dfid malawi_civil society governance fund

8/7/2019 DFID Malawi_Civil Society Governance Fund

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/dfid-malawicivil-society-governance-fund 1/52

GB- Glasgow: Financial management consultancy services.

Section I

I.1) Name, Addresses and Contact Point(s) Dept for International

Development

Abercrombie House, Eaglesham Road, East Kilbride

Glasgow

G75 8EA

United Kingdom

Tel 01355 843426

Fax: 01355 84 3183

Email: [email protected]

www.dfid.gov.uk

www.dfid.gov.uk

Paul Gaffney Paul Gaffney Further information can be obtained at:

o As in above-mentioned contact point(s)

Specifications and additional documents (including documents for competitive

dialogue and a dynamic purchasing system)can be obtained at:


Tenders or requests to participate must be sent to:


I.2) Type of contracting authority and main activity or activities

o Other: Central Levelo General Public Services

The contracting authority is purchasing on behalf of other contracting

authorities: No

Section II: Object of the Contract: SERVICES

II.1) Description

o II.1.1) Title attributed to the contract by the contracting authority: Civil

Society Governance Fund-Malawio II.1.2) Type of contract and location of works, place of delivery or of

performance: SERVICES Service Category 11

o II.1.3) The notice involves: A public contract

o II.1.5) Short description of the contract or purchase(s):

Financial management consultancy services. The Civil Society

Governance Fund (CSGF) is intended to support work by civil society

with the goal of making Malawi’s governance more accountable,

inclusive and responsive to citizens. DFID wishes to appoint a Service

Provider (SP) to manage a multi-donor pooled fund to implement theCSGF as well as undertake work to help improve civil society’s



o III.1.3) Legal form to be taken by the grouping of economic operators

to whom the contract is to be awarded (if applicable):

Joint and Several liability.

o III.1.4) Other particular conditions to which the performance of thecontract is subject (if applicable) : Not Provided

III.2) Conditions For Participation

o III.2.1) Personal situation of economic operators, including

requirements relating to enrolment on professional or trade registers :

Not Provided

o III.2.2) Economic and financial capacity

Not Provided

o III.2.3) Technical capacity

Not Provided

III.2.4) Reserved contracts (if applicable):

o Not Provided

III.3) Conditions Specific to Service Contracts

III.3.1) Execution of service is reserved to particular profession:

o Not Provided

III.3.2) Legal person should indicate the names and professional qualifications

of the staff responsible for execution of the service: Yes

Section IV: Procedure

IV.1) Type of Procedure

o IV.1.1) Type of procedure: Restricted

o IV.1.2) Limitations on the number of operators who will be invited to

tender or to participate

Envisaged minimum number : 5 and maximum number: 8 Objective Criteria for choosing the limited number of

candidates:

As stated in the Pre-Qualification Questionnaire

IV.2) Award Criteria

o IV.2.1) Award criteria (please tick the relevant box(es))

or the most economically advantageous tender in terms of

the criteria stated below (the award criteria should be

given with their weighting or in descending order of

importance where weighting is not possible for

demonstrable reasons) Criteria - Weighting

Quality of Personnel - 25

Evidence of capacity to undertake work and quality

assurance - 25 Methodology - 25



Commercial - 25

o IV.2.2) An electronic auction will be used: No

IV.3) Administrative Information

o IV.3.1) File reference number attributed by the contracting authority (if

applicable): PO5414o IV.3.2) Previous publication(s) concerning the same contract: Not

Provided

o IV.3.3) Conditions for obtaining specifications and additional

documents (except for a DPS ) or descriptive document (in the case of

a competitive dialogue):

Not Provided

o IV.3.4) Time-limit for receipt of tenders or requests to participate

Date 18/04/2011

Time 23:59

o IV.3.5) Date of dispatch of invitations to tender or to participate to

selected candidates (if known): 11/05/2011o IV.3.6) Language(s) in which tenders or requests to participate may be

drawn up

English

Section VI: Complementary Information

VI.1) This is a recurrent procurement (if applicable): Not Provided

VI.2) Contract related to a project and/or programme financed by Community

Funds: Not Provided

VI.3) Additional Information (if applicable)

The contracting authority considers that this contract may be suitable for

economic operators that are small or medium enterprises (SMEs).However,

any selection of tenderers will be based solely on the criteria set out for the

procurement, and the contract will be awarded on the basis of the most

economically advantageous tender. Expressions of interest should be

submitted by e-mail, to the address at Section 1, using the PQQ application

form available from DFID's website at: http://www.dfid.gov.uk/Working-

with-DFID/Procurement/Current-contract-opportunities. Draft Terms of

Reference and other background material can also be found at this website

address. Following assessment of PQQs DFID will invite short-listedapplicants to submit full technical and commercial proposals. Prices are not

required at the PQQ stage. When required, pricing must be in Sterling and

payments under the contract will be made in Sterling. The contract is expected

to last 42 months with a possible extension of up to 36 months. The contract

will be covered by English law. DFID reserves the right to annul the tendering

process and not award a contract. From 01/04/2001, all UK development

assistance has been fully untied which allows suppliers from anywhere in the

world to bid for DFID contracts. Where circumstances require further

extensions beyond the original contract duration/agreed extensions, DFID will

consider doing so, by means of the Negotiated Procedure, where necessary

conditions can be met.



VI.4) Procedures For Appeal

o VI.4.1) Body responsible for appeal procedures :

Dept for International Development, GB-

Email: [email protected]. Tel: 01355 843313.

o VI.4.2) Lodging of appeals (please fill heading VI.4.2 or if need be,

heading VI.4.3): Not Provided

o VI.4.3) Service from which information about the lodging of appeals

may be obtained:

Not Provided

VI.5) Date of dispatch of this notice: 09/03/2011

Annex A (Additional Addresses And Contact Points)

Not Provided



Civil Society Governance Fund - Malawi

Terms of Reference

1. Terms of Reference

1.1 Introduction

1.1.1 DFID on behalf of its partners, EU and Irish Aid, wish to appoint a ServiceProvider to manage a multi-donor pooled fund to support governance workconducted by Malawian civil society. The Civil Society Governance Fund(CSGF) is approx.£7.2 million fund for disbursement and does not includethe management cost. It will run for 3.5 years from September 2011( whichincludes a six month inception phase ), with the possibility of an extension

of up to 3 more years subject to performance, continued need andavailability of funding.

1.2 Objective

1.2.1 To establish and manage a grant making facility for Malawian-based CSOssupporting projects that contribute towards the goal of increasinglyaccountable, inclusive and responsive governance in Malawi.

1.3 Recipient

1.3.1 The recipient of the services is DFID (on behalf of the funding development

partners)1.

1.4 Scope of work

1.4.1 DFID Malawi, in partnership with the EU and Irish Aid, have developed aprogramme (The Civil Society Governance Fund-CSGF) intended to helpachieve the goal of “increasingly accountable, inclusive and responsivegovernance in Malawi”. The specific outcome of the CSGF is intended to be“empowered citizens promote social inclusion, political rights andaccountability for basic services.” A Service Provider is required to managethe CSGF, providing grants to Malawian and Malawian-based Civil Society

Organisations (CSOs) based on received project proposals to achieveresults in 3 defined areas that contribute towards these programmeobjectives. DFID does not provide advance funding, therefore, serviceproviders will be required to pre-finance the management of theprogramme, before claiming reimbursement from DFID in arrears (includingdisbursement of funds)

1 Wherever DFID is mentioned in these ToRs as the contractor, the ‘on behalf of’ relationship - noted here - withthe other funding development partners is implied. The evaluation committee for the procurement of the servicesrequested here will include representative(s) all funding partners and may include potential funding partners.



1.4.2 The Service Provider will be required to demonstrate clear Value for Money

from the management of the CSGF-Malawi. This will include demonstrating

that administrative costs can be minimised, the management processes

designed to maximise cost effectiveness and that grants can be allocated

based on evidence of results to ensure the greatest possible impact isachieved. A clear process for measuring value for money should be included

in the monitoring framework.

1.4.3 The three overall objectives of the CSGF are: Civil society empowers citizens

to promote increasingly accountable, capable and responsive governance;

Civil society empowers citizens to reduce social exclusion; and Civil society

enables citizens to hold service providers to account for performance on

selected MDGs

The CSGF requirement comprises three outputs:

1. Grant-making facility for CSOs established, enabling them to undertakeprojects to achieve results in the three defined areas

2. Technical advice and capacity-building support provided to CSOs toimprove their ability to manage grants and achieve results

3. Research and analysis to identify strategic opportunities forinterventions undertaken, and where necessary coalition buildingfacilitated and small non-standard support grants provided

1.4.4 The successful bidder will be required to manage a multi-donor pooled fund ofapproximately £7.2 million over an initial 3.5 year period ( which includes asix month inception phase ), with the possibility of an extension of up to 3more years subject to performance, continued need and availability of fundingin order to deliver the CSGF outputs above. The provider will require apermanent presence in Malawi.

1.4.5 A design process for the CSGF has already taken place and provided a“model fund design” for achieving the programme objectives. This model canbe adapted by the bidders for this contract as they see fit to maximise results.These ToRs provide some detail on this, More detail can be found in the Draft

Technical Specification included in the tender documents.

1.5 Methodology

1.5.1 The Service Provider implementing this programme on behalf of DFID willbe required to carry out a number of tasks including the following.

