Request for Proposal for Consultancy Services Related to Resource Mobilisation for the Sanitation and Hygiene Fund (SHF)

New clarification added: Question:"Section 2.7 of the RFP_Section_III_Returnable_Bidding_Forms asks us to Demonstrate how you plan to integrate sustainability measures in the execution of the contract to provide goods or services. We request clarification on which of the following “sustainability measures” are being referred to in this section.• Sustainability of revenue mobilisation/ funding post completion of contract• Sustainability of projects implemented by SHF• Sustainability incorporated within our operating modalities, for example, ESG initiatives in the provision of services by the consultant"Answer: Sustainability in this context refers to sustainability incorporated within the working modalities of the bidding company and how those services will be sustained  and continued throughout the engagement period.  

New clarification added: Q19. For the submission as Joint Venture/Consortium/Association, financial capability criteria is required to be met by all partners?.A19. Financial capability criteria is required to meet by any one of the partners of the JV/ Consortium/ Association.Q20. EXCLUSIVITY AND AVAILABILITY STATEMENT was mentioned under clause No.11 of Section I: Instruction to Offerors. Please clarify if it is applicable for this process.A20. Please refer to the UNOPS eSourcing Tender Particulars Section. The Exclusivity and/or availability statement is not required for this process.Q21. Regarding the two examples of previous experience, is it required to provide achievement and final product?A21. The offeror final deliverables/contract copy document or a one-page summary as an example of their similiar previous experience as required under the qualification criteria.Q22. Please explain what type of interventions will be covered by the SHF.A22. The SHF Strategy 2021-2025 outlines 4 main areas of intervention: i) household sanitation ii) menstrual health and hygiene iii) WASH in schools and health centres, and iv) sanitation markets and innovation. The burden suggests that we would be working mainly in rural and/or non-sewered urban. Interventions can include subsidies for the poor and products (for example MHH n schools). We are not focusing on water supply (with the exception of schools and health centres) and here we would expect to leverage water investments. We are targeting only  eligible countries (as per policy) - mainly lower income in Africa. The Covid situation and the resulting shift in the focus of bi-lateral donors especially, means that we will have to start work on innovative finance sooner than planned - we simply can’t rely on sovereign gants. This means that area 4, sanitation markets and innovation (the sanitation economy - and see the work of the Toilet Board Coalition and others for more information) will feature strongly in our dialogue with governments as this is where the private sector interest lies. Prioritization about where investments are targeted in a country is the role of government. SHF will invest in national investment plans, and can support the development of these where they don’t exist.  Q23. Has SHF started to approach donors beyond the Dutch and Swiss, or are you waiting for this RFP to start? A23. Yes, we have been in dialogue for the last year or so but only operational as an organization since July 2021. It is worth mentioning that we do not wish to compete with other WASH agencies. This means that we either have to go deeper in existing donor pools, or find new ones. The former is mainly grant based and the latter for us is where the innovative financing comes in. We know that foundations and the private sector are interested in the sanitation economy - and this we have to exploit. Q24. As per the Schedule of Requirements, we are required to submit five proposals every month. Our understanding is that we will be preparing the proposals and incorporating the suggestions of UNOPS and SHF in refining the proposals. But the signatory on the proposals and the sender of the proposals to the respective donor agencies will be UNOPS/ SHF and not the consulting firm. Please confirm if our understanding is correctA.24.Yes, your understanding is correct. Q25. We would like to know if there are templates available for the proposals and if we will be able to build on existing contacts of SHF.A25. Templates depend on the donor in some instances. Where the donor does not provide a template, SHF branding guidelines will be referred to and a template agreed (format - content etc) between the consulting firm and and SHF. Q26. Given the significant number of proposals to be submitted each month, we would like to know the acceptance criteria for these proposals. What would be the turnaround time for SHF to respond to and accept these proposals for final submission?A26. We would anticipate reaching agreement on this during the initial stages of the contract. Certainly the internal customer chain needs to be as seamless as possible. We therefore commit to reach agreement on the number of days for turnaround, quality assurance criteria  etc soonest the award is made and engagement started. We would expect the consultancy firm to suggest this to us and for the suggestions to take into consideration the drafting, review to final process. 

