Loren Data's SAM Daily™

FBO DAILY ISSUE OF JANUARY 06, 2005 FBO #1137
MODIFICATION

R -- Brazil: Definitional Mission for Government Communications Network Projects ini the States of Sao Paulo and Ceara

Notice Date

1/4/2005
 

Notice Type

Modification
 

NAICS

541611 — Administrative Management and General Management Consulting Services
 

Contracting Office

United States Trade and Development Agency, TDA Contracts Office, USTDA, 1000 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 1600, Arlington, VA, 22209-3901
 

ZIP Code

22209-3901
 

Solicitation Number

USTDA-05-Q-51-079
 

Response Due

1/18/2005
 

Archive Date

2/2/2005
 

Small Business Set-Aside

Total Small Business
 

Description

SCOPE OF WORK ?DEFINITIONAL MISSION? FOR ADVISORY AND ASSISTANCE SERVICES BY NON-GOVERNMENTAL SOURCES FOR INFORMATION COMMUNICATIONS TECHNOLOGY AND E-GOVERNMENT PROJECTS IN BRAZIL PROJECT TITLE: BRAZIL: DEFINITIONAL MISSION FOR GOVERNMENT COMMUNICATIONS NETWORK PROJECTS IN THE STATES OF S?O PAULO AND CEAR? 1 SCOPE OF WORK The U.S. Trade and Development Agency (?USTDA?) requires services under this non-personal services Contract to support or improve its decision-making relative to the funding of projects and activities in developing and middle income countries. USTDA is evaluating prospective information communications technology and e-government projects in the States of S?o Paulo and Cear? in Brazil. The Contractor shall provide a report to USTDA, which will: 1.2 assess and justify whether or not USTDA should provide funding for the proposed feasibility studies/technical assistance or other activities; 1.3 assess any alternative study or activities which the Contractor sees as viable options for USTDA consideration; and 1.4 provide supporting analysis and recommendations on the above information in a final report that analyzes all the relevant issues. 2 DELIVERY & PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS 2.1 KICK-OFF MEETING WITH THE USTDA PROGRAM OFFICE Upon award, the Contractor shall contact USTDA?s Contracting Officer?s Technical Representative to schedule a meeting to discuss details of the Contract assignment. Unless otherwise advised by the COTR, this meeting will be held at USTDA?s office in Arlington, Virginia. The COTR shall provide the Contractor with names and addresses of the project sponsors, other pertinent entities to contact in the United States and overseas, and any other relevant details that may impact upon the design and/or evaluation of the proposed projects. 2.2 PRE-VISIT REPORT Prior to departure to the host country, the Contractor shall provide the COTR a pre-visit written report of 3-5 pages containing the proposed schedule or itinerary, preliminary strategies or findings on project viability, financing options, U.S. company interest in the projects, a list of contacts to be made during the visit and a pre-visit checklist of issues, information and questions to be utilized during the visit. 2.3 USTDA RESPONSIBILITY USTDA will advise the U.S. Commercial Service in the host country of the Contractor?s proposed travel itinerary prior to departure and request that the Commercial Service in S?o Paulo meet with the Contractor for briefing and debriefing meetings. 2.4 CONTRACTOR?S HOST COUNTRY TRAVEL The Contractor shall travel to S?o Paulo, SP and Fortaleza, Cear? to meet with relevant project officials. The Contractor shall contact the Commercial Section at the U.S. Consulate in S?o Paulo upon arrival and prior to departure for briefing and debriefing meetings. The Contractor is responsible for arranging all meetings as well as logistics for the visit, i.e., hotel accommodations, transportation, and interpretation services. In some cases, the Contractor may need to Contract with a local entity to assist with these logistics. Local entities may not provide the technical work of substance for the creation of the DM report. 2.5 CONTRACTOR MEANINGFUL DISCUSSIONS The Contractor shall hold meaningful discussions with appropriate contacts to determine and gauge the interest of potential project financiers and potential U.S. suppliers and assess whether the proposed projects are economically, financially, and technically viable. The Contractor shall analyze the potential procurement of U.S. goods and services for project implementation by categories and dollar values. The analysis shall include for each project an assessment of the project risks and its financial viability, the priority of the project and political/social/organizational support it has, potential sources of financing, and the capability and experience of the project sponsor. The analysis shall also include an assessment of the social and economic development impacts of the proposed projects. 2.6 USTDA REPORT OBJECTIVES If the Contractor recommends that USTDA fund the study/technical assistance in a phased approach, and/or if any outstanding issues should be resolved or conditions met before funding is approved, those phases, issues and/or conditions should be clearly explained in the recommendation. 