REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

Implemented by:

Program: mSTAR, Subcontract to Develop Adaptive Programming

Conceptual Framework

Solicitation: 101023020001009-SystemsThinkingCF-01

Authority: USAID Award No. AID-OAA-A-12-00073

Date of Issuance: Tuesday, October 6, 2015

Due Date for Questions: 5:00 PM US EST Monday, October 12, 2015

Response to Questions: Thursday, October 29, 2015

Closing Date: 5:00 PM US EST FridayTuesday, December 1November

20, 2015

Estimated Award Date: December January 20165

1

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

Implemented by:

TABLE OF CONTENTSTABLE OF CONTENTS................................................................................................................21 PURPOSE STATEMENT.......................................................................................................32 OBJECTIVE & PROGRAM DESCRIPTION .......................................................................43 INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS.........................................................................................9

4.1 Offerors Eligibility............................................................................................................94.2 Funding and estimated period of performance...............................................................104.3 Proposal Submission Deadline........................................................................................104.4 Submission Method for Questions and Proposals...........................................................104.5 Review Process...............................................................................................................104.6 Proposal Contents...........................................................................................................104.7 Evaluation Criteria..........................................................................................................13

5 TERMS AND CONDITIONS...............................................................................................145.1 Source of Funding and Geographic Code.......................................................................145.2 Withdrawal of proposals.................................................................................................145.3 Right to Select/Reject......................................................................................................145.4 Disclaimer.......................................................................................................................145.5 Offer Verification............................................................................................................155.6 False Statements in Offer................................................................................................155.7 Conflict of Interest..........................................................................................................155.8 Reserved Rights..............................................................................................................155.9 Governing Law and Language........................................................................................165.10 Certification of Independent Price Determination......................................................165.11 Award and Notification of Selected Proposals............................................................16

6 ATTACHMENTS..................................................................................................................18

2

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

Implemented by:

1. PURPOSE STATEMENT

The purpose of this Request for Proposals (RFP) is to solicit proposals for funding from prospective subcontractors to support FHI 360’s implementation of the Mobile Solutions Technical Assistance and Research Program (mSTAR), funded by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), Award No. AID-OAA-A-12-00073. mSTAR is a strategic investment by USAID to advance mobile solutions and close the gaps that hold back access and uptake of mobile technology. The project supports broad-based coordinated action by a range of market stakeholders — including governments, donors, mobile service providers, and their customers.

FHI 360’s mSTAR project is issuing this request for proposals to academic institutions to assist with the following:

USAID’s Global Development Lab (Lab) is launching an initiative to conceive, design, and test how real-time data1 systems underpinned by mobile technology can enable a more adaptive and participatory approach to development in complex settings. This initiative is concerned with how to most appropriately integrate flow data from multiple agents across the information supply chain, including community members, frontline workers, and government decision makers to facilitate rapid operational assessments, adaptive and iterative learning, and summative evaluations. In support of this initiative FHI 360 seeks an organization to develop of a real-time data (RTD) Conceptual Framework.

The intent is to mainstream the learnings from this initiative throughout USAID’s programmatic and policy reforms and also to inform a larger global development reform agenda across international development organizations. As a result, this effort implicates a wide-range of actors from the fields of complexity science, innovation studies, participatory action research, adaptive knowledge management, behavioral economics, political economy, and digital technology.

This scope of work (SOW) outlines the pieces required for the RTD Conceptual Framework, which will inform the shape of the Adaptive Programming initiative and directly inform an applied toolkit.

BackgroundThe overall RTD Adaptive Programming initiative involves four main phases:

1. RTD Adaptive Programming Workshop: This workshop will bring together leading thinkers and practitioners from the aforementioned disciplines to discuss

1 USAID defines real-time data as data that has a flow and timeliness that is appropriate to the demand and the decisions that it will be used for, whether it is hourly, weekly or monthly. This data should be relevant, actionable and verifiable.