1.5.2 In relation to output 1, the Service Provider will be required to:

Develop an appropriate management structure for delivering these terms ofreference and ensuring that the programme is sufficiently flexible to scale upin response to new funding and changes in the political context

2



Draw up annual work plans and budgets which will deliver the various outputsand help achieve the purpose

Advise the Management Board on the performance of the funding windows,the opportunities to pursue new thematic priorities and necessary

modifications to selection criteria and processes (to ensure outcomeachievement and promote outreach to a diversity of CSOs)

Administer “calls for proposals” covering the three results areas at agreedintervals

Support and feedback to potential grantees to improve proposal quality,particularly in terms of result management

Provisionally approve grants under €20,000. Score and submit grants over€20,000 to the Board

Oversee grant implementation, including rigorous monitoring of progress anddelivery of results

Under instruction from the Board coordinate reviews as below:

- An inception review within 6 months of award of contract;

- annual reviews thereafter;

- a full mid-term review; and

- a final evaluation at least 3 months before the end of the project

Implement decisions and carry out additional tasks required by the Board,including approved recommendations from the independent evaluation agentand review meetings

1.5.3 In relation to output 2 the Service Provider will be required to takeresponsibility for:

Carrying out needs assessments of CSOs requiring assistance to access theFund or manage and implement projects, under criteria agreed with theBoard

Providing tailored and generic capacity-building support to CSOs to maximiseresults

Compiling rosters of technical assistance (TA) and negotiating draw-downcontracts as required for capacity building support

Selecting and recruiting of any required short-term consultants, trainers, localcapacity development service providers, seminar/workshop leaders,participants and mentors, including organising their terms of reference andassignment definition

1.5.4 In relation to output 3 the Service Provider will be required to:

3



undertake periodic research and analysis of the Malawian governancecontext in relation to the results areas and overall CSGF objectives andmaintain a deep understanding of the Malawian political context

identify strategic opportunities where specific interventions by civil society

and other stakeholders around particular issues may help achieve definedresults and the objectives of the CSGF

facilitate people coming together from a range of organisations from bothwithin and outside of civil society, including government, private sector etc todevelop interventions around the strategic opportunities where they havecommon objectives

coordinate and contract a limited number of short term grants outside theusual call for proposals to support these efforts

1.5.5 In relation to the delivery of all outputs the Service Provider will be requiredto complete a six month inception phase for the programme during whichtime the following tasks will be completed:

Set up a programme office in Lilongwe, including recruitment andprocurement.

Draft manuals and procedures for grant applications and approvals, oversightand quality assurance, accounting and procurement, drawing on lessonslearned from other programmes.

Develop and implement an effective knowledge management strategy and

system for the project, including a grants database.

Develop and implement an outreach plan and communications strategy.

Review existing good practice CSO capacity development approaches andmethods, and identify initial local consultants for capacity development.

Develop and agree with the Board work plans and budgets (an indicative workprogramme for the first two years and a detailed work programme for the firstyear).

Issue a call for expression of interest and allocate first round of grants

Revisit and clarify programme management arrangements to ensure optimumeffectiveness and value for money.

1.5.6 At the end of the inception phase the Service Provider will prepare aninception report (in a format agreed with DFID) and a revised resultsframework. The report will set out the results and findings of all inceptionactivities as well as incorporate the proposed priorities and workprogrammes; programme budget; management budget; any commentaryrequired on specific issues especially any that differ from the originalTechnical Proposal. If necessary, and on negotiation with DFID, the Terms

of Reference should be updated/revised in the light of inception phaseanalysis and planning.

4



Implementation Phase 1.5.7 Subject to DFID & funding partners approval of the inception p[hase

deliverables and agreement on costs the Service Provider will progress tofull implementation of an agreed 30 month programme, subject to

satisfactory performance of the Service Provider during the inceptionphase..

1.5.8 The financial capacity of the Service Provider will be reviewed in line with

those specified in para 1.6 below to ensure they continue to have the

financial capacity to deliver the programme outputs.

1.6 Reporting

1.6.1 In addition to the Inception Report, the following reports will be preparedand copied to the Board for comments:

- Annual work plans, procurement plans and budgets. These will be approvedby the Management Board.

- Progress in delivering these plans, especially at activity and output levels,shall be reported on a quarterly basis to the Board in an agreed format.

- At the year end additional reports will be required on lessons learned, riskmanagement, monitoring reports, and recommendations to improve theCSGF’s operations.

1.6.2 Mandatory financial reports:

- Annual forecast of expenditures (the budget) disaggregated monthly – for thefinancial year April to March. These should be updated at least every 6months

- Six monthly comparison of budget with expenditure

- External audit report on the annual financial statements

1.6.3 These financial reports will present data by output as well as by type ofexpenditures (such as grants, training, workshops, consultancies). Thedetailed requirements will be agreed with DFID during the inception phase.

1.7 Programme Management Arrangements

1.7.1 The programme will be overseen by a Management Board. More details ofthe “model” board structure, composition and responsibilities are included inthe draft technical specification. The Service Provider will report directly to theChairperson of the Board.

1.7.2 DFID does not provide advance funding, therefore, consultants will be

required to pre-finance the management of the programme, before claiming

reimbursement from DFID in arrears ( including disbursement of funds ).

1.8 Timeframe

5



1.8.1 The selected Service Provider is expected to be in Malawi and beginningoperations by September 2011 (one month after contract award). The fundis designed to be operational for an initial 3.5 years, with the possibility of anextension of up to 3 more years subject to performance, continued needand availability of funding. The fund will have a 6 month inception phase

in which the secretariat and procedures will be established and first callissued.

1.8.2 As with all DFID contracts there will be routine review points. Results ofthese may signal a restructuring of the timeframe, or the scale or scope ofwork in a particular area.

1.8.3 The progression to implementation phase will be subject to acceptance ofdeliverables, satisfactory performance of the Service Provider andagreement to the Service Provider’s proposal including costs. This will beassessed at the end of the 6-month inception phase.

1.8.4 If DFID and other donor partners decide not to proceed on completion ofinception phase, the contract will be terminated at no cost to DFID.

1.8.5 Bidders should note that bids will be assessed for both the inception andimplementation phases. A full and detailed budget is required for theinception phase with an indicative budget for the implementation phase. Thebudget for the implementation phase will be assessed to ensure it stillprovides the most economically advantageous proposal.

1.9 DFID coordination

1.9.1 DFID coordination will be provided by the DFID Governance Team Leaderor an appointed Governance Team staff member.

2 Background

2.1 Malawi is a largely rural country and, despite impressive recent progress,poverty rates and basic service delivery remain a challenge. 16 years sincemulti-party democracy replaced 30 years of single party rule, many people arestill unused to holding Government to account for services they provide, howthey manage public money, or protection of basic rights. This leavescommunities, especially the poor, lacking the ability to address the problemsthat reduce their quality of life and vulnerable to the impact of corruption.

2.2 There has been definite progress since 1994. Human rights and the space fordebate are much better than under one-party rule, although there is still scopefor improvements. An increase in women MPs between 2004 and 2009elections (14% to 23%) suggests progress on gender equality, but it is still aconcern, and other marginalised groups have limited ‘voice’ and opportunitiesto participate. Malawi is still a very rural and poor country and there remains astrong patrimonial trend, from village level to formal political structures. There isalso a common perception of a recent reduction in the space for engagementand for civil society to operate.

2.3 Although poor local communities are often very distant from political andeconomic decision making in the capital, Malawi does have some tradition of

6



2.4 This programme will aim to build on this Malawian tradition of civil engagement,to support moves to greater public accountability and faster progress ondevelopment outcomes. Global evidence provides many examples of howcitizen action can lead to the improvement of service delivery; can contribute tothe development of new accountability frameworks; and help poor andmarginalised groups realise political rights and democracy2. It also suggeststhat civil society can play a major role in empowering citizens and helping themhold public officials to account, but also to work with the state (and thegovernment) and actors within it to achieve common aims.

2.5 CSOs face many challenges, including institutional weaknesses such as poor

capacity and financial management. However, given that formal institutions areplaying a less robust scrutiny and oversight role, civil society will beincreasingly important in filling this gap. The CSGF will need to contribute bothto the institutional development of civil society and improving internal goodgovernance, as well as to strengthening the role of civil society to implementprogrammes to promote more responsive and accountable government.

2 See for example the work of the “Citizenship, Participation and Accountability” Development Research Centre housed at the Institute for Development Studies. Their publication “Putting Citizens at the centre: linking state and societies for responsive governance” provides a good overview.

7



C IVIL S OCIETY G OVERNANCE F UND

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION

REFERENCE DOCUMENT FOR

POTENTIAL SERVICE PROVIDERS



Contents

Page

1 Introduction 32 Delivering Impact 4

Goal and Purpose 4

Output 1 4

Output 2 5

Output 3 5

3 Fund Structure & Governance 6

Governance Structure 6

Management Agent 6

Independent Impact Evaluation Agent 7

Management Board 8

4 Fund Management 11

Legal Status of Fund 11

Eligibility 12

Capacity Development 13

Audits & Reporting 13

Timing 15

Budget 15

Portfolio Management 15 5 The Grant Making Process 16

Ensuring a Focus on Results 16

Calls for Proposals 16

Grant Types 18

Annex 1: Managing Agent Terms ofReference

20

2



1 Introduction

1.1.1 The Civil Society Governance Fund (CSGF) Malawi is a DFID, EU and Irish Aid project to

support governance work conducted by civil society. This overview provides an outlinespecification for the CSGF based upon “best practice”. Many of these areas are open for

those bidding for the Service Provision contract to amend or change in their bid and

should therefore not be taken as a prescription.