New amendment added #1: The RFP is hereby amended as follows:Deadline for submission (General tab) is extended by 10 days to 10 Sep 2021 at (12:00 UTC). Deadline for clarifications (General tab) is extended by 10 days to 5 Sep 2021 at (12:00 UTC). RFP Schedule of Requirements, Section 9, item No.2 and item No.5 under “9 has been amended to read as follows“Quarterly submission of reports with quarterly payment”. Please see RFP_Section_II_Schedule of Requirements Revision 1. 

New clarification added: Q17.For this 24 month compelling piece of work, we have been working on the opportunity of combining capabilities across our network, especially in South-Asia, Sub-Sahara Africa, in the context of a very tight agenda. We would be much grateful if you could grant an extension of at least 10 business days for the submission of the proposal. A17. Deadline for submission (General tab) would be extended by ten days to 10 Sep 2021 at (12:00 UTC).Q18. Currently the payment milestones given in the Schedule of Requirements are loaded towards the end with 40% towards the end of the engagement period at month 23. However, there is a considerable effort involved throughout the two year period. Would you consider the weight on the five proposals per month to be increased to 20% and the weight on archive of donor communication to be reduced to 10%. Also could we request that the payment for donor communication be made on a quarterly basis?”A18. Payment No.2 and No.5 under “9. Payment” of “Section II: Schedule of Requirements” would be amended as “Quarterly submission of reports with quarterly payment”.

New clarification added: Q16. As per RFP_Section_II_Schedule of Requirements, "The positions provided for ‘other team members’ is an indicative list of team members and skill profiles, however bidders have the freedom to identify their own team structure and composition including the possibility to merge some of the functions suggested below." Can we propose a sectoral expert instead of the portfolio officer? As some of the skills of the portfolio officer are overlapping with those of the Team Leader. Our understanding is that a sectoral expert may bring the required additionality for the assignment.A16. Yes. Bidders can identify their own team structure so long as the key components provided in the schedule of requirements are covered and technically compliant. The SHF has sector experts and access to peers in the wider domain and so we had not thought to include one as part of this TOR.

New clarification added: Q9. Reference:Section III: Returnable Bidding Forms: Page 2.Form A refers to the Joint Venture Partner Information Form. We would like to understand whether the same form will be used if the partner is a Sub Contractor. If not, is there a separate form for subcontractors?A9. List of subcontractors or suppliers information could be provided under “Table 2: Cost breakdown per component” of “Form C: Financial Proposal Form” of “Section III: Returnable Bidding Forms”. But the bidder who signed the bid submission form has full responsibility for the submission. Q10. Reference:Section III: Returnable Bidding Forms: Form D: Technical Proposal FormIs there any page limit for the various sections in the Technical Proposal Form?A10. No. There is no page limit.Q11. Reference: Section III: Returnable Bidding Forms: Form D: Technical Proposal FormWe would like to understand the difference between Section 2.4 and 2.6 of this form. Both talk about an implementation plan outline with proposed activity sequencing that is logical and realistic. Our interpretation is that Section 2.4 is about proposing a detailed implementation plan and Section 2.6 is about providing the rationale behind it. Please confirm if our understanding is correct.A11. Section 2.4 requests the submission of an implementation plan with proposed activities and their sequence.Section 2.6 requests the summary of the suppliers’ assessment of their proposed implementation plan. For example, section 2.6 may cover a detailed description of the proposed plan and how the activities will be implemented, how the risks are estimated and what assumptions are being made.   Q12. Reference: Section III: Returnable Bidding Forms: Form F: Performance Statement FormThe format provided in this form seems more suitable for Goods/ Works assignments. As our relevant assignments are in the nature of consulting projects, can we use a customized format here instead of the given template?A12. Please use the template as provided in the Form F. The term Goods/Works is interchangeably used to refer to consulting services and projects. Q13. Reference: Section IV_III: Contract for professional servicesThe draft contract format outlines two possible options -(1) Option 1- Fixed price and (2) Option 2- cost reimbursement. Please clarify which option will be followed in this case. In case Option 2 is followed, kindly confirm if we need to provide time sheets of experts and other evidence to claim these amounts.Since this is a long term project, we would prefer if the contract is a fixed price contract wherein payment is made on the basis of specific outputs.Will the selected supplier have any say in choosing a particular form of contract?A13. Option 1 (fixed price) would be applied as per “9. Payments” section of “Section II: Schedule of Requirements”.Q14. Reference : RFP Section II: Schedule of RequirementsThe educational qualification for several key experts is “Advanced university degree in economics, banking, finance structuring or other related field.”Our understanding is Chartered Accountancy is considered an advanced university degree because in India, CA is the equivalent of a Master’s degree.A14. A degree equivalent to the qualification of an advanced university degree is acceptable. Please provide in your submission all the supporting documents demonstrating that the offered degree is equivalent to the qualification of an advanced university degree. Q15: Our understanding is that this is a QCBS proposal. We would like to know the weightage on technicals and financials. Whether it is 80:20 or 90:10 or any other combination.A15. Please refer to the “Weightage of technical and financial pr/oposals” section mentioned at the Particular tab of eSourcing which is 70% (Technical) : 30% (Financial). Minimum points for technical compliance is 70%.