3

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

Implemented by:

how RTD systems can facilitate adaptive programming and aid decision-making. The workshop will synthesize different perspectives of this work to form a set of research questions that will feed into the Conceptual Framework in the next phase. Select participants from the workshop will go on to form an External Advisory Group, which will informally advise on the development of the Conceptual Framework.

2. Develop Conceptual Framework: The Conceptual Framework will describe the theoretical and practical foundations for RTD learning systems to develop an understanding and systematic methodology for how these systems can be designed and implemented across development practice. This will include a literature review of the theoretical foundations of RTD and adaptive programming, a synthesis of the practical foundations relating to service delivery, and exploratory research through comparative case studies and information mapping. The Conceptual Framework will also incorporate primary research on the incentives and limitations of service operators and implementing partners. Examples of other Conceptual Frameworks include T. Tanahashi’s framework for evaluating health systems, David Snowden’s Cynefin Framework for decision-making from a complexity perspective, and C.S. Holling’s Panarchy framework for systems change and resilience.

3. Create applied toolkit: The Conceptual Framework will be used to design an applied toolkit that will be mapped onto USAID’s Program Cycle, the series of policies and strategies that frame the Agency’s programs. The Toolkit will help USAID Missions and implementing partners design, implement and adapt RTD systems. The design of the toolkit will include field-testing amongst various Missions and implementing partners (IPs).

4. Socialize and promote lessons learned: Once the initial testing and refining process is completed, a strategy for promoting the adoption and adaptation of the framework and toolkit will be developed. The process will include dissemination of information and guidance around the framework and toolkit, training of Pillar Bureaus and Missions, and development of other resources to support the application of the toolkit.

This RFP is issued as a public notice to ensure that all interested, qualified, and eligible organizations have a fair opportunity to submit proposals for funding.

4

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

Implemented by:

2. OBJECTIVE & PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This SOW is for an organizational contractor to develop the Conceptual Framework and Phase 2. This will involve the following components:

RTD Adaptive Programming Workshop: In support of this overall activity, USAID and FHI 360 (as a part of its mSTAR project) will be convening a group of experts October 27-28, 2015 for a workshop in London (logistical details will be provided to the organization selected to develop the Conceptual Framework). Notes from the October 27-28th workshop will be provided, along with consultation with the facilitator of the workshop, to the selected organization to utilize the key insights which emerged from the workshop for the development of the Conceptual Framework.

Literature Review: A review of different disciplinary literatures linking adaptive programming with real-time data — including complex adaptive systems, participatory action research, behavioral psychology, organizational learning, political economy and more — will be conducted. The array of literature sources, both peer-reviewed and grey literature, will be determined through the RTD Adaptive Programming Workshop report, as well as by recommendations of the External Advisory Group and by the contractor through the literature review itself. As there are numerous literatures that bear on adaptive programming using real-time data, the literature review should include a meta-analysis that compares and contrasts existing approaches and theories amongst the various fields and relate them to the potential integration of digital technologies. A gap-analysis about adaptive programming using real-time data should also be conducted, which will identify areas of inquiry that have not been studied. This gap-analysis will help determine research questions that will feed into the larger Conceptual Framework documents, as well as the comparative case study. The literature review should also interpret, synthesize, and evaluate the various sources and analyses above to identify common themes and integrate the various disciplines to form a larger macro-level understanding of adaptive programming using digital technologies for better development outcomes.

Guiding principles for RTD implementation: In conjunction with the Conceptual Framework, the contractor will produce a decision support framework for thinking through where adaptive programming using RTD systems and digital technologies is appropriate. The framework should include formative analyses (i.e., contextual, cost/benefit, risk, feasibility, etc.) and other considerations that can help implementers determine whether to implement an RTD system to support a development intervention. The actual analysis (e.g. decision tree) will be determined in consultation with FHI 360.

5

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

Implemented by:

Academic paper: The contractor will develop a peer-reviewed journal paper that will present and detail the Conceptual Framework, as well as the guiding principles for RTD implementation. This paper will integrate the Literature Review — including the synthesis, gap analysis, and meta analysis — with parts of the mixed methods research of the Comparative Case Study to develop a Conceptual Framework that will provide the theoretical and practical foundations for adaptive programming using real-time data via digital technologies.