1.2 Goal and Purpose

1.2.1 The fund has the following goal and purpose:

‐ Goal: Malawi’s governance is increasingly accountable, inclusive and responsive to citizens.

‐ Purpose: Empowered citizens promote social inclusion, political rights and accountability for

basic services.

1.2.2 The fund will have three outputs and these correspond to the three results areas. These

outputs will link into a draft project results framework that will be developed by the

development partners and finalised by the Service Provider in the inception phase.

Output 1: Civil society empowers citizens to promote increasingly accountable, capable

and responsive governance.

1.2.3 Theory of change: Increasing levels of engagement in policy formulation, implementation

and development by civil society will help deliver increased accountability of government.

This will lead to improved government and non-state actor responsiveness, including

more effective delivery of the services impacting MDG indicators. Accountability for

political rights and civil liberties will keep the political space for policy debate open.

1.2.4 Within this output, indicative specific results are defined below. These will be validated

and amended and subsequently finalised by the Board. Projects must fall within one

these areas which can be amended at the Board’s discretion or at Participatory Annual

Review sessions, as the political context changes.

Specific sub-results:

Citizens are well informed about public matters and are willing and able to hold the state

accountable.

Citizens provide input into budget processes, discussions and monitor allocation,

expenditure and results

Citizens are aware of their rights and the roles of their representatives and are confident

to claim their rights and exercise their responsibilities.

MPs held accountable for their policy performance.

Political parties aggregate and articulate citizens’ interests in political programmes

3



Political and campaign financing increasingly transparent and civil society able to monitor

and act as a watchdog

A free and balanced media informs citizens and holds government to account, and

facilitates public debate.

Increased demand for transparency and accountability on allocation and use of

resources by government.

Civil society organisations strengthen their internal accountability mechanisms and

become more transparent in their operations.

More evidence-based policy-making, based on civil society input.

Output 2: Civil society empowers citizens to reduce social exclusion

1.2.5 Theory of change: Organisations representing those who are excluded from basic rights

and services, and empowerment of the people themselves, allows the excluded tosuccessfully claim their entitlements. Alongside this, accountability will lead those in

positions of power, at both at macro and micro levels, to ensure their governance is

inclusive. In addition awareness raising and work with the majority will lead to an

increasing societal rejection of exclusionary practices.

1.2.6 A gender and social exclusion analysis is being undertaken to support the Board in

identifying specific groups and results that will targeted. These groups and results can be

amended at the discretion of the Board.

Output 3: Civil society enables citizens to hold service providers to account for

performance on selected MDGs

1.2.7 Theory of change: Increasing amounts of people holding government and other service

providers to account for service delivery will lead them to work with and respond to

communities to deliver improved services - impacting MDG indicators. The Board will

select specific MDGs and related service delivery improvements for the fund to target.

2 CSGF Structure & Governance

2.1 Governance Structure

2.1.1 Below is a suggested structure for the CSGF’s governance that has been provided by a team of consultants. The Service Provider should use this as a reference document in

developing the CSGF’s governance structure using its own experience and

understanding of what works and what doesn’t, especially in the specific Malawian

context.

2.1.2 The CSGF will be constituted of three bodies: the Secretariat , Management Board and

an Independent Impact Evaluation Agent. The Secretariat (run by the Service Provider)

and Independent Impact Evaluation Agent will be accountable to the Management Board.

The Board will have two sub-committees: the Grants Sub-Committee and Audit Sub-

Committee.

4



2.2 Service Provider

2.2.1 The CSGF Secretariat will be run by the Service Provider and be responsible for the day

to day running of the fund. The structure, staffing and set-up of the Secretariat is the

responsibility of the Service Provider to create, In discussion with funding partners, but

the roles of the Secretariat (as described in the ToRs) will include:

‐ Administering calls for proposals.

‐ Support and feedback to potential grantees to improve proposal quality, particularly in terms

of result management.

‐ Provisionally approving grants under €20,000. Scoring and submitting grants over €20,000 to

the Grant Sub-Committee and Board.

‐ Management of the multi-donor pooled fund account

‐ Management of grants, including monitoring (but not evaluation).

‐ Coordination of capacity development: needs assessments, compiling roster of technical

assistance (TA), negotiation of draw down contracts with TA and management of TA.

Capacity building discussed in more detail below.

‐ Identification of strategic opportunities for reform. The Secretariat will be able to commission

pieces of research, identify key issues where coalitions of interest exist, catalyse civil society

coordination and contract a limited number of strategic short term grants, outside of the usual

call for proposals.

Management Board

Board Grants Sub-

Committee

Secretariat

Mana ement Structure

Board Audit Sub-

Committee

Independent Evaluation

Agent

5



‐ Reporting to contributing partners.

‐ Coordination of review meetings.

‐ Implementation of decisions made by the Board, including approved recommendations from

the independent evaluation agent and review meetings.

2.2.2 A strong link exists between the quality of the staff managing the Secretariat , particularly

the project manager, and the effectiveness of the fund. These will be key criteria for

choosing the Service Provider.

2.3 Independent Impact Evaluation Agent

2.3.1 The funding partners are committed to contracting an Independent Evaluation Agent. The

Independent Impact Evaluation Agent will be contracted separately from and a

number of months after the Service Provider specified in this tender and is to beoverseen by the Board. Responsible for evaluation of the impact of individual projects

and the portfolio as a whole, the Independent Impact Evaluation Agent will play a

knowledge management role and, along with the Board, will keep the fund, its Secretariat

and grantees focused on the delivery of results. Specific roles might include:

‐ Collection of baselines and results for projects supported by the fund, including the

coordination of pre and post intervention surveys in project areas.

‐ Analysis of portfolio composition in terms of spreads of risk, the three result areas, value for

money/cost-benefit analysis and geographical balance.

‐ The commissioning and coordination of randomised control trials for two large projects

funded during the first or second year of granting.

‐ Making annual recommendations to the Board of how the project could improve its results

focus.

2.4 Management Board

2.4.1 The details of the management board and grant approval process, amounts etc as

described below have been developed by consultants and agreed by the funding partners in consultation with Malawian civil society and others, and as such are the

current preferred structure. However, we will take on board suggestions by bidders for a

different structure that can help increase the CSGF’s effectiveness and the contracted

Service Provider will establish the final structure in consultation with the funders.

2.4.2 Overseeing the Secretariat and Independent Impact Evaluation Agent will be the fund

Management Board. This will be composed of representatives from contributing donors

and three eminent Malawians chosen for their experience and impartiality. Each

contributing partner and eminent Malawian would have a single vote on the Board with

Chairmanship revolving between members on an annual basis.

6



2.4.3 The Board will include eminent Malawians with significant experience in civil society or

elsewhere (e.g. private sector, academia) but exclude individuals currently in leadership

roles within civil society organisations likely to bid for grants. These individuals would be

recruited by the other members of the Board, utilising suggestions of civil society

representatives. Individuals will be appointed for one year periods and can be

reappointed subject to willingness of the individual and the nomination of the chairman ofthe Board, who will consult with other members. The fund expects high performing Board

members and will incentivise this through the establishment of strong performance

criteria as well as ensuring competitive remuneration for Eminent Malawians.

2.4.4 While the Board is eventually likely to meet bi-annually, monthly meetings will be the

norm for at least the first year. The Board will also be able to pass resolutions by email,

given responses from a quorum of members.

2.4.5 Specific functions of the Board include:

‐ Ultimate responsibility for the performance of the fund and its impact. Receives reporting and

work planning from the Secretariat and Independent Impact Evaluation Agent, making

changes where necessary.

‐ Review of proposals for advocacy grants, administered in a timely fashion in-between calls

for proposals.

‐ Strategy setting for overall fund, ensuring the fund continues to be respond effectively to

changes in political context. This will include reviewing the results framework annually.

‐ Investing in creating political cover for the fund by publishing its work and, where appropriate,

keeping government informed of developments with the fund.

‐ Making decisions on grant eligibility guidelines and their interpretation.

‐ Commissioning annual reviews of the fund to assess the achievement of the fund at output

level, its contribution to the fund purpose and the success of management arrangements.

‐ Final sign off on grants totalling over €200,000 and a veto over all grant decisions.

2.4.6 The Grants Sub-committee (of the Board) will be comprised of two members of the

Board, acting on behalf of the body on a bi-annual1

rotating basis. The Secretariat will

present a limited range of viable options to the sub-committee. While the Board has afinal veto over all funding decisions,

2the approval process varies by grant size:

‐ Under €20,000: Approved by the Secretariat , direct to board for final approval (or veto).

‐ Totalling €20,000 - €200,000: Scored by the Secretariat , approval given by the grant sub-

committee. Final board approval (or veto).

1Linked to calls for proposals. With Board agreement the Sub-committee members may stay on for two calls for

proposals.2

For each round the Board will be presented with the sets of proposals to be funded alongside those that werenot.

7



‐ Totalling over €200,000: Scored by the Secretariat , provisional approval given by the grant

sub-committee. Final approval given by the Board based on more detailed engagement than

for grants under €200,000.

