RFQ Service - Consultancy Services for the Joint End-of-Project Evaluation of Labor-intensive maintenance in Public Areas in Jordan (Phase I and II)

New clarification added: Question:Our Dutch-Canadian evaluation firm ACT for Performance is interested to provide Consultancy Services for the Joint End-of-Project Evaluation of Labor-intensive maintenance in Public Areas in Jordan (Phase I and II), in consortium with our local partner in Jordan, specialized in surveys. In order to enable us to draft a quality proposal, would it be possible to extend the submission date with one week.Answer:Regrettably, the existing project schedule does not permit a deadline extension.Question:Form C: Technical Quotation Formcan you please explain the required details to be filled in this form? the form on the word document is not editable and its not clear where and what should we be filing.Answer:All of the required and needed documents are inserted in the RFQ_Section_III_ReturnableBiddingForms , you have to check the required documents and these documents you can use your own templates as example (method of statement) and the other to fill our template as example Form D. 

New clarification added: Question: 6. Will UNOPS provide the selected consultant with relevant recruitment and access support, including: ○ An approved Cash-for-Work beneficiary list for FGD recruitment; ○ School lists and focal-point contacts; ○ Contact details for MoE, MoL, UNOPS, school, and community stakeholders for KIIs; ○ Official access letters and coordination support for school visits and stakeholder interviews?Answer:Yes. UNOPS will provide the Phase II CfW beneficiary list, school lists, focal point details, and institutional contact points. UNOPS will also support in coordinating with relevant stakeholders for the consultant in order to facilitate entry. The consultant will be responsible for the direct field-level scheduling and coordination of the visits.Question 7. Could UNOPS clarify its expectations regarding the mode of qualitative fieldwork? Specifically, are KIIs expected to be conducted in hybrid format as stated in the ToR, while FGDs must be face-to-face, or can the consultant recommend adjustments where access or scheduling requires it?Answer:The consultant may recommend adjustments as neededQuestion 8. Could UNOPS confirm whether the final Evaluation Report, five-page visual executive summary / impact factsheet, and final results presentation are required in both Arabic and English? ○ Moreover, when reporting for the qualitative component, kindly confirm if the consultant can follow its standardized qualitative reporting, which does not follow any kind of code books.Answer:​Yes, they must be provided in both Arabic and English. The consultant may follow its standardized qualitative reporting but the details will be further discussed and agreed during the inception phase with the awarded consultant. Question:Please let us know from where TORs can be downloaded for this opportunity as relevant forms are available however TORs document is not available on the portal.Answer:it is under file RFQ_Section_II_Schedule of Requirements