USAID policy publication: As the academic paper will be a more technical output for a specific research-oriented audience, the USAID policy publication will be a more public-facing document. The policy publication should incorporate similar elements as the academic paper and will present the Conceptual Framework and RTD guiding principles, but at a higher level and for a broader audience in international development.

Graphical representation: The contractor will provide input into the design of a graphical representation of the Conceptual Framework and how to understand adaptive programming using digital technologies. FHI 360’s Design Lab will be responsible for the deliverable but the contractor will provide input.

In addition to the Conceptual Framework, the contractor will be responsible for the following items:

Case study research: The case study research will focus on the applied work of practitioners that are engaging in adaptive programming using digital technologies. The contractor will produce a single comparative case study in the form of a report, which focuses on a single and specific development sector and geography. The initial part of the research will be exploratory, identifying an appropriate sector and geography where digital tools are used for adaptive programming. The contractor will then select between 3-5 programs within the identified sector and geography that are implementing these adaptive programming measures and compare/contrast the programs to provide an understanding of how they are implementing adaptive programming measures, which programs are effective towards development outcomes and why are they effective. The selection of the programs is open, and they do not have to be USAID-funded. Along with the use of various mixed-methods, the case study should also include ethnographic research and decision-making analysis of users across the “information supply chain” — from local communities to frontline workers to government decision makers — to gain an understanding of behaviors, incentives, capacities, and constraints around each decision-making process in the programs. Traditional case study analytical methods — i.e., pattern matching, cross-case synthesis, logic models, explanation building, etc. – should be employed. The case study research and report will happen concurrently to the

6

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

Implemented by:

development of the Conceptual Framework — both will feed into one another but not be dependent.

Consultations on research design: The contractor will provide input into the research design used for the applied toolkit, which will be led by FHI 360. Since the contractor will have already created a research design for the case study and since FHI 360 will need to develop a similar albeit distinct research design for the applied toolkit, the contractor and FHI 360 will meet a number of times to ensure the applied research framework benefits and is informed by the research design for the comparative case study.

Advisory group participation: Coming out of the initial workshop in October, USAID will develop an External Advisory Group of theoretical and practical experts from academia, think tanks, donors, practitioners, and other groups. This will consist of monthly calls around the development of the Conceptual Framework or other follow-up discussions from the workshop. Advisory group members will serve as thought contributors on a voluntary basis, and provide feedback and comments on the Conceptual Framework, draft publications, and tools developed resulting from this activity. FHI 360 will provide programmatic support for the working group and perform co-facilitation. The contractor is responsible for contributing to the Advisory Group and also to work with the facilitators to translate the learnings from the Advisory Group into the Conceptual Framework.

LocationThe contractor can work remotely but it is expected that the contractor travel to Washington, DC for three general consultations on the work at critical moments in the work. It is further expected that the contractor make trips to specific country markets as part of the case study.

Expected deliverables and deadlinesThe Conceptual Framework design will lead to a series of publications:

Literature Review A peer-reviewed journal paper that describes the foundations and constructions for the

Conceptual Framework. A USAID policy publication on the Conceptual Framework A comparative case study to be identified by USAID and the selected contractor that will

illustrate critical aspects of the framework. This will require up to 2 trips to a single specified geography.

After the initial two weeks, the contractor will present USAID with a workplan to be agreed upon, which will include a schedule, specific methodology for the Conceptual Framework and the comparative case study report, specifics on the format, length and contents of the literature

7

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

Implemented by:

review, the USAID RTD paper, and the comparative case study report. The workplan will be adapted from the Project Description in the application.

Drafts of the literature review, USAID RTD report and the comparative case study report should be submitted to USAID in advance of any final report disseminations or submissions. USAID will review and provide feedback of each draft within 2 weeks. The contractor should then submit a final version and incorporate the feedback given by USAID.