Final Approval For Grants

Total Grant Size Approval Veto

Under €20,000 Secretariat Board

€20,000 – €200,000 Grant Sub-committee Board

Over €200,000 Board Grant Sub-committee (Provisional Approval)

Board (Final Approval)-

Management

Board

Grant Approval Process

Final

Approval

Provisiona

l Approval

Sifting

and

Scoring

Management

Board

Management

Board

Secretariat

Under

€20,000

Over

€200,000

€20,000 -

€200,000

Secretariat

Grant Sub-

Committee

Secretariat

Grant Sub-

Committee

Secretariat

2.4.7 The Board sub-committee model allows a limited degree of donor engagement in the

decision making process without overloading the Board. By having a forum for

engagement in the decision making process, donor partners will also be better informedin terms of the quality of proposals and the extent to which they are focused on specific

and achievable results, allowing more substantive input as the fund develops. The Board

may change this approval structure as the fund develops, and the Service Provider will

be expected to provide advice.3

2.4.8 The audit sub-committee will be comprised of three members of the Board appointed

annually on a rotational basis. The committee will be called on an ad-hoc basis with

authority delegated by the Board for specific tasks. These may include establishing

guidelines for audit, handling any financial mismanagement and dealing with issues

arising from annual audits of the Secretariat and Independent Impact Evaluation Agent.

3E.g. by abolishing the Grant Sub-committee or changing the levels at which approvals are given

8



The Board retains the authority to decide whether audit issues will be handled directly at

Board level; decisions of consequence made by the audit sub-committee must be

approved by the Board.

2.4.9 Broader accountability for progress will come in participatory reviews held on an annual

basis. These are a donor requirement, although the format is potentially flexible.

2.4.10 The reviews will bring contributing partners, grant recipients and potential grantees

(including a selection of unsuccessful grantees) together to review progress from the

perspective of a range of stakeholders. A key priority for the fund is ensuring it remains

relevant in a changing political context. Participatory reviews will provide input to the

Board, allowing it to make relevant changes.

2.4.11 Specific objectives include:

‐ By ensuring that representatives from each of the categories of civil society4 are represented,

participatory reviews will be able to identify gaps in the fund’s work, In particular they will

identify whether the accountability efforts of local CBOs are being supported effectively by

the fund.

‐ Review of fund objectives and strategy – identification of high and low performing areas and

any gaps between articulation of fund objectives and implementation. This will also be an

opportunity for re-articulation of the fund’s focus on results to grantees.

‐ Identification of opportunities for political engagement and further research that have

emerged.

3 Fund Management

3.1 Eligibility

3.1.1 Eligibility criteria have been agreed by funders after consolation. However, we are open

to bidders suggesting additional or changes to the criteria based on a understanding of

the Malawi legal and political context.

3.1.2 The following eligibility criteria apply to all grantees.

‐ Registration with either central government or district assemblies (legal registration, or

through CONGOMA (registration for operational purposes).

‐ Audited accounts for at least a year5 or at least 4 years for top tier results grants.

‐ Only three grants may be administered concurrently by CSOs.

4Civil society organisations, community based organisations, faith based organisation and international NGOs As

identified in the state of Civil Society Analysis5 This requirement will prevent many CBOs from accessing the fund, the implementing agent will work withcontributing partners to agree whether this requirement be waived for small grants if other financial systems arein place.

9



‐ Both national and international NGOs may apply to implement projects under the fund. The

portfolio will be managed in order that support to I-NGOs does not exclude suitable local

NGOs from implementing projects.6

‐ Individuals linked to CSOs receiving grants must demonstrate conscious consent to take part

in projects, in full knowledge of the risks to their person and families.

3.1.3 The fund will welcome and encourage applications from partnerships, coalitions and

consortium of CSOs, and those intending to sub-grant.

3.1.4 There will be no formal restrictions on levels of funding imposed on CSOs. This will be

left to the discretion of the Service provider who can make informed decisions on the

capacity of organisations to administer further grants, as and when they are applied for.

3.2 Capacity Development

3.2.1 Ensuring the organisations the fund works with are running effectively will have asignificant impact on results delivered by the fund and so capacity development will be a

key responsibility of the Service Provider. Capacity development will be approached not

as an end in itself but as a means of delivering increased impact. It is suggested that

short capacity assessments will be conducted jointly by the CSO and Secretariat, in order

that a shared understanding of organisational weakness is achieved.7

By taking this

approach support will be demand led and tailored to the specifics of organisations. This

means the Secretariat will only conduct ‘one size fits all’ training sessions to large

numbers of partners in exceptional circumstances and where there is a strong value for

money case Areas of support include:

‐ Project management

‐ Financial management

‐ Monitoring and evaluation

‐ Internal governance

3.2.2 Capacity development should be closely aligned to the granting process in order that

they are mutually reinforcing.8

To this end, the Secretariat will be directly responsible for

capacity development and is advised to use a small roster of local consultants on a draw

down basis. This means the Secretariat does not need to keep a large staff in place to

cover all potential capacity development needs. Specifics of this arrangement include:

‐ The Secretariat will develop a roster of technical assistance using an open application

process. The consultation with I-NGOs demonstrated that only limited numbers of high

quality consultants are available in Malawi and so the open application process will also be

6Given the size of the fund, this is not a significant risk.

7The organisational assessments conducted as part of the grant making process will also feed into these

capacity assessments.8 Capacity development coming out of needs identified during the granting process and experience/ informationfrom the capacity development process creating a more intelligent grant making partnership and maximisepotential synergies that could be lost through two contracts being made.

10



complimented with proactive head hunting of high quality individuals, using recommendations

from other programmes.

‐ Reusing the same individuals, subject to performance, is an important method used by I-

NGOs to incentivise TA delivery that the Secretariat should use. By building a strong

relationship between TA and Secretariat, follow up with partners is also substantially

improved.

‐ Consultants will be contracted through framework agreements with the Secretariat in order to

ensure value for money and establishment of a strong working relationship, and information

flows, between TA and the Secretariat.

3.3 Audits & Reporting

3.3.1 The Service Provider will be responsible for developing a joint monitoring arrangement,

including joint reporting formats, in line with the requirements of contributing partners.

3.3.2 The Secretariat and the multi-donor pooled fund account will be audited annually in line

with basic requirements for all contributing partners. For ease of administration, auditors

will be contracted and paid for by DFID who may subtract the cost of the audits from its

contribution to the fund.

3.3.3 The audit sub-committee will be responsible for developing a realistic strategy for

auditing grantees, which will then be approved by the Board. The Secretariat will compile

a fraud register containing cases of fraud and suspected fraud, recording both the NGOsand individuals involved and governed by a clear set of guidelines regulating inclusion on

the register.

3.4 Timing

3.4.1 The fund is designed to run for four years from the mobilisation of the chosen Service

Provider. This is scheduled to be September 2011 to August 2015. Contributing partners

retain the option to extend the fund by up to three years if it is working successfully. The

fund will have a 6 month inception phase in which the Secretariat and procedures will be

established.

3.5 Budget

3.5.1 Projected contributions to the multi-donor pooled fund and the schedule of funding by the

contributors- DFID, EU and Ireland- is under negotiation. The total available funding for

the pooled fund- money available for grants- is around £6,200,000. Other partners may

also contribute to the fund at a later stage.

3.6 Portfolio Management

3.6.1 It is suggested that the fund will have three levels of grants: those above €200,000, those

between €200,000 and €20,000 and those below €20,000. The Secretariat will take a

proactive approach to portfolio management ensuring that balance is achieved in the

11



3.6.2 The fund will balance large and small grants with 50% of the fund invested in large grants

totalling over €200,000 and 50% in small (under €20,000) and medium (totalling €20,000

to €200,000) grants. In addition to this, small grants will be capped at a maximum of 15%of the total fund value, out of recognition of the higher transaction costs associated with

these grants. The Board will have the power to amend these ratios as the fund is

implemented and they will be reviewed annually.

3.6.3 The Secretariat will balance the levels of outcome risk within the portfolio, without

compromising on financial risk. Up to 20% of the value of the middle and lower tier

funding (totalling 10% of the total portfolio) will be invested in innovative yet higher

outcome risk projects and in line with projects elsewhere, a failure9

rate of approximately

20%10

is to be expected with an expected 20 - 30%11

of these grants achieving above

average impact.12

The calls for proposals will specifically welcome innovative (higher

outcome risk) projects. The Secretariat will be required to assess the risks associatedwith each proposal, categorising them into ‘innovation’ and ‘project’ grant categories as a

method for balancing risk across the portfolio. This will allow the fund to have an appetite

for high risk, high impact projects without becoming over-exposed.

4 The Grant Making Process

4.1.1 The grant-making process described below has been develop by consultants and

represents a suggested best practice methodology for ensuring a grant making process

that will achieve results. The funding partners remain open to suggestions by bidders to

changes and amendments to this process. The final grant-making process will be agreed between the contracted Service Provider and the funding partners.

4.2 Ensuring a Focus on Results

4.2.1 The quality of many proposals received by the fund is likely to be low, particularly in

terms of specifying clear and achievable results. The Service Provider is likely to have to

work alongside civil society to refine proposals, in order that objectives and monitoring

arrangements can be refined. This challenge will be dealt with in two ways - both

upstream before proposals are submitted, and downstream, after they have been

received.

4.2.2 The Service Provider will focus upstream by holding regional information sessions

outlining fund objectives and offering guidance on making proposals focused on results.

This approach is based on the assumption that investing up front will save staff time later

when proposals have been submitted. Sessions will be run by the Secretariat with any

assistance brought in to support, rather than substitute, staff.

9Only partially meeting the objective

102% of total fund portfolio

112-3% of total fund portfolio

12 These ratios were developed in relation to centrally funded DFID projects. Further investment in assessingindicative rates of return will be necessary. These can then be adjusted using figures prepared by theindependent evaluation agent as the project is implemented.