2.6.2 The Contractor shall provide a final report to the USTDA, which will: 2.6.2.1 assess and justify whether or not USTDA should provide funding for feasibility studies/technical assistance for the proposed projects; 2.6.2.2 assess any alternative or other activities which the Contractor sees as viable options for USTDA consideration; and 2.6.2.3 provide recommendations on the above information in a final report that analyzes all relevant issues 2.6.3 Contractor recommendations shall be based upon USTDA funding criteria, which are that the project must: 2.6.3.1 be likely to receive implementation financing, and in addition, have a procurement process that provides ?equal access? to U.S. firms; 2.6.3.2 represent an opportunity for sales of U.S. goods and services that is many times greater than the initial investment of USTDA assistance; 2.6.3.3 be a development priority of the project sponsor and country where the project is located and have the endorsement of the U.S. Embassy in that nation; and 2.6.3.4 involve U.S. companies that are facing strong competition from foreign companies receiving subsidies and other support from their governments. 3 DEFINITIONAL MISSION FINAL REPORT 3.1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY (1-2 PAGES) The Contractor shall submit an executive summary of the report?s findings and recommendations. 3.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION (3-5 PAGES) The Contractor shall submit a description and history of the projects, including, among other things, host country and/or other project sponsors, sector, project location, source of raw materials, infrastructure requirements, proposed technological approach, legal and regulatory framework (licenses, permits, etc.), implementation schedule, economic fundamentals (estimated capital cost, operating costs, expected revenues, etc), and any other key variables or issues that the Contractor deems critical as part of a thorough activity/project evaluation. 3.3 DEVELOPMENTAL IMPACT (2-3 PAGES) The Contractor shall submit an assessment of the development impact of the projects on the host country. In this section, the Contractor shall discuss two aspects of ?developmental impact?. 3.3.1 Primary Developmental Benefits - The Contractor will discuss the most important benefits that the projects will provide to the host country. Items of interest to USTDA include, but are not restricted, to the following: number of new jobs created by the project; technology transfers; and new service etc. 3.3.2 Alternatives ? Are there competing ways to achieve host country objectives? At the Definitional Mission stage, it will not be possible to address these questions definitively, but the Contractor, at a minimum, is expected to define and comment on the broad alternatives available to the host country project sponsor. 3.4 PROJECT SPONSOR?S COMMITMENT (1-2 PAGES) The Contractor shall submit a description of the host country project sponsors business/government operations or authority and an assessment of the project sponsors? ability to implement the project. 3.5 IMPLEMENTATION FINANCING (2-4 PAGES) The Contractor shall submit a review of the financing options for project implementation, including an assessment of the overall cost estimate of the projects and, for projects involving potential U.S. equity investment, the project?s proposed debt-equity structure to ensure that it corresponds to the requirements of the prospective lenders (this aspect is critical to USTDA?s decision making). As part of this review, the Contractor is required to contact officials from the potential financing institutions, including, where appropriate, multilateral lending institutions, Ex-Im Bank, OPIC, and private/commercial sources, to assure that the project sponsors have adequately explored their financing options. The Contractor shall provide names and phone numbers of contacts at the potential lending institutions and summarize their comments. The Contractor must determine the most likely source(s) of implementation financing and ensure that the terms of reference for any proposed feasibility study/technical assistance fulfill the requirements of the most likely source(s). 3.6 U.S. EXPORT POTENTIAL (1-2 PAGES) The Contractor shall submit a best estimate of potential procurement of U.S. goods and services for project implementation. This estimate should be supported by a breakdown by category and dollar value of goods and services likely to be imported for the project and an illustrative list of potential U.S. suppliers of the goods and services for those goods and services listed as likely U.S. exports. A report of discussions with a reasonable number of U.S. companies that could be exporters, and their level of interest in the project, should also be included. 3.7 FOREIGN COMPETITION (1-2 PAGES) The Contractor shall discuss the foreign competition for goods and services likely to be procured for project implementation by category, including a discussion of U.S. industry competitiveness in each category, taking into account geographic factors, local industry capabilities, technology and licensee issues, past procurement tendencies of the project sponsors, and how the procurement is likely to be conducted. 3.8 IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT (1-2 PAGES) The Contractor shall submit a statement regarding the likely consequences the proposed projects may have on the environment and ensure that the terms of reference for the feasibility study/technical assistance include, at a minimum, a preliminary review of the project?s impact on the environment, with reference to local environmental requirements and those areas requiring evaluation by the potential lending agencies. The feasibility study/technical assistance should identify potential negative impacts and discuss the extent to which they can be minimized. 