New clarification added: Q1. Regarding activity #6 (“communicate with identified donors, in consultation with SHF management”) our interpretation is that the vendor would make connections with donors where possible, arrange the meetings, prepare all materials, prepare the SHF team, participate in the meetings and potentially lead those conversations in which grants are being solicited, and track/capture/archive all donor communications. But the vendor would not be required to lead conversations that entail soliciting investments, on SHF’s behalf, of return-seeking capital, nor would the vendor be responsible for achieving fundraising targets. Is our interpretation correct?A1.Bidder is required to initiate the process with donors. Once a lead is identified senior SHF management may/may not join initial meetings and calls with potential donors, governments and other stakeholders. Depending on the likelihood of a successful bid and the significance/ size of the donor then SHF management will be involved accordingly. Q2. Regarding activity #7 (“prepare proposals from draft to final…”), we assume that the vendor would receive administrative support from SHF with the proposal preparation process (e.g., for completing the administrative sections/annexes of proposals). Is this correct?A2. Yes especially for technical input on the core strategic investment areas of household sanitation, sanitation economy, hygiene and menstrual health. Q3. Regarding activity #9 (“provide advice to SHF-eligible government to support strategies to unlock additional public and private finance from international and domestic sources”), we interpret this to mean the vendor role would not include providing direct support to individual SHF-eligible governments but would rather include preparing materials targeted to this audience and/or develop/host informational webinars, for instance.A3. Yes Q4. We would like to confirm our attendance at the Aug 24th pre-bid meeting. A4. Thank you for your team's interest. Q5. A question about the eligibility of the offerer. Can a proposal be submitted by a consortium of independent consultants, with the UNOPS contract (if awarded) will be managed by the leading partner? Does the leading partner have to be a legal entity? What are additional conditions, if any, imposed on the leading partner?A5. As per RFP section I - instruction to Offerors, the Offeror to this RFP may be a private, public or government-owned legal entity or any association with legal capacity to enter into a binding contract with UNOPS. For consortium and JVs, please check the requirements in “Form A: Joint Venture Partner Information Form” under the RFP_Section_III_Returnable Bidding Forms. The JV should be legally registered and shall meet all the requirements provided in the RFP.The Offeror and all parties constituting the Offeror must disclose any actual or potential conflict of interest in the Offeror Information Form questionnaire (question 5) provided under the UNOPS eSourcing system. Q6. Would you consider contracting multiple consultancies to cover this RfP, i.e. would it be possible to only pitch for the RM strategy element of your RfP?A6. The process is expected to result in successful contracting of one consultancy firm for the entire scope of the requirements. As per the particulars section of the eSourcing, partial proposals shall not be allowed. Offerors must quote prices for the total goods and/or services for the total requirement. Evaluation will be done for the total requirement. Q7. Is the one month timeline for the RM strategy development a hard deadline? We have extensive experience in developing RM strategies for international organizations and in our experience developing a sound RM strategy takes longer (+/- 3 months)..A7. We are keen to get a RM strategy in place in the time frame indicated, however we are seeking quality and success. Therefore should this time frame be too ambitious, a new one can be proposed. The rationale and the justification for the additional timelines/ longer timelines proposed for the milestones shall be clearly demonstrated in the Technical Proposal Form D for example sections 2.1 and 2.4.Q8. Would request to provide the terms of reference to understand the actual scope of work.A8. Please refer to the Document section of the UNOPS eSourcing system. The terms of reference is provided in “RFP_Section_II_Schedule of Requirements” of “Documents”.