Request for Quotation (RFQ) for the provision of consultancy services to conduct baseline and ground truthing assessments in 500 communities in Nigeria

New clarification added: With coverage across 500 communities, there are important trade-offs between depth of data and overall cost. Could you please indicate whether the priority is broad coverage with lighter data per community, or more in-depth analysis with a larger number of data points and a higher budget?UNOPS Response:The main goal is to cover all 500 communities with enough data for solid analysis and decisions.Coverage vs. Depth:Priority is on reaching all the 500 communities with a standardised core data set.A tiered approach is welcome: all communities get basic, harmonized data; a subset gets more detailed surveys or technical reviews.Budget Considerations:Full-depth data everywhere should be weighed based on budget.Propose a base scenario (broad coverage, lighter data per community) and one or two enhanced scenarios (more detail in selected areas), detailing extra costs and analytical benefits.

New clarification added: Given the list of 500 communities, could you please advise on the required number of interviews per community and whether statistically similar communities can be combined into shared sampling strata, rather than applying minimum sample sizes at the individual community level? This will help us refine the budget.UNOPS Response:The use of stratified sampling is supported and setting interview count per community based on population or number connections.Interviews per community: Consultants should recommend a statistically sound sample size for each stratum, ensuring key community types are well represented and allowing for effective impact analysis.Stratification: Communities may be grouped by shared characteristics, and there is need to justify your stratification logic and clearly explain how interviews are distributed across strata and communities.

New clarification added: To support a more accurate and evidence-based proposal, we kindly request confirmation on whether the Client can share any existing records or datasets indicating the number or distribution of households, MSMEs, and public institutions within each community. This may include population figures, density estimates, percentages, or other proxy indicators. Access to such information at the proposal stage would allow the Consultant to refine the sampling approach and field deployment plan using actual data, rather than relying solely on assumptions or high-level estimates.UNOPS Response:It should be noted that all the sites have no baseline information and that is the basis for this consultancy. It is expected that the consultant will assist in this aspect. However, the number of planned and actual connections have been provided to guide the consultant at this based on proposals submitted by the developers. The consultant should use the planned/actual connections for their estimate. The relevant baseline data to be collected will be identified jointly with the successful bidder.

New clarification added: Dear UNOPS team,May bidders propose an alternative implementation schedule for data collection and reporting for both work packages, while maintaining the overall 12-week timeline for all deliverables, other than what is specified in the TORs?UNOPS Response:Yes, the bidder may propose an alternative implementation for data schedule and strategy must be clearly stated and justified