3.9 IMPACT ON U.S. LABOR (1-2 PAGES) The Contractor shall submit an assessment of the impact of the projects on U.S. labor. 3.10 QUALIFICATIONS (1-2 PAGES) The Contractor shall submit the feasibility team qualifications required to conduct the study and the evaluation criteria to be used by the Project Sponsor in cases of completed studies. 3.11 JUSTIFICATION (1-2 PAGES) The Contractor shall provide an explanation of why USTDA?s grant funding is needed. 3.12 TERMS OF REFERENCE (1-5 PAGES) The Contractor shall provide Terms of Reference (TOR) for each feasibility study/technical assistance activity recommended for funding. The TOR which must be endorsed by the Project Sponsor, shall include, at a minimum, the following: 3.12.1 Purpose and objective of the study and; a technical analysis of the project; 3.12.2 An economic analysis of the project (This section will usually include attention to competing alternative methods of achieving the same or similar host country objectives); 3.12.3 A financial analysis of the project; 3.12.4 An appropriate environmental analysis of the project; 3.12.5 A review of regulatory issues related to the project; 3.12.6 A summary of key host country economic development benefits expected from projects (e.g., job creation, new technologies introduced, productivity enhancements, new production/transport/communications capacities that will result from the project). 3.12.7 A list of proposed equipment and services for project implementation, including a list of potential U.S. sources of supply (company names and contact information); 3.12.8 An implementation plan (anticipated next steps necessary to implement the project); and 3.12.9 A Final Report that summarizes the findings of the study and/or other appropriate deliverables. The TOR must be designed to meet the requirements of the most likely source(s) of implementation financing. The requirements of some of the potential financing sources may be found at the following web sites: www.opic.govfinance/home.htm www.exim.gov/tools/index.html www.ifc.org/proserv/ www.adb.org/privatesector/finance/default.asp www.ebrd.com/apply/index.html www.iadb.org/iic/english/pdf.htm www.afdb.org/opportunities/business_general_proc_notices_country.htm 3.13 FEASIBILITY STUDY BUDGET (2-3 PAGES) The Contractor shall provide a budget a detailed budget and task breakdown for the feasibility studies/technical assistance prepared in accordance with the Feasibility Study Budget Format and Budgeted Labor Requirements, which can be found at www.tda.gov. The budget should be supported with sufficient detail to enable USTDA staff or others reviewing the material to understand completely, not only the budgeted amounts, but also the methodology that justifies the budget amounts. The budget should include: 1. Labor, budgeted by position title and task for each of the positions on the feasibility study team. Positions should be identifiable, with descriptions of the positions and proposed team members included in the proposal. Person-Days should reflect the proposed number of days of work effort proposed for each position for each task. The unit cost should be the actual loaded daily rate for each position. The proposed budget may not include fee or profit. 2. Itemization should be prepared for per diem, transportation, communications, subcontracts, translation of Final Report, and other direct costs. Per Diem must be based on U.S. Government rates, which are available on the State Department web site (http://www.state.gov/www/perdiems/index.html). The budget should support the feasibility study terms of reference. 3.14 RECOMMENDATIONS (1-2 PAGES) The Contractor shall provide recommendations as to: 3.14.1 whether or not the projects meet USTDA?s basic funding criteria; 3.14.2 the appropriate TORs for the proposed studies/technical assistance; and 3.14.3 the appropriate budgets for the proposed studies. 3.15 CONTACTS The Contractor shall submit a list of individuals contacted during the DM, with their addresses, phone and fax numbers, and e-mail addresses. 4 CONTRACTOR INTERIM STATUS REPORTING AND DELIVERABLES The Contractor shall provide verbal updates to the COTR when necessary. The deliverables may also take the form of information, advice, opinions, alternatives, analyses, evaluations, recommendations, interim and final reports, or other oral or written work products needed for successful performance. 5 CONTRACTOR -- DEFINITIONAL MISSION REPORTS The Contractor shall prepare a report to USTDA that addresses all the issues in the Definitional Mission requirements as outlined in Section 3.1 through 3.15. Since this report will be available for public distribution, any sensitive or business proprietary information shall be included in a separate confidential attachment to the report. 5.1 REPORT DRAFT -- COTR APPROVAL The Contractor shall provide the report in draft form to USTDA for COTR review within ten (10) working days after completion of the overseas visit. The report should be clearly marked ?Draft? on the cover. 5.2 REVISED REPORT DRAFT ? COTR APPROVAL Within five (5) working days after receiving the COTR?s comments on the draft report, the Contractor shall submit a revised copy for COTR review. The Contractor shall revise the report as necessary until securing final COTR approval. 