Biweekly debrief sessions will be conducted by the contractor with USAID to go over progress on the components of the Conceptual Framework and the comparative case study report.

Deliverables

DeliverablesEst. Due

Date*

Estimated LOE (days)

Not-to-Exceed

1. Initial in-brief and in person meeting with USAID12/1/15January 2016

1

2. Workplan12/15/152 weeks from award date

3

2a. Presentation of draft workplan (incl. methodology) to USAID 1

3. Draft Literature review (draft)1/1/16Eearly February 2016

25

3a. Virtual presentation of draft literature review to USAID 1

8

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

Implemented by:

3b. Literature review (final)1/20/16L late February 2016

5

4. Virtual meeting with USAID to discuss peer-reviewed journal content and structure 2/15/1

6March 2016

1

4a. Peer-reviewed journal paper Submitted to journal April 20163/15/16

20

5. USAID policy publication on Conceptual Framework (draft) 3/1/16Eearly April 2016

5a. Virtual presentation of policy publication at USAID

5b. USAID policy publication on Conceptual Framework (final) 3/20/16Llate April 2016

6. In-person meeting with USAID on the Comparative Case Study 5/1/16May 2016

1

6a. Comparative Case Study Report (draft)7/1/16E early June 2016

110

9

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

Implemented by:

6b. Present in person the final Comparative Case Study Report 7/20/16June 2016

10

7. Virtual Advisory Group participation Multiple dates

3

Total 202

*These dates are estimated due dates. A timeline of due dates for deliverables will be confirmed with the approved workplan to be submitted two weeks after award of the contract.

3. INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

1. OFFERORS ELIGIBILITYThis competition is open to any non-governmental, non-profit or for-profit entity. To be minimally eligible for funding, offerors must comply with the following conditions:

Organizations must be legally registered or otherwise authorized to conduct business in their country or countries of operation.

Organizations must have a DUNS number. Organizations must submit their proposal in English.

Additionally, the contractor should have expertise and experience in applying a complex systems lens to the fields of adaptive programming, political economy, service delivery, behavioral sciences, development economics, monitoring and evaluation, and digital technologies (including but not limited to ICT4D) in international development. This expertise should be exhibited through the publication of reports and peer-reviewed articles, as well as curriculum vitae of key staff. The contractor should also have experience in case study research and have published comparative case studies. The contractor should also be connected with a wider network of organizations and institutions committed to reforming international development. This can be exhibited through prior participation in relevant conferences and meetings. Collaborative proposals from two or more organizations will be accepted as long as it is through a single unified proposal and there is a single identified Principal Investigator (PI).

2. FUNDING AND ESTIMATED PERIOD OF PERFORMANCEThe mechanism for funding will be a Firm Fixed Price Subcontract. FHI 360 will issue payment(s) based on submission and FHI 360 acceptance of invoices and associated deliverables or measurable project milestones. Once an award is issued, it will include an invoicing schedule as well as a schedule of deliverables/milestones specified in the Scope of Work. The estimated ceiling budget for this activity is $380,000.

10

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

Implemented by:

The subcontract is anticipated to commence in early-NovemberDecemberJanuary and final deliverables are anticipated to be submitted in June 2016.

3. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION DEADLINEProposals may be submitted at any time before 5:00 PM EST on the date specified on the cover page of this RFP. Submissions received after the deadline will not be considered. Additional opportunities for applying, however, may be made available in the future.

4. SUBMISSION METHOD FOR QUESTIONS AND PROPOSALSSubmit Questions and Proposals electronically to: Sara Seavey at sseavey@FHI360.org with copies to Lori Reid at lreid@FHI360.org. FHI 360 is not receiving paper applications for this RFP. All questions and answers will be shared with all interested offerors.

Technical proposals and attachments may be submitted in Microsoft Word or Adobe PDF. Budgets must be submitted in Microsoft Excel.

The email subject line should read “Subcontract to Design and Conduct Systems Theory Concept Framework– [Name of Organization submitting proposal]”.

