contained therein. What sections are to be removed? A. The part of Section L.10 that should be disregarded is at Subsection (a), the fourth paragraph that Begins, “Describe how the team will coordinate and integrate the municipal government strengthening and alternative development investments. In addition, …………..growth at the national level. Q31: Section M.4.1.4.5 is identified as “Effectiveness of Key Personnel, however the version released to the Public notes that Section M.5.1.4.5 addresses “Effectiveness of Key Personnel”? A. Section M.5.1.4.5, Effectiveness of Key Personnel is the correct one.