New clarification added: Question: Dear UNOPS Team, Please find below some inquiries with regards to both quantitative and qualitative components, where the answers will highly help us provide accurate scoping and better pricing for this project: Quantitative Inquiries :Sampling & DatabaseQuestion1. Will UNOPS provide the beneficiary database for sampling purposes?Answer:Yes. To ensure a statistically representative and valid sample as required by the Terms of Reference, UNOPS intends to provide the selected consultant with the necessary data for sampling purposes. Please note that the final transfer of data remains subject to final administrative confirmation and data privacy clearances from the donor (KfW).Question 2. What is the exact size of the available beneficiary database?Answer:Approximately 14,000 CfW Beneficiaries for Phase II excluding the current ongoing package which is in the current database. There are 4,561 CfW beneficiaries for Phase I.Question 3. Can UNOPS provide the beneficiary distribution by: ○ Governorate ○ Gender ○ Nationality ○ Disability status (if available)?Answer:Yes UNOPS will provide this information to the awarded consultantQuestion:4. Has the database been recently updated and validated?Answer:YesSample Design Question 1. Are there any minimum quotas required by gender, nationality, or governorate?Answer:The ToR states that the final sample must be statistically representative and disaggregated by gender, nationality, and location. This will be further discussed and agreed with the awarded consultant  Question 2. Are there any specific requirements regarding persons with disabilities or other vulnerable groups?  Answer: Yes, the consultant is expected to ensure that the qualitative sampling design (FGDs and KIIs) explicitly includes representation from women, youth, Syrian refugees, persons with disabilities, and other highly vulnerable groups to evaluate equity and accessQuestionnaire Question 1. Does UNOPS have any previous questionnaires, baseline/endline tools, beneficiary surveys, or GESI instruments that can be shared for adaptation? Answer:UNOPS carried out a Gender and Social Inclusion (GESI) assessment in 2025 which will be shared with the awarded consultant. There were no other baseline/tools or surveys carried out across all packages. 2. Are there any mandatory indicators that must be measured or compared against previous studies? No 3. What is the expected interview length (LOI)? Not more than 20 minutes per interview .Fieldwork Question1. Are multiple callback attempts required for non-contact cases?Answer: Not more than 3 attemptsQuestion 2. Will UNOPS provide introductory communication to beneficiaries before fieldwork starts?Answer:No, this will be done by the consultant For the Qualitative Component, please find below the required clarifications: Coverage of Phase I and Phase IIQuestion:1. Could UNOPS please confirm the intended scope of the Phase I light-touch sustainability review? Specifically, should this component be limited to desk review and a small number of school site visits, or are qualitative interviews with former beneficiaries, school representatives, or other stakeholders also expected? ○ Also, could UNOPS confirm the specific deliverables and requirements from the site visits?Answer: This will be done through a desk review of existing UNOPS completion reports and a limited sample of site visits. Primary beneficiary surveys remain focused on Phase II. The sample is to be agreed with UNOPS but we do not currently expect it to be more than 15 schools. The main requirement of the Phase I site visits is to visually assess the long-term durability of the repairs (sustainability review) and assess the impact of the project from school management.Question: 2. Could UNOPS indicate the expected or preferred number of Phase I school/site visits, as well as the intended governorates or criteria for selecting these sites?Answer:UNOPS considers 2-3 schools per governorate from Phase I will be sufficient but we will invite the consultant to propose refinements or alternative approaches to the sampling strategy during the Inception Phase.Question 3. For Phase II, should the qualitative fieldwork cover all eight governorates equally, or may the consultant propose a purposive approach that prioritizes governorates based on beneficiary volume, geographic spread, type of intervention, or implementation context?Answer:Yes, this is possible.Qualitative Sampling and Recruitment Question 1. The ToR provides an indicative range of 2–3 FGDs and 5–7 KIIs per governorate. Could UNOPS confirm whether this range should be treated as a minimum expectation for costing and planning, or whether the consultant may propose an alternative qualitative sample based on a technically justified approach?Answer: Note that the range is indicative and the consultant may propose an alternate qualitative sample.  Question 2. Please clarify the priority participant groups that UNOPS expects to be covered through FGDs. In particular, should separate groups be conducted for: ○ Female and male Cash-for-Work beneficiaries; ○ Jordanian and Syrian beneficiaries; ○ Youth beneficiaries; ○ Persons with disabilities and/or other vulnerable groups; ○ Community-support committee members or school-related community representatives?Answer:The consultant can propose how they envision to separate the groups but it is important to consider participation safety when determining the groups. This will be closely discussed with UNOPS during the inception phase. It is essential that there is disaggregation by key demographics (gender, nationality, vulnerability)Question 3. Does UNOPS prefer Jordanian and Syrian Cash-for-Work beneficiaries to be recruited into separate FGDs, or may mixed groups be considered where this is appropriate and does not affect participant comfort or openness?Answer:Where appropriate and allows for participant comfort and openness, the consultant may recruit mixed groups.Question: 4. Could UNOPS confirm whether direct engagement with students is expected as part of the qualitative component? ○ If so, please clarify the intended age groups, preferred format of engagement, and the required parental-consent, child-assent, and safeguarding arrangements.Answer: Direct engagement with students is not expected as part of the qualitative component but the consultant will consult with school staff including principals, teachers and the Ministry of Education where necessary  Question:5. In the event that direct student participation is not expected, should assessment of school-level outcomes rely primarily on school principals, teachers, MoE engineers, community representatives, and structured site observations?Answer: Yes