12



Submission of Concept Notes

Submission of Proposals

CSO

accept

reject

reject

Re-submission

Grant Submitted for Approval

revise & resubmit

revise &

resubmit

at next call reject

accept

Grant Vettin

4.3.5 The Service Provider will deliver high standards of service to partners and be expected

to: acknowledge receipt of proposals within a pre-agreed period of time, specifying atimeline for a response as well as providing a basic level of feedback to unsuccessful

grantees14

. Aside from being a reputational issue for the fund, these basic service

standards increase civil society buy-in which produces a range of wider benefits such as

higher quality proposals and further political cover. By using concept notes and ensuring

feedback is given, the proposal failure rate will be likely to fall, reducing overall demands

on the Secretariat.

4.4 Grant Types

4.4.1 The fund will have three types of grants: those totalling over €200,000, those between

€200,000 and €20,000 and those below €20,000. Application requirements will varyaccording to grant size. In doing so, the need for rigorous assessment of the results each

proposal will deliver will be balanced against the need for application procedures that are

sufficiently light touch to allow smaller CBOs to apply. In order to keep the application

requirements as light as possible, the Secretariat , during the 6 month inception period,

may recommend to the Board that these levels be amended. Grants will run for between

one and three years depending on the size of the grant.

14Where proposals are of good quality but fall outside the fund’s remit, this may include re-direction to alternative

sources of finance

14



Grant Name GrantSize

MaximumGrantDuration

Target CSOs

Small Grants Under€20,000

1 year CBOs and locally rooted CSOs impacting a smallnumber of districts or TAs

Fast Track Grants Under

€20,000

1 year CSOs with a proven track record of advocacy

Results Grants(lower tier)

€20,000 -€200,000

3 years Wide range of CSOs implementing policy specificor geographically limited projects

Results Grants(upper tier)

€200,000 3 years Large CSOs implementing projects at scale

4.4.2 The bottom tier of grants, those below €20,000 will provide space for both small, locally

rooted CSOs and CBOs15

This category will allow CBOs to apply directly to the fund and

whilst this category of grants is likely to be most transaction heavy, it is built on

recognition of the significant governance impact had by small locally rooted

organisations. The management agent would place particular emphasis on keeping

application requirements for projects in this category as light as possible. These grants

would run for a maximum of one year. The fund will also welcome applications from

CSOs that have successfully implemented projects for the fund, or elsewhere, that

require additional funding to consolidate their work, or develop advocacy around it.

4.4.3 Also below €20,000 are fast track grants to larger organisations for strategic short term

and time limited projects. This is important as twice yearly funding rounds are not well

suited to acting quickly on time bound opportunities for reform; both because they can

take a number of months to complete and may fall outside of the time period for strategic

interventions. Up to five of these grants would be provided per year and applications

would be welcomed outside of the usual funding cycles- to be approved rapidly by the

grants sub-committee via email. By allowing applications outside of normal application

windows, there is a risk that the management agent would be swamped with proposals.

To prevent this, the management agent will be responsible for producing detailed

guidance on the conditions under which time-timed proposals would be funded which

would have to include a firm case for why proposals could not be funded through the

normal windows. These grants will not be available to NGOs already receiving core

funding from the fund.

4.4.4 The lower tier Results Grants, totalling between €20,000 and €200,000, will account for

the majority, by number, of grants within the fund. These are differentiated from higher

tier grants by the detail required in demonstrating links to outcomes and the forms of

monitoring and evaluation to be used. Application requirements for lower tier grants are

in line with the formats for proposals currently required for similar size grants by the

contributing partners- a well defined objective, clear and specific outputs, a logical link up

to outcomes and a credible results management framework. Grants will run for up to

three years with the application format varying by total grant size.

4.4.5 In contrast the higher tier applications, totalling over €200,000 would have more

extensive application requirements including a much more detailed monitoring and

evaluation plan and a well argued case for the approach and impact on higher level

objectives. Organisations implementing these grants would be required to be well

established, having four years audited accounts, strong management systems and

15Whose major source of funding is often the Local Development Fund which limits their ability to hold local

government accountable

15



16

implementation capacity.16

For grants of this size impact would be measured, as much

as it is attributable, at outcome level.

4.4.6 Large CSOs whose main work is in line with fund objectives may apply for higher tier

grants to support their core work. As with all higher tier grants, funding would be provided

against the delivery of a specific set of higher level results; CSOs would be required todemonstrate that these results were not being achieved through other existing funding.

4.4.7 The fund will allow CSOs apply to the fund to partner with local CBOs and CSOs as a

means to target local processes of accountability. The coordinating CSO (either an NGO

or I-NGO) will be responsible for the results delivered by its partners and any capacity

building required to increase CBO performance.

4.4.8 By splitting higher tier Results Grants out as a separate category, the Secretariat will

avoid putting an unrealistic burden on smaller CSOs applying for grants in the lower tier.

Without this differentiation it is likely that the Secretariat would be unable to disperse the

donor investment effectively while guaranteeing appropriate accountability for results.

The distinction between upper and lower tier grant application formats will be reviewed at

the end of the second year, allowing them to be merged, if necessary.

16 While the fund will consider grants of all sizes, the stringent application requirements for the top

grant category are designed to limit the number of large applications.



Issue No: 3

Date of Issue: 06/05/10

Page 1 of 24

PRE-QUALIFICATION QUESTIONNAIRE

Civil Society Governance Fund-Malawi

March 2011



Issue No: 3

Date of Issue: 06/05/10

Page 2 of 24

THE CIVIL SOCIETY GOVERNANCE FUND PRE-QUALIFICATION QUESTIONNAIRE

CONTENTS

PART A GENERAL ................................................................................................................................... 3 1. Introduction and Background ....................................................................................................... 3 2. The Requirement…..……………………………………………………………………..…………63. Procurement Process ................................................................................................................... 7 4. Conflicts of Interest ....................................................................................................................... 7 5. Timetable ....................................................................................................................................... 7 6. Instructions for Completion .......................................................................................................... 9 7. Consortium and sub-contracting ................................................................................................. 9 8. Queries about the procurement ................................................................................................... 9

9. Supplier contact point ................................................................................................................. 10 10. Evaluation Approach .................................................................................................................. 10 11 Confidentiality and Publication of Information .......................................................................... 11 12 Freedom of Information and Environmental Information Regulations.................................... 12 13 Publicity ....................................................................................................................................... 12 14 Reliance on Information ............................................................................................................. 12 15 Costs of the Procurement .......................................................................................................... 12 16 Collusion and Canvassing ......................................................................................................... 12 17 Change of Control or Information Provided in the PQQ .......................................................... 12 18. Pre-Qualification Questionnaire ................................................................................................ 13 PART B-ENCLOSURES ...................................................................................................................... 221



Page 3 of 24

PART A GENERAL

1. Introduction and Background

1.1 Definitions and abbreviations

The following is a list of the key definitions and abbreviations used throughout this document.

Term Definition

Authority This refers to the contracting body, the Departmentfor International DevelopmentEU Restricted Procedure A two-stage process allowing a short-list of

interested parties to be established during a pre-qualification stage, prior to the issue of ITTdocuments.

1.2 Purpose of this document

The purpose of this document is for DFID to seek Responses from Respondents wishing to be selected to tender for the Contract.

It is envisaged that between 5 and 8 s uccessful Respondents will be invited to participate further in the procurement process and will be invited to tender forprovision of the Services. The Contract duration will be 3.5 years, with an extension option for a further 3, subject to performance, continued need and availability offunding.

This is a competitive procurement conducted in accordance with the Restricted Procedure, under the UK Public Contracts Regulations 2006.

1.3 Background Information

Department for International Development Structure

The UK government believes it is in all our interests to help poor people build a better l ife for themselves. So in 1997 it created a separate government department -the Department for International Development (DFID) - to meet the many challenges of tackling world poverty. It is DFID’s job to make sure every pound of Britishaid works its hardest to help the world’s poor.



Page 4 of 24

Our structure and staff

DFID is the part of the UK government that manages Britain's aid to poor countries and works to get rid of extreme poverty. We are led by a cabinet minister, one ofthe senior ministers in the government. This in itself is a sign of how determined is the UK government to tackle poverty around the world.

We work in 150 countries and have 2,600 staff, half of whom work abroad. We have headquarters in London and East Kilbride, near Glasgow, and 64 officesoverseas.

Our work is guided by two sets of targets. First, we are working to reach the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), international targets agreed by the UnitedNations (UN) to halve world poverty by 2015. Second, the government’s Public Service Agreement (PSA) sets objectives and targets by which we measure ourprogress towards this aim.

We work with governments of developing countries, charities, businesses and international bodies, including the World Bank, UN agencies and the EuropeanCommission. All our partners share our ambition to achieve the Millennium Development Goals.

In 2008/09 we spent £5.5 billion on aid to poorer countries and our budget will increase to £7.8 billion by 2010/11. By 2013, the equivalent of 0.7% of the UK’s grossnational income will be dedicated to development assistance, from 0.36% in 2007/08.

What is the legal basis for our work?

The legal basis for our work is the International Development Act 2002. The act allows the secretary of state for international development (the cabinet minister whoheads this department) to provide aid for sustainable development and welfare. But the secretary of state must make sure that the aid is likely to contribute toreducing poverty. Under the act, British aid cannot be tied to British goods and services. (Since 1997, governments receiving UK aid have been free to use supplierswho compete on price, quality and service alone.)