5. REVIEW PROCESSProposals will be reviewed and awarded by an evaluation panel. FHI 360 will lead and coordinate the evaluation panel. A technical evaluation committee will review all technical proposals using the Evaluation Criteria detailed in section 3.7 below.

It is anticipated that the award will be made within 4-6 weeks after the submission deadline, as stated on the cover of this RFP. Final negotiations and award will be managed by FHI 360.

6. PROPOSAL CONTENTSOfferors will develop their proposals based on their understanding of needs, their prior institutional experience and their determination of the approaches that would be feasible and successful within the context provided above. In all cases, offerors shall clearly explain the rationale for the proposed approaches chosen.

Proposals should include submission of a technical proposal with attachments and a cost proposal. Proposals must remain valid for at least sixty (60) days. The format should include the following:

Application materials:A full application must contain the following sections:

a. Cover Sheet – the Cover Sheet should include the following: (1) Title of the proposed project, (2) Organization’s legal name (3) Contact name (4) Contact person’s position

11

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

Implemented by:

(5) E-mail address (6) Telephone number (7) Proposed budget amount, and (8) Name of Principle Investigator (PI) and Co- Principle Investigator (Co-PI).

b. Project Summary – Each proposal should contain a Project Summary not longer than one page. The overview should include a description of the activity, including the methods and activities employed.

c. Project/Technical Approach Description – The Project Description should provide a clear statement of the work to be undertaken and a general understanding of the present state of knowledge in the field of adaptive programming and real-time data. It should outline the general plan of work, including the broad design of activities, and where appropriate, provide a clear description of methods and procedures. Proposers should address what they want to do why they want to do it, how they plan to do it, and how they will know if they succeed. The Project Description may not exceed 10 pages.

d. References Cited – References are required in the Project Description. Each reference must include the names of all authors, the article and journal title, book title, volume number, page numbers, and year of publication. If the document is available electronically, the website address should also be identified. The References Cited section of the application is not included in the 10-page limit of the Project Description.

e. Biographical Sketches – The PI and any Co-PI should be identified as the project leads. Key personnel should also be identified as Senior Personnel or Other Personnel. For each individual, a two-page biographical sketch should be included. The sketch should include education, academic/professional appointments, citable publications (including full citation information), and any synergistic activities that demonstrate the broader impact of the individual’s professional and scholarly activities that focus on the integration and transfer of knowledge as well as its creation.

f. Budget and Budget Justification – Each proposal must contain a Budget. The amounts for the Budget must be documented and justified in a budget justification. Budget items should include the following: (1) Salaries and Wages, including the LOE of each individual, (2) Domestic and Foreign Travel for three trips to meet with USAID in Washington, D.C. and two international trips for the case studies, (3) Materials and Supplies, and (4) Other Direct Costs. The Budget and Budget Justification should not be longer than 2 pages.

g. Timeline – The applicant should document the list of activities in a timeline. This should be no longer than a single page.

12

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

Implemented by:

h. Corporate Capabilities and Past Experience or Synergistic Activities of the Organization(s) – The applicant should identify key networks that they are involved in which are relevant to the work of adaptive programming and real-time data that could be used as a knowledge base and a dissemination audience for the work. Involvement could be in the form of conference or meeting participation, academic or related societies, and any other ‘community of practice’. The applicant should clearly describe its experience in relating research with policy and practice.

Part B: Cost Proposal

1. Please submit a summary and detailed line item budget broken down by activity, budget narrative, and supporting documentation that clearly describe how the budgeted amounts are calculated. See Attachment A for budget template.

a. A brief narrative explanation and justification for each line item must be included in a separate section entitled “budget narrative” and include data to support actual costs and/or methodologies to support cost estimates. The budget narrative serves as justification for each cost included in a budget; should be presented in such a way as to be easily referenced from the budget; and should provide sufficient information so that FHI 360 may review a proposed budget for reasonableness. All projected costs must be in accordance with the organization’s standard practices and policies.