New clarification added: 6. With respect to the subsidy modelling scope, we seek clarification on whether the existing subsidy calculation tool will be shared with the selected Consultant, or whether a reference link or working version of the calculator is available. This will support appropriate scoping of the desk review, validation, and stress-testing tasks described in the ToR. 7. For both work packages, we kindly request clarification on:The level and type of data previously collected (technical, demand, socio-economic, performance),The party responsible for collecting and housing this data (e.g., REA, developers, third-party platforms),And whether such data will be made available to the Consultant to support verification and reconciliation exercises.8. For brownfield sites, we seek clarification on whether the technical verification is expected to be limited to assessing performance and compliance against developer-approved specifications and documentation, or whether high-level design optimisation and upgrade recommendations are also expected. 9. Similarly, for greenfield sites, is the expectation limited to reviewing approved technical and design specifications, or does the scope include independent technical validation of the proposed system concepts? 10. We would appreciate clarification on whether any energy audits or demand assessments have already been conducted for the greenfield sites. If so, how detailed were these assessments, and will the data be made available to the Consultant? If no such assessments have been conducted, is the Consultant expected to carry out demand estimation and load proxy assessments as part of this assignment?11. Is there  flexibility on a timed period where the consultant might go back to collect new data to help determine impact from a quasi experimental and experimental basis as to the more descriptive approach that might be available presently. Especially for greenfield sites.UNOPS Response:6. Access to Subsidy Modelling ToolYes, the existing subsidy calculation tool (or a reference version) will be shared with the selected Consultant. This will include the current calculator, assumption documentation, and relevant parameters or datasets. This access supports validation, stress-testing, and improvement of the model. This access is intended to support validation, stress‑testing, and refinement of the subsidy model.7. Availability of Previously Collected DataAccess will be granted to all relevant datasets associated with the assignment, which include Technical system data. Demand and consumption data! Socio-economic surveys (subject to availability) and Performance and operational data.  These datasets are currently maintained by REA, developers, and third-party platforms. The Consultant will be provided with consolidated access, subject to the provisions of applicable data-sharing agreements.8. Scope of Technical Verification for Brownfield SitesFor brownfield sites, the principal requirement is the verification of performance,  compliance with approved specifications and Operational status.  In addition, the Consultant is expected to offer high-level design optimization or upgrade recommendations when gaps or inefficiencies are identified. This function is intended as targeted technical advice rather than a comprehensive redesign exercise.9. Scope of Technical Review for Greenfield SitesFor greenfield sites, the Consultant is responsible for reviewing approved technical and design specifications and performing independent technical validation of system concepts where required. This process ensures that all proposed designs are technically robust, appropriately dimensioned, and consistent with projected demand.10. Energy Audits and Demand Assessments for Greenfield SitesSome preliminary demand assessments for greenfield sites may be available and will be shared if so, but their depth varies. If adequate assessments are lacking, the Consultant should estimate demand, use load proxy methods and Validate assumptions through field observations and stakeholder consultations. These tasks are part of baseline and planning duties.11. Flexibility for Follow‑Up Data CollectionTime-bound follow-up data collection is allowed if it enhances evidence through quasi-experimental or impact-focused analysis. Such follow-ups must be justified in the methodology, fit within the program schedule, and have prior approval. This approach is particularly useful for greenfield sites, where impact assessment requires multiple points in time.

New clarification added: 1. With respect to the ground-truthing scope described in the ToR, we request clarification on the expected level of Consultant autonomy. Should the exercise be primarily developer-led, relying on information provided by mini-grid developers and operators, or is SEforALL/DARES expecting a more consultant-led verification approach, where the Consultant is permitted to define and implement an independent sampling strategy (including random sampling of connections) or recommend alternative verification approaches as deemed appropriate? 2. We would appreciate clarification on how SEforALL/DARES anticipates managing the risk of key stakeholders not providing required information during the assignment. For example, in the event that a mini-grid developer does not provide access to technical, operational, or commercial data for brownfield sites when requested, what mitigation mechanisms or fallback approaches does SEforALL envisage for the Consultant? 3. We seek confirmation on whether the key personnel and resources specified in the returnable form are fixed, or whether the Consultant is permitted to adjust (add or remove) resources at its discretion, provided the overall technical quality, coverage, and deliverables of the assignment are maintained. 4. We observed that the total number of communities listed across the annexes exceeds the 500 communities referenced in the ToR by approximately 16 communities. We would appreciate clarification on whether this variance relates to additional nearby or buffer communities, or whether it reflects an update to the total number of sites intended to be covered under this assignment. 5. We also request clarification on the selection logic underpinning the planned connections (greenfield sites) and existing connections (brownfield sites) presented in the annexes. Specifically, what criteria or assumptions formed the basis for determining the connection numbers for each site (e.g., household counts, demand projections, developer proposals, or grant agreement thresholds)?  Knowledge of this logic will enable the consultant propose the right methodology to illustrate the true impact of these connections.UNOPS Response:1. Consultant Autonomy in Ground‑TruthingThis is  a consultant‑led verification approach and not developer led though information from developers and operators will be incorporated.  However the Consultant is expected to independently design and implement a verification methodology, including sampling strategies and any alternative approaches deemed necessary to ensure data accuracy and representativeness. Developer inputs should support—not drive—the verification process.2. Managing Non‑Cooperation by DevelopersFormal introductory and authority letters will be issued as well as escalation channels to ensure access to the information needed. If a developer is uncooperative or withholds data, the Consultant should document non-compliance! use alternative verification (field assessments, proxy measurements, customer interviews and notify employer for action. 3. Flexibility in Key Personnel and ResourcesKey personnel listed in the returnable forms may be changed by the Consultant, as long as technical expertise, coverage, and quality are maintained. Major changes require employer’s approval. This flexibility helps ensure efficient delivery across 500 communities.4. Variance in Number of CommunitiesThe variance between the 500 communities referenced in the ToR and the slightly higher number listed in the annexes reflects buffer communities included for planning purposes. The official target remains 500 communities, and employer will confirm the final list prior to deployment. Any additional communities will only be included if explicitly approved.5. Logic Behind Planned and Existing Connection NumbersConnection numbers for greenfield and brownfield sites are determined by developer proposals, prior household and enterprise counts, demand forecasts, grant thresholds, eligibility criteria, and, for brownfield sites, historical data. This approach will be shared with the Consultant for consistent methodology and impact analysis.