We also work within the International Development Act (Reporting and Transparency) 2006. This act requires the secretary of state to report every year on howmuch we spent on aid, how effective it was in reducing poverty and how much we gave to poor countries.

The National Audit Office (NAO) keeps a watch on public spending for parliament. It audits the accounts of all government departments and agencies, includingDFID.

The NAO reports to the Parliament and the Public Accounts Committee, which analyses the value for money of DFID’s work. In parliament the InternationalDevelopment Committee (IDC) scrutinises our annual report and also holds inquiries into particular areas of our work.



Page 5 of 24

Our values

Our values set out how we mean to live up to our strategic aim of halving world poverty by 2015. Over the next three years, we expect to have a more flexible andinfluential workforce in a more challenging yet supportive sphere of work.

Our values include:

ambition and determination to eliminate poverty diversity and the need to balance work and private life ability to work effectively with others desire to listen, learn and be creative

professionalism and knowledge.



Page 6 of 24

2.1 Overview of Requirement

The Civil Society Governance Fund (CSGF) is intended to support work by civil society with the goal ofmaking Malawi’s governance more accountable, inclusive and responsive to citizens. DFID wishes toappoint a Service Provider (SP) to manage a multi-donor pooled fund to implement the CSGF as well asundertake work to help improve civil society’s capacity to operate and identify strategic opportunities tofacilitate citizens coming together to achieve common objectives.

The CSGF will be a results-focused fund that will provide grants to civil society organisations that candemonstrate a credible plan to implement a range of activities that will achieve outputs in 3 mainprogramme areas. These outputs should all contribute towards the outcome of empowered citizens ableto promote social inclusion, political rights and accountability for basic services. The three programmeareas are outlined in the ToRs and background documents.

The donors involved in the CSGF at this point are DFID, the European Union and Irish Aid. The pooledfund will be in the region of £7.2 million, which does not include the management costs, with thepossibility of additional funders coming on board. Exact levels of funding are still to be agreed. Thecontract will be for 3.5 years, with extension options for a further 3 years subject to performance,continued need and availability of funding. The contract will begin with a 6 month inception period which ifsatisfactory to DFID and its partners will be followed by full implementation.

2.2 Background to the Assignment

Malawi is a largely rural country and, despite impressive recent progress, poverty rates and basic servicedelivery remain a challenge. 16 years since multi-party democracy replaced 30 years of single party rule,many people are stil l unused to holding Government to account for services they provide, how theymanage public money, or the protection of basic rights. This leaves communities, especially the poor andcommonly excluded, lacking the ability to address the problems that reduce their quality of life andvulnerable to the impact of corruption.

The Civil Society Governance Fund will address these challenges by giving people the information,support and opportunities they need to play a greater role in their own development, and encourage morecapable, accountable and responsive governance. It will contribute towards the development of increaseddemocratic space and a more active civic life, and help identify opportunities where organisations andcitizens can use this space to achieve common objectives that lead to improvements in their lives.

2.3 Interface with Stakeholders

Due to the number of interfaces required in the programme the Service Provider will be expected todevelop and maintain collaborative relationships with a wide number of stakeholders. These will includethe funding partners (currently EU, DFID and Irish Aid) and other potential partners, but also mightinclude:

- local civil society organisations and community based organisations- trades unions

- faith-based organisations- professional associations- academics in various pertinent fields and their universities- media organisations and outlets at national and local levels- political parties and actors- government of Malawi officials and office holders- parliamentarians and parliamentary officials- members of the judiciary- traditional authorities (chiefs, village headmen etc)- service providers in key sectors- the private sector and related organisations (such as chambers of commerce)- development partners, both bilateral and multilateral



Page 7 of 24

- diplomatic partners of Malawi- research programmes both national, regional and international

A governance structure is outlined in the background documents that will be refined to facilitate interfacewith main stakeholders. In order to improve the efficiency of the overall removals process, the ServiceProvider will be expected to participate in continuous improvement initiatives

2.4 Security Requirements

Due to the nature of the information being communicated between DFID and the Service Provider, therewill be a requirement for the safe and secure storage of DFID’s records, both in a permanent location andduring their transit, in accordance with prevailing government guidelines.

2.5 Insurance Requirements

Respondents are advised that for this contract, there will be a minimum insurance requirement of:

1. Professional Indemnity Insurance £5m limit of indemnity2. Employers Insurance £10m limit of indemnity

2.6 Prevention of Illegal Working

Respondents’ attention is drawn to the requirement to comply with the Law on Prevention of IllegalMigrant Working as set out in Section 15 – 25 of the Immigration and Nationality Act 2006 (which cameinto force on 29

thFebruary 2008 replacing the previous Section 8 of the Asylum & Immigration Act 1996).

3. Procurement Process

DFID is following the Restricted Procedure of the Public Contracts Regulations 2006.

DFID reserves the right to reject any Respondent on the grounds of the ineligibility conditions provided byRegulation 23 of the Public Contracts Regulations 2006.

DFID reserves the right to terminate the procurement process at any time and does not undertake toaward a Contract for the Services to any Respondent. In no circumstances shall DFID be liable for anycosts incurred by a Respondent in relation to the procurement process.

It is the intention that the procurement will take place in accordance with the methodology outlined in theintroduction to this PQQ. However, DFID reserves the right to change by notice the basis of theprocurement. It also reserves the right not to proceed with the proposed procurement at all. Under nocircumstances shall DFID or its staff, agents or advisors incur any liability in respect of such matters.

4. Conflicts of Interest

Respondents are responsible for ensuring that no conflicts of interest exist between Parties. In particularthis should include any conflict of interest between:

advisors appointed by the Respondent and those appointed by DFID

the Respondent and DFID or any Advisor to DFID

Any Respondent who fails to comply with this obligation could be disqualified from the procurementprocess.

5. Timetable



Page 8 of 24

Responses to this Pre-Qualification Questionnaire must be received by e-mail at the address set out inthe OJEU Notice.

18 April 2011, 23:59hrs

Responses received after this date and time may be disregarded.

The outline timetable for the remainder of the procurement is as follows:

OJEU Notice and PQQs issued - 9 March 2011

PQQ final response time and date - 23:59hrs on 18 April 2011

ITT Issued - 11 May 2011 Submission of Bid - 22 June 2011

Bid Evaluations and internal Assurance - 16 July 2011

Contract Award - 30 July 2011

Mobilisation - 01 September 2011

Service Commencement - 01 September 2011

DFID intends to let a contract(s) for a period of 3.5 years with extension options of up to 3 subject toperformance, continued need and availability of funding.



Page 9 of 24

6. Instructions for Completion

Prospective Respondents should fully complete the PQQ below and return this document in its entiretywith all questions answered accurately and concisely. Where a question is not relevant to yourorganisation, this should be marked N/A and an explanation given.

The format must not be altered and any supporting documents and information required by DFID as partof the PQQ, e.g. copies of audited accounts, must be submitted as a separate attachment and be clearlyreferenced commencing with the question number it relates to followed by a short and clear description ofthe file content (e.g. Q1.12 Pen Portrait). All attachments must be provided in formats compatible with theMicrosoft Windows XP® operating system (*.doc,*.xls, *ppt, *.pdf etc.). No single file should be morethan 5MB in size.

All signatures should be submitted to DFID as a scanned copy of a version with an original ink signature.An electronic/pre-scanned signature inserted into an electronic document will not be accepted by DFID asa part of a compliant PQQ response.

Questions must be answered in English.

Responses will be evaluated in accordance with the procedures set out in Section 10. In the event thatnone of the Responses are considered satisfactory, DFID reserves the right to consider alternativeprocurement options or not to award a Contract. For the avoidance of doubt, DFID will not bear any costsin respect of any abortive effort should no Contract be awarded.

Failure to furnish the required information, make a satisfactory response to any question, or supplydocumentation referred to in responses, within the specified timescale, may mean that Respondents willnot be invited to participate further.

7. Consortium and sub-contracting

Where a consortium or sub-contracting approach is proposed, all information requested should be givenin respect of the proposed prime contractor or consortium leader. Relevant information should also beprovided in respect of consortium members or sub-contractors who will play a significant role in thedelivery of services or products under any ensuing contract. Responses must enable DFID to assess thesuitability of the Respondent as a whole.

Where the proposed prime contractor is a special purpose vehicle or holding company, informationshould be provided of the extent to which it will call upon the resources and expertise of its members.

DFID recognises that arrangements in relation to consortia and sub-contracting may be subject to futurechange. Respondents should therefore respond in the light of such arrangements as are currentlyenvisaged.

DFID intends seeking independent financial, legal, market and internal advice and references to validate

information declared or to assist in the evaluation. References, site visits or demonstrations and/orpresentations may be requested at this stage.

8. Queries about the procurement

DFID will not enter into detailed discussion of the Service requirements at this stage. Any questionsabout the procurement should be submitted to Paul Gaffney, Strategic Sourcing and SupplierManagement at [email protected]



Page 10 of 24

If DFID considers any question or request for clarification to be of material significance, both the queryand the response will be communicated, in a suitably anonymous form, to all Respondents who haveexpressed an interest.

9. Supplier contact point

Respondents have been asked to include a single point of contact in their organisation for their Responseto the pre-qualification questionnaire. DFID shall not be responsible for contacting the Respondentthrough any route other than the nominated contact. The Respondent must therefore undertake to notifyany changes relating to the contact promptly.