b. Budgets must be sufficiently detailed to demonstrate reasonableness and completeness. Offerors including budget information determined to be unreasonable, incomplete, unnecessary for the completion of the proposed project, or based on a methodology that is not adequately supported may be deemed unacceptable.

c. Budgets should be submitted in applicant’s local currency. Please note that FHI 360 cannot honor exchange rates included in a budget. Payments will be made according to the exchange rate at the time of payment.

d. Please indicate the inclusion/exclusion of any applicable taxes such as VAT.e. Please include travel to the field (two trips to either Asia or Africa—depending on

the chosen geography for the case study), as well as to Washington DC for project meetings and debriefs as necessary.

2. Please include a signed biodata form (Attachment B) for any proposed staff or consultants who have a daily rate greater than $50 USD. See Attachment B for FHI 360 template.

Part C: Attachments

1. Certifications (Attachment C ); Certifications are required by FHI 360 and USAID and must be signed by the authorized official, dated and included in the proposal. Recipients will be required to comply with the content of the certifications as part of the contractual agreement when/if funding is approved.

2. Registration certificate for the organization.

13

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

Implemented by:

7. EVALUATION CRITERIAThe criteria presented below have been tailored to the requirements of this RFP. A total of 100 points are possible for the complete proposal. The relative importance of each criterion is indicated by approximate weight by points.

Evaluation Criteria PointsTechnical Approach Comprehensiveness of proposed approach and Technical soundness of

methodology and reasoning why the methodology was chosen. Implementation plan and proposed timeline are realistic and include all

proposed elements of the activity. Understanding of the subject matter and issues. This will consider the

background statement and references cited.

40 points

Personnel PI and Co-PI proposed for this work must have a proven track record in

research, complex systems, and adaptive management. Personnel should also be familiar with and, ideally, have experience working

with USAID. Proposed staff person(s) who will be responsible for implementation have the

relevant skills and past experience to successfully complete the assignment. Personnel should have excellent written and oral communication skills in

English.

30 points

Corporate Capabilities and Past Experience Experience and capacity of the organization(s) and adequacy of resources.  The proposed management structure is reasonable and sufficient to implement

this work. The organization shows past experience in the area of adaptive programming

and real-time data (networks, publications, presentations, etc.).

15 points

Cost Application Reasonableness of proposed budget based on scope of activities being

proposed Summary budget, detailed budget, and budget notes included Signed FHI 360 biodata forms included In local currency, follows budget template (see Attachment A), indicates

inclusion/exclusion of any applicable taxes. Total price will be evaluated by FHI 360. In evaluating the proposed budget, FHI 360’s concerns include determining whether:

o Proposed price reflects a clear understanding of the requirements stated in this RFP, and is consistent with the various elements of the Offeror’s proposal.

o Proposed price is reasonable in comparison with proposed prices received in response to the solicitation.

o Proposed price is reasonable in comparison with prices with FHI 360’s

15 points

14

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

Implemented by:

independent cost estimate.Unrealistically low or high proposed prices, initially or subsequently, may be grounds for eliminating a proposal from competition either on the basis that the Offeror does not understand the requirement or the Offeror has provided an unrealistic proposal.TOTAL 100

points

4. TERMS AND CONDITIONS

Offerors are responsible for review of the terms and conditions described below and in the award budget template attached. If relevant, particular attention should be paid to clauses regarding USAID geographic code, marking and branding requirements and equipment and commodity purchases.

1. SOURCE OF FUNDING AND GEOGRAPHIC CODEAny award issued under this RFP will be financed by USAID funding and will be subject to U.S. Government and USAID regulations. The authorized USAID geographic code for this RFP and any resulting award is Code 937. All commodities and services supplied under any subcontract resulting from this RFP must meet this geographic code in accordance with the US Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), 22 CFR §228.