New clarification added: Dear Bidders,Please be informed that the deadline of the quotation submission has been extended until 10 Feb. 2026, 12:00 UTC/13:00 CET.Best regards,UNOPS Procurement Team

New amendment added #1: Dear Sir/Madam,Please be informed that the deadline of the quotation submission has been extended until 10 Feb. 2026, 12:00 UTC/13:00 CET.Regards,UNOPS Procurement Team

New clarification added: Dear UNOPS Procurement Team,In Section II of the RFQ documents, it is mentioned that "Applying entities would be provided with the detailed spreadsheets for both WP5.2 and WP5.3 upon request."May we request for these detailed spreadsheets to be shared?UNOPS Response:Please refer to Annex I and Annex II of the Section II of the RFQ documents where you have the Terms of Reference. The list of location, plant capacity and planned connections are provided in the document.

New clarification added: From an execution and deployment planning perspective, clarity on the proposed sampling approach is important. The anticipated sample size will directly inform field team sizing, deployment logistics, and scheduling. Additionally, understanding how sampled connections are distributed across connection types and categories (household, commercial, industrial) will help ensure that data collection tools are appropriately designed and applied.While our proposal reflects assumptions based on prior experience and our interpretation of the scope of work, confirmation from the Client will enable us to further refine our field strategy and optimise implementation.Is there a defined sampling percentage for the number of connections per community? If so, how is the sample distributed across connection types or categories (e.g., household, commercial, and industrial?)UNOPS Response:1. Sampling Percentage per CommunityThere is no predefined sampling percentage or fixed minimum number of connections required to be assessed per community. The sampling approach is flexible, allowing the Consultant to determine an appropriate methodology that ensures representativeness across communities of varying sizes and connection densities.2. Distribution Across Connection CategoriesThere is no mandated distribution ratio for sampling across household, commercial, or industrial (productive‑use) customer categories. However, the sampling strategy should: reflect the actual customer mix within each community, ensure adequate representation of productive‑use customers, given their importance to economic and energy‑use assessments and apply stratified sampling principles where necessary to avoid bias and ensure balanced coverage. The Consultant is expected to design a sampling framework that captures the diversity of customer types while remaining operationally feasible.3. Consultant‑Proposed Sampling FrameworkThe Consultant developing the sampling methodology welcome however the framework should be statistically robust and defensible, scalable across the 500 communities, sensitive  to variations in community size, customer categories, and connection characteristics and efficient to implement within the field deployment timelines.

New clarification added: Dear sir, 1. Considering the exchange rate, please consider annual turnover of 100million naira or usd 70,000 to allow more local participation.2. Can you further clarify that unops intend to award the entire 500 communities to a single contractor.UNOPS Response:1. The contract will be awarded in USD. Therefore, we must consider an annual sales turnover of minimum USD 150,000 in any one of the last two years.2. Yes, the contract will be awarded for all 500 communities.

New clarification added: Dear UNOPS Procurement Team,Under the deliverable "National Summary Report", it is outlined that submissions include "proposed grid models". Please confirm whether these grid models are indeed to be created for all 500 sites, which would significantly increase the project level of effort.UNOPS Response:Grid models should be created for all the 500 sites.  A comprehensive baseline study profiles socio-economic characteristics to precisely determine the specific energy requirements of the community. The exercise also serves to evaluate whether scaling up infrastructure is necessary. The valuable data obtained will enable well-informed decision-making. Therefore, it is necessary to create these models for all 500 sites.