10. Evaluation Approach

The objective of the selection process is to assess the Responses to the Pre-Qualification Questionnaire

and select potential Respondents to proceed to the next stage of the procurement.

Selection criteria will be a combination of both financial and non-financial factors and will be carried out intwo stages:

Stage 1 Evaluation will be applied in respect of the following questions, all of which are subject to apass/ fail test:

Questionreference

Question

2.10 Acceptance that any anti-competitive behaviour, canvassing, collusion, or any attempt todistort the market in any way, could preclude your organisation from being a Supplier / Prime Contractor.

3.1 None of the grounds set out in The Public Contracts Regulations 2006 Regulation 23 apply

7.1 Negative answer to the questions: have any contracts been terminated for poorperformance or has a court awarded any damages against the Respondent in the last fiveyears?

9.2 Ability to supply the details to DFID to enable security clearance of staff

13.3 Negative response to the question: In the last 3 years, has any finding of unlawfuldiscrimination in the employment field been made against your organisation by any courtor tribunal or in comparable proceedings in any other jurisdiction?

13.4 13.4 Negative response to the question: In the last 3 years, has your organisationbeen or is in the process of being, the subject of formal investigation by theEquality and Human Rights Commission on the grounds of alleged unlawful

discrimination in the employment field?

If a Respondent fails one of the categories noted above, the Response will be eliminated unless therelevance and proportionality of the reason for failure is deemed by the Evaluation Panel to beinsignificant.



Page 11 of 24

Stage 2 Evaluation

This will be qualitative for the technical sections and both quantitative and qualitative for the financialsection. Weightings will be applied to each section as summarised in the table below, with 1 being theleast and 6 being the highest importance with a scoring mechanism of 0-6 being applied to eachresponse to the question, with 0 being the lowest and 6 being the maximum score per question. Amaximum weighted score of 336 is therefore possible to be achieved and only Respondents who achievea pass score of 236 will be invited to tender or a maximum of 5 suppliers with the highest score above therequired pass mark.

Section Weighting

1. Organisation Identity 1

2. Organisation Information 2

3. Compliance with EU Legislation 2

4. Financial 12

5. Insurance 3

6. Relevant experience and references 5

7. Disputes 2

8. Areas of Business 2

9. Business Capability 4

10. Professional Organisations 1

11. Quality Assurance/ Health & Safety 2

12. Information Security 3

13. Equal Opportunities 3

14. Environmental Management 2

15. Programme Specific Questions12

11 Confidentiality and Publication of Information

Any information provided by DFID within this PQQ document set, or in subsequent answers to

clarification questions from Respondents, is made available on condition that it is treated as confidential(except where it is already in the public domain). Respondents must not disclose any informationsupplied as part of this procurement process to any third party, member of staff or advisor, unless suchperson needs to receive the relevant information for the purposes of enabling a response to anyprocurement document.

Respondents who are selected to tender will be asked to sign and return the form of ConfidentialityAgreement and DFID terms and Conditions of Service which are attached at Section 15 and 16respectively, before they receive the ITT.

Comment [a1]: GHARI had only 4 for

this. Is 6 OK?



Page 13 of 24

18. Pre-Qualification Questionnaire Application Questionnaire

The questionnaire is designed to enable DFID to verify the suitability of the Respondent to carry out theCivil Society Governance Fund. Part A requires the Respondent to complete a series of questionsconcerning its organisation and Part B lists the documentation which Respondents are required tosubmit together with the completed questionnaire.

This questionnaire will form the basis of a decision as to which suppliers to short-list to invite for tenderfor the Contract. However, DFID reserves the right to request further information and/or to visit theRespondent’s premises.

Respondents MUST provide ALL of the information requested below by the above date. Failure to

address any area may result in exclusion from the tender list.

PART A - GENERAL INFORMATION

1. ORGANISATION IDENTITY

1.1 Name of the organisation (Prime or SingleContractor) in whose name the tender would besubmitted:

1.2 Lead contact name and job title:

1.3 Address:

Post Code :

1.4 Telephone number:

1.5 E-mail address:1.6 Company Registration number:

1.7 Date of Registration:

1.8 Registered address if different from the above:

Post Code :

1.9 VAT Registration number:

1.10 Website address (if any):

1.11 Please advise the details of the Executive Directors/ Partners of your organisation:

Name

1.12 Please provide a pen portrait with details and experience of the senior management personnel whowill be responsible for implementation and management of any awarded contract. Please limit yourresponse to no more that 1 x A4 page using a minimum of arial size 10 point font.



Page 14 of 24

2. ORGANISATION INFORMATION

2.1 Is your organisation: i) a public limited company? iii) a sole trader?

ii) a limited company? iv) a partnership?

v) a statutory corporation vi) a consortium

2.2 Where applicable, please provided a copy of your organisation’s Certificate of Incorporation orsimilar.

2.3 Is your company a subsidiary of another company?

If yes, please advise the name and address of the holding or parent company:

And the ultimate parent company (if applicable) including details of the Parent Company’s percentageholding.

2.4 Please provide a one-page chart illustrating the ownership structure of the Respondent includingrelations to any parent or other group or holding companies.etc and include as an attachment.

2.5 Please provide details of any significant corporate changes (e.g. changes in ownership, etc) orimpending/future changes since the last financial year end.

2.6 Is your organisation:

a) Bidding to provide the services required entirely on its own? YES/NO

b) Bidding in the role of Prime Contractor and intends to use third parties to provide someservices?

YES/NO

c) Bidding in the role of a consortium? YES/NO

2.7 If your answer to 2.6 is (b) please identify intended subcontractors / partners for the bid below:

Organisation name Organisation address and contact details Service provision responsibility

2.8 a) Have any of the Respondent’s directors, partners, etc been disqualified from actingas directors of any company, under the provisions of the Company Directors DisqualificationAct, 1986, or equivalent host country legislation, in the last five years?

YES/NO

2.8 b) If the answer to question 2.8 a) above is yes, please provide below a brief explanation of thedetails of the relevant disqualifications.

2.9 Please give a brief outline on your policy regarding the use of sub-contractors and, if applicable, theextent to which you might envisage using them for this requirement. In particular, please indicate thenature of the relationship which you intend to create with the those third parties (including details of anyprevious collaboration with each) and the extent to which the relationships would be defined andgoverned in contracts or other forms of documentation e.g. collateral warranties.



Page 15 of 24

2.10 Do you acknowledge that any anticompetitive behaviour, collusion, or any attempt todistort the market in any way, could preclude your organisation from being a Supplier / Prime Contractor?

YES/NO

If NO, please give details and outcome (continue on a separate sheet if necessary)

2.11 Is your organisation an existing supplier to DFID?If YES, please provide your Supplier ID number below: YES/NO

2.12 Are there any conflicts of interest between

the Respondent and DFID or any Advisor to DFID?

any advisors appointed by the Respondent and those appointed by DFID

YES/NO

YES/NO

If the answer to 2.12 is YES, please provide details.

3. COMPLIANCE WITH EU LEGISLATION/UK PROCUREMENT LEGISLATION

3.1 Do any of the circumstances as set out in Regulation 23 Public ContractsRegulations 2006 (from the EU) apply to your company?

If YES, please supply details:

YES/NO

DFID may seek evidence at a later date, in confirmation of your answer.(A summary of the circumstances of Regulation 23 is provided at the end of this questionnaire, Please

see Appendix 1)

4. FINANCIAL (APPLICANT) and (Parent Company if applicable)

4.1 The following financial information is required to be provided.

(a) A copy of the most recent audited accounts for your organisation that cover the last two years oftrading or for the period that is available if trading for less than three years. As required by theCompanies act, the latest of these accounts should be those that were filed a maximum of 10 monthsago. This should include a statement of the organisation’s turnover, profit & loss and cash flow positionfor the most recent full year of trading (or part year if full year not applicable) and an end period balancesheet.

(b) A statement of the organisation’s cash flow forecast for the current year and a bank letter outlining

the current cash and credit facility position.

(c) If the organisation is a subsidiary of a group, (a) and (b) are required for both the subsidiary and theultimate parent.

(d) A Parent company and/or a Performance Bondmay be required if considered appropriate. Is yourorganisation willing to arrange for a suitableguarantee and/or a performance bond ifappropriate?

YES/NO



Page 16 of 24

(e) Please provide the name and address of your banker for thpurposes of DFID obtaining a bank reference. (NB. DFIDreserves the right to contact your bank for a reference. Yourpermission to do so will be assumed unless you explicitly stateany objections).

4.2 Please give details of any event between the date on which the latest set of accounts was authorisedfor issue and the date of the submission of this PQQ that, had the accounts not been authorised for issueuntil the submission date, would have required an adjustment or disclosure in accordance with theprovisions of International Accounting Standard 10.

4.3 Please give details of any significant pending developments, changes in financial structure orownership, prospective take-overs bids or buy outs which are currently in the public domain; copies ofany company announcements made to the authorities of the stock exchange, market or bourse on which

the stocks or shares of the company are publicly traded, since the date of publication of the latest set ofaccounts.

5. INSURANCE

5.1 Please provide details of your organisation’s insurance protection.

Type Insurer Policy Number Indemnity Value (£)

Employers Liability

Public Liability

Professional Indemnity

Other (please specify)

5. 2 Please provide details of any proposed subcontractor’s insurance protection.