2. WITHDRAWAL OF PROPOSALSOfferors may withdraw proposals by written notice via email received at any time before award.

3. RIGHT TO SELECT/REJECTFHI 360 reserves the right to select and negotiate with those firms/individuals it determines, in its sole discretion, to be qualified for competitive proposals and to terminate negotiations without incurring any liability. FHI 360 also reserves the right to reject any or all proposals received without explanation. 4. DISCLAIMER

1. Offerors will not be reimbursed for the cost incurred in preparation and submission of a proposal. All preparation and submission costs are at the Offeror’s expense

2. This RFP represents only a definition of requirements. It is merely an invitation for submission of proposals and does not legally obligate FHI 360 to accept any of the submitted proposals in whole or in part, nor is FHI 360 obligated to select the lowest priced proposal.

3. FHI 360 reserves the right to negotiate with any or all firms, both with respect to price, cost and/or scope of services.

4. FHI 360 reserves the right to independently negotiate with any offeror, or to make an award without conducting discussion based solely on the written proposals if it decides it is in its best interest to do so. FHI 360 reserves the right to fund any or none of the proposals received.

15

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

Implemented by:

5. FHI 360 reserves the right to disqualify any offer based on offeror failure to follow solicitation instructions.

6. FHI 360 may choose to award only part of the activities in the solicitation, or issue multiple award based on the solicitation activities.

7. FHI 360 reserves the right to waive minor proposal deficiencies that can be corrected prior to award determination to promote competition

8. FHI 360 reserves the right to check applicant’s donor reference

5. OFFER VERIFICATIONFHI 360 may contact offerors to confirm contact person, address, bid amount and to confirm that the bid was submitted for this solicitation.

6. FALSE STATEMENTS IN OFFEROfferors must provide full, accurate and complete information as required by this solicitation and its attachments. Failure to submit correct, complete and accurate information shall lead to automatic disqualification.

7. CONFLICT OF INTERESTOfferors must provide disclosure of any past, present or future relationships with any parties associated with the issuance, review or management of this solicitation and anticipated award. Failure to provide full and open disclosure may result in FHI 360 having to re-evaluate selection of a potential offeror.

8. RESERVED RIGHTSAll RFP responses become the property of FHI 360 and FHI 360 reserves the right in its solediscretion to:

o Disqualify any offer based on offeror failure to follow solicitation instructions;o Waive any deviations by offerors from the requirements of this solicitation that in FHI

360's opinion are considered not to be material defects requiring rejection or disqualification; or where such a waiver will promote increased competition;

o Extend the time for submission of all RFP responses after notification to all offerors;o Terminate or modify the RFP process at any time and re-issue the RFP to whomever FHI

360 deems appropriate;o Issue an award based on the initial evaluation of offers without discussion;o Award only part of the activities in the solicitation or issue multiple awards based on

solicitation activities.

9. GOVERNING LAW AND LANGUAGEThis solicitation and any resulting contract shall be interpreted in accordance with the laws of the U.S. Government -. The English language version of this solicitation and any resulting contract shall govern, and all notices pursuant to the provisions of this solicitation and any resulting contract shall be in English.

16

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

Implemented by:

10. CERTIFICATION OF INDEPENDENT PRICE DETERMINATION(a) The offeror certifies that—

(1) The prices in this offer have been arrived at independently, without, for the purpose of restricting competition, any consultation, communication, or agreement with any other offeror, including but not limited to subsidiaries or other entities in which offeror has any ownership or other interests, or any competitor relating to (i) those prices, (ii) the intention to submit an offer, or (iii) the methods or factors used to calculate the prices offered;

(2) The prices in this offer have not been and will not be knowingly disclosed by the offeror, directly or indirectly, to any other offeror, including but not limited to subsidiaries or other entities in which offeror has any ownership or other interests, or any competitor before bid opening (in the case of a sealed bid solicitation) or contract award (in the case of a negotiated or competitive solicitation) unless otherwise required by law; and

(3) No attempt has been made or will be made by the offeror to induce any other concern or individual to submit or not to submit an offer for the purpose of restricting competition or influencing the competitive environment.(b) Each signature on the offer is considered to be a certification by the signatory that the signatory—