5.3 FINAL REPORT ? COTR APPROVAL The final report shall incorporate all mutually agreed upon material and revisions. The report shall include any supporting documentation. It shall be grammatically and factually correct in all respects, internally consistent, and all statements and tables shall be clear and easily understood by a competent reader, and contain no typographical errors. Upon notification from the COTR that the report is considered acceptable, the Contractor shall submit twenty (20) copies, and one (1) unbound original to USTDA. All reports must be paginated and submitted in Microsoft Word on a 3.5-inch disk or on a CD-Rom. The Contractor shall also submit the report to the COTR as an e-mail attachment, and also in Microsoft Word format. 6. PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS AND PROFILE S?o Paulo The government of the State of S?o Paulo is planning to concession to the private sector the management of its extensive communications network and data centers that support the state?s e-government programs. The Intragov Communications Network is the communications network for data, voice, and image traffic for the S?o Paulo State Government. Intragov integrates all state secretariats and agencies, the state legislature, and judiciary. The state government has 20,000 administrative units in 645 municipalities across the state. There are over 4,500 communication lines installed at schools, ?poupatempos? (one-stop service centers), internal revenue centers, courts of justice, subway stations, police stations, hospitals, etc. Numerous municipalities have also joined the Intragov Communications Network to connect with the state government and to access the internet. The state spends over US$68 million annually to operate its communications network. The state government also intends to integrate and upgrade several shared government data centers in order to meet increased demand. This will involve increasing the service capacity of the management and help desks; increasing the computing capacity of the mainframe computers that support the state government?s major applications; implementing security systems; adapting buildings and electrical supply to handle additional servers; upgrading information service management systems and defining a contingency plan for critical services; increasing physical security; and adapting the communications network. For example, some of the servers used for the provision of internet service were acquired in 1997 and need to be replaced. The back-up system for every platform needs to be updated. The system currently records 11 million hacker attempts per month and there is a real need to upgrade cyber and physical security. Cear? As with the State of S?o Paulo, the State of Cear??s needs to upgrade its IT infrastructure to keep pace with continuous growth of its e-government programs. The State of Cear? is planning to contract a private company to provide data center services to the state government. The company will be required to invest and build the data center, deliver processing capacity and storage space that meet high quality and security standards, and maintain and update the infrastructure to meet the government?s requirements. The data center is expected to host the integrated government management system, process control system, official publication system, finance and accounting functions, public budget system, project management system, procurement system, governmental portal, etc. The DM consultants would work with both projects sponsors to define the appropriate terms of reference and budget for the feasibility studies. Both project sponsors have expressed interest in a study that will help define technical specifications, project costs, and the economic and financial analysis required to determine how to best structure the business model of the respective projects. The projects would be implemented through an international competitive bid. Both state governments are planning to implement these projects with the participation of the private sector, using the Public-Private Partnership (PPP) framework. On December 22, 2004, Brazil?s Congress approved the Public-Private Partnership legislation, which is intended to stimulate private investment in infrastructure backed in part by government guarantees. The State of S?o Paulo has already enacted its own PPP law and the state legislature in Cear? approved its state PPP legislation in early December 2004. Both projects contemplate utilizing the state government resources that are currently spent on the telecommunications and IT systems as a source of revenue for the private contractor. For example, the State of S?o Paulo spends approximately US$68 million per year for the Intragov Communications Network and about US$3 million annually for its principal data center. In the State of Cear?, the government has invested approximately US$4.5 million over the past three years to acquire servers and other network equipment, not including software and services.
 

Place of Performance

Address: Headquarters, USTDA, 1000 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 1600, Arlington, Virginia

Zip Code: 22209-3901

Country: USA
 

Record

SN00729367-W 20050106/050104212137 (fbodaily.com)
 

Source

FedBizOpps.gov Link to This Notice
(may not be valid after Archive Date)

---

| FSG Index  |  This Issue's Index  |  Today's FBO Daily Index Page |