Subcontractor

Type Insurer Policy Number Indemnity Value (£)

Employers Liability

Public Liability

Professional Indemnity

Other (please specify)

6. RELEVANT EXPERIENCE AND REFERENCES

6.1 Please provide details of three major contracts you have been awarded for the provision of servicessimilar to those required by DFID during the last 3 years. In particular those awarded by centralgovernment departments, agencies, local authorities, health authorities NHS trusts or Global AidAgencies. A4 continuation sheets may be appended where required.



Page 17 of 24

Customer name,address and e-mail

Contact name andTelephone number

Date contractawarded,contract periodand value ofcontract

Service descriptionand size oforganisation

Names ofsubcontractorsand/ orconsortiummembers andtheir role

NB. DFID may elect to contact any of the given companies for a reference. Your permission to do so willbe assumed unless you explicitly state any objections.

DFID reserves the right to take into account its own experience of any Respondent.

6.2 Please provide details of your organisation’s performance with existing and recent clients, insimilar service provision environments, as follows:

a) Client testimonials that we may substantiate.b) Details of recent performance scores in accordance with your existing contractual performancemechanisms.c) Details of any performance issues and how these were addressed satisfactorily by yourorganisation and the client’s organisation.d) Details of any outstanding performance issues.

6.3 By reference to one or more specific project(s), on no more than one side of A4 paper using aminimum of arial size 10 point font, describe the methods you have employed to improve or to facilitatethe improvement of service performance including how you have involved the client and stakeholders.

7. DISPUTES

7.1 Have you had any contracts which have beenterminated for poor performance or has a court hasawarded any damages against the Respondentwithin the last 5 years?

Yes/No

If Yes, please provide details below:

Customer nameand address

Contract reference andbrief description of servicesprovided

Date ofclaim/ contracttermination

Reason for claim/ contract termination

7.2 Has your organisation been involved in any court action and/ or significant disputes (includingemployment tribunals) over the last 3 years?

If yes, please supply details:



Page 18 of 24

7.3 Are there any court actions and / or significant disputes (including employment tribunals) pendingagainst your organisation?

If yes, please supply details:

8. AREAS OF BUSINESS

8.1 Please indicate below the principal areas of business activity of your company:

9. BUSINESS CAPABILITY

9.1 Please advise the number of staff currently involved in the provision of services similar to thoserequired by DFID:

Year The average numbers of staff whoundertake similar work

The number ofmanagerial staff inpost

Turnover (%)

2007:

Permanent staff numbers:

Third party staff numbers

2008: Permanent staff numbers:


2009:

Permanent staff numbers:


9.2 All staff must be security cleared by DFID. Are you willing to supply details

to DFID to enable certification to take place?

9.3 Is there a code of discipline and behaviour for employees?If Yes please supply a copy.

10. PROFESSIONAL ORGANISATIONS

10.1 Please indicate which professional or trade bodies your organisation belongs to.



Page 19 of 24

10.2. Is your organisation notified under the Data Protection Act 1998 (or equivalent nationallegislation)? If so, what is your DPA notification number:

11. QUALITY ASSURANCE/ HEALTH & SAFETY

Notes: “System” means processes and procedures to ensure that the subject is properly managed. This includes making sure

that legal requirements are met.

12. INFORMATION SECURITY

12.1 Please provide details of security measures to ensure the safe keeping of any paper orcomputerised information provided by DFID, both in storage and in transit, in accordance with currentgovernment guidelines

12.2 Please submit a statement of security principles and procedures for your staff.

13. EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES/EQUALITY AND DIVERSITY

13.1 Is it your policy as an employer to comply with the 2010 Equality Act in relationto decisions to recruit, train, promote employees and foster good relationsacross the strands below:

Age YES/NO

11.1 Does your organisation hold any quality assurance accreditations such asBS EN ISO9001 or equivalent standard?

If YES, please enclose a copy of the relevant accreditation certificate

YES/NO

11.2 Please provide details of any quality assurance certification for which you have applied.

11.3 If your organisation does not hold a recognised quality assurance certification,

does your organisation have a quality management system in place?

If YES, please provide details

YES/NO

11.4 Does your organisation have a written health and safety at work policy?

If YES, please provide a copyYES/NO

11.5 Does your organisation have a health and safety at work system* ? YES/NO

11.6 If ‘YES’ please provide details and if ‘NO’ to either 11.4 or 11.5 please explain why :

11.7 Has your organisation been issued with any enforcement or prohibition noticesby H&S Exec in the last 3 years?

If answered ‘YES’, please provide details

YES/NO



Page 20 of 24

DisabilityGenderGender reassignmentRaceReligion or beliefSexual orientation

If yes, please provide your companies policies.

YES/NOYES/NOYES/NOYES/NOYES/NOYES/NO

IYES/NO

13.2 Does your organisation have an equality and diversity policy?

If yes, please provide your policy document.YES/NO

13.3 In the last 3 years, has any finding of unlawful discrimination in theemployment field been made against your organisation by any court ortribunal or in comparable proceedings in any other jurisdiction?

YES/NO

13.5 In the last 3 years, has your organisation been or is in the process of being,the subject of formal investigation by the Equality and Human RightsCommission on the grounds of alleged unlawful discrimination in theemployment field?

YES/NO

13.6 If the answer to question 13.3 or 13.4 is Yes, what steps have you taken as a result of thatfinding or investigation?

14. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT

14.1 Does your organisation hold any Environmental Management accreditationssuch as BS EN ISO14001?

If YES, please provide copy certificates.

YES/NO

14.2 Please provide details of any environmental management certification for which you haveapplied?

14.3 Does your organisation have an Environmental Management System?*

If YES, Please supply detailsYES/NO

14.4 Please provide a copy of your companies Environmental policy

*System means processes and procedures to ensure that the subject is properly managed. This includesmaking sure that legal requirements are met.



Page 21 of 24

15 CIVIL SOCIETY GOVERNANCE FUND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS

NB - Please attach answers to these questions as a separate attachment

15.1 What experience do you have of working with civil society organisations to support them to achievegovernance objectives and help successfully develop their organisational capacity?

15.2. What is your track record of successful work in Malawi, or comparable contexts, and of involvinglocal suppliers and building partnerships with local organisations?

15.3 What is your track record of working effectively with donor programmes, managing pooled andmulti-donor funding and demonstrating the capacity to manage scaled-up levels of funding in a flexibleway?

15.4 What is your track record of identifying strategic interventions and building or facilitating coalitions

of actors (including civil society) to work together to successfully achieve common objectives?



Page 22 of 24

PART B-ENCLOSURES

Please check that you have enclosed the following supporting documents with your completed

questionnaire:

SECTION QUESTION DOCUMENT ENCLOSED

1 1.12 Pen Portraits of senior management

personnel

YES / NO

2 2.2 Certificate of Incorporation YES / NO

2 2.4 Ownership Structure chart YES / NO

4 4.1(a) Copy of most recent audited accounts tocover last two years of trading

YES / NO

4 4.1(b) Statement of the organisation’s cash flow

forecast for the current year and a bank letter

outlining the current cash and credit facility

position

YES / NO

4 4.3 Copies of any companies announcements YES / NO

6 6.1 Continuation of description of three major

contracts

YES / NO

6 6.2 Performance details YES / NO

6 6.3 Service Improvement details YES / NO

11 11.1 Quality Assurance certification YES / NO

11 11.3 Details of Health and Safety at work systems YES / NO

11 11.4 Health and Safety at work policy YES / NO

12 12.1 & 12.2 Details of security measures, principles and

procedures

YES / NO

13 13.1 Equality Policies on Age, Disability, Gender,

Gender Reassignment, Race, Religion or

Belief, Sexual Orientation

YES / NO

13 13.2 Equality and Diversity Policy YES / NO

14 14.1 Environmental Management Accreditations YES / NO

14 14.3 Details of Environmental Management

System

YES / NO

14 14.4 Environmental Policy YES / NO

15 All Programme Specific Questions YES / NO



Page 23 of 24

Form completed by:

Name: …… ………………… Tel No: ………………………………

Signature: …………………..……………………… Date: …………………………………

Position: …… ……………….…… E-mail: ………………………………

Thank you for completing this questionnaire. The information it contains will be held in confidence byDFID and used for the purpose of determining your suitability for meeting our general requirements forthe provision of the Services. Further assessment may be required before any indication can be given onthe success of your tender.

COMMENTS



APPENDIX 1

DISCLAIMER

SUMMARY OF INELIGIBILITY CONDITIONS PROVIDED BY REGULATION 23 OF THE PUBLICCONTRACTS REGULATIONS 2006

Regulation 23 sets out the grounds on which a service provider may be deemed ineligible to tender for, orbe awarded a public contract. A summary is provided below. However, Respondents should obtain theirown legal advice on this area. The Regulations are available athttp://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2006/20060005.htm

Rejection is permissible when a service provider:

- guilty of conspiracy, corruption, bribery, fraud or money laundering. Rejection is also permissible whereany of the directors or other significant decision makers are guilty of any of these offences;

- is in a state of bankruptcy, insolvency, compulsory winding up, administration, receivership, compositionwith creditors or any analogous state, or subject to relevant proceedings;

- has been convicted of a criminal offence related to business or professional conduct;

- has committed an act of grave misconduct in the course of business;

- has not fulfilled obligations relating to payment of social security contributions;

- has not fulfilled obligations relating to payment of taxes;

- is guilty of serious misrepresentation in supplying information required by DFID under the Regulations;

- is not in possession of a relevant license or is not a member of the appropriate organisation where thelaw of that State requires it) or is not registered on the relevant professional or trade register of therelevant State in which established.

dfid malawi_civil society governance fund

Documents