(1) Is the person in the offeror's organization responsible for determining the prices being offered in this bid or proposal, and that the signatory has not participated and will not participate in any action contrary to subparagraphs (a)(1) through (a)(3) above; or

(2) (i) Has been authorized, in writing, to act as agent for the principals of the offeror in certifying that those principals have not participated, and will not participate in any action contrary to subparagraphs (a)(1) through (a)(3) above; (ii) As an authorized agent, does certify that the principals of the offeror have not participated, and will not participate, in any action contrary to subparagraphs (a)(1) through (a)(3) above; and (iii) As an agent, has not personally participated, and will not participate, in any action contrary to subparagraphs (a)(1) through (a)(3) above.(c) Offeror understands and agrees that —

(1) Violation of this certification will result in immediate disqualification from this solicitation without recourse and may result in disqualification from future solicitations; and

(2) Discovery of any violation after award to the offeror will result in the termination of the award for default.

11. AWARD AND NOTIFICATION OF SELECTED PROPOSALS1. Prior to the expiration period of proposal validity, FHI 360 will notify the successful

offeror who submitted the highest scoring proposal in writing by registered letter, email, or facsimile and invite it to negotiate the contract.

2. The aim will be to reach agreement on all points, and draft an initial contract by the conclusion of negotiations.

3. Negotiations will commence with a discussion of the offeror’s technical proposal, schedule of activities, staffing and any suggestions you may have made to improve upon the Scope of Work. Agreement must then be reached on the final deliverables, staffing, logistics and reporting. Special attention will be paid to define clearly the inputs required from FHI 360 to ensure satisfactory implementation of the assignment.

17

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

Implemented by:

4. Changes agreed upon will then be reflected in the financial proposal, using proposed unit rates.

5. Having selected the Subcontractor on the basis of an evaluation of proposed key professional staff among other things, FHI 360 expects to negotiate a contract on the basis of the staff named in the proposal and, prior to contract negotiations, will require assurance that these staff will be actually available. FHI 360 will not consider substitutions during contract negotiations except in cases of unexpected delays in the starting date or incapacity of key professional staff for reasons of health.

6. The negotiations will be concluded with a review of the draft form of the contract. FHI 360 and the offeror shall finalize the contract to conclude negotiations.

7. The contract will be awarded after successful negotiations with the selected offeror. If negotiations fail, FHI 360 will invite the offeror having obtained the second highest score to contract negotiations.

8. Any selected firm will be required to complete a Financial Pre-Award Assessment in order for FHI 360 to ascertain that the organization has the capacity to perform successfully under the terms and conditions of the proposed award. As part of the Pre-Award Assessment process the firm will also be requested to submit a financial audit report from the previous fiscal year. In addition, payroll records and other financial information may be requested to support budgeted costs.

9. Issuance of this Request for Proposal does not constitute an award commitment on the part of FHI 360 nor does it commit FHI 360 to pay for the costs incurred in the submission of a proposal to the RPP. Furthermore, FHI 360 reserves the right to reject any or all offers received and to negotiate separately with an offeror, if such action is considered to be in the best interest of FHI 360’s client organization, the U.S. Agency for International Development.

10. FHI 360 may evaluate offers in response to this solicitation without discussions and will award a contract to the responsible offeror whose offer, conforming to the solicitation, will be most advantageous to FHI 360 based on the technical factors specified in this solicitation and the price.FHI 360 reserves the right to:

a. Reject any or all offers;b. Accept other than the lowest-price offer; and/orc. Waive informalities or minor irregularities in offers received.

11. Please note that if you consider that your firm does not have all the expertise for the assignment, there is no objection to your firm associating with another firm to enable a full range of expertise to be presented. However, joint ventures between firms on the shortlist are not permitted without the prior approval of FHI 360. The request for a joint venture should be accompanied with full details of the proposed association.

5. ATTACHMENTS

The following documents under are considered part of this RFP.

A. Budget TemplateB. FHI 360 Biodata Form

18

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

Implemented by:

C. Certifications

19