Request for Proposal for Evaluation of the Stop TB Partnership’s Community, Human Rights and Gender Interventions

New amendment added #1: Amendment 1 to extend the tender period with few additional days to allow for submissions.

New clarification added: Q22: Are the specific years of experience listed in the requirements for the Key Experts included within the years of relevant general experience?R22: Section 10.2 of the TOR describes the difference between required and desirable general and specific experience. Further on, the requirements for each Key Expert is defined, thus general experience is counted separately then specific experience, as per initial provision. Q23: We understand that the “per diem” mentioned in RFP as reimbursable is the UN DSAs for the countries to be visited. Please confirm.R23: Correct, per diem is same as DSA (UN general term) and the proposal should budget for any such reimbursable costs for travel as per breakdown in the Financial Proposal Form.

New clarification added: Q12: With regards to Output 1, our understanding is that this refers to the development of a standardised methodology for measuring outcomes and impact of STBP CRG TB activities across a range of settings. Can you provide any insight as to the range of settings in which this methodology will likely be applied? This range will be useful for guiding the level of flexibility to be considered when developing the methodology.A12: The tender information mentions sufficiently how and where the methodology will be applied. Additional clarifications (including those on the use of methodology) will be provided by STBP to the successful bidder upon contract signature. Q13: Is there an expected start date for the work?A13: UNOPS intends to award the contract with a start date of mid-June as per posted tender. Q14: Is there a maximum budget available for the work, or an estimated person days required?A14: The budget shall be submitted part of the financial proposal in line with the estimated level of effort, which UNOPS Stop TB will evaluated as per the RFP evaluation methodology outlined in the tender. Q15: Should we have any further requests for clarification, is there a deadline up until which we can submit these?R15: Deadline for clarifications is: 6 May, 23:00 CET, as per published tender. Q16: Please elaborate on the tools development? Would the supplier be expected to develop and finalise tools and guidelines that could immediately be used in other countries?A16: Yes, (as per RFP) it is expected that the tools will be finalized and ready-to-implement in other countries and settings. Additional information will be provided by STBP to the successful bidder upon contract signature. Q17: Would the tools be designed to be used by lay people/communities or by evaluators in the other countries?A17: The tools are intended to be used by STBP and its (professional) partners. Q18: Regarding the timeline, Is there an absolute deadline for the end of this work? Is the timetable likely to have flexibility at all?A18: The estimated total duration of the project is four months after the date of contract signature. Q19: Is CRG team based in Geneva? If so, do “In-depth discussions with CRG team, as well as other STBP teams” require of the team’s presence in Geneva’s offices?A19: Indeed our Stop TB, CRG team is based in Geneva, but for discussions, it is not necessary for the consultants to be physically in Geneva as these may be held remotely through videoconferencing, Skype etc. Q20: Will STBP provide the list of stakeholders to be interviewed during the application of the methodology in two selected countries?A20: Yes, STBP may provide the list of key stakeholders (people and organizations), but this list will not be exhaustive and it is up to the consultants to involve other stakeholders in order to ensure proper outputs. Q21: The intermediate report must contain the final evaluation methodology with the relevant tools and the drat evaluation report for one country. Does this mean that the test of the methodology in the remaining country can be done in the period between the two months after de date of contract signing and the four months after the date of the contract signing?A21: Yes but not limited to (i.e. if the consultant manages the first country within one month after contract signing (and present the evaluation report to STBP and agree on it), they would be able to start the second country right after.

New clarification added: Q1: Apart of your preferences with regards to the size of the consulting team, is there any indication of the effort needed (working days)?A1: The estimated level of effort is to be proposed by the supplier, and to be clearly output-oriented. Q2: In the requirements for the Key experts, what exactly do you mean by “specific experience”? In evaluation techniques?  in human rights/ gender interventions? in TB Support services? A2: Specific experience applies to all the mentioned (Health, TB, CRG, evaluations), yet ‘CRG’ experience should be particularly noted. The proposal should put on the team people with needed experience, which will be evaluated against the criteria requested. Q3: You have said that you will provide the contact details for national and international partners, will this include people who have received a grant from UNOPS, be this in Kenya, and or Cambodia? A3: All needed contact info will be provided to the successful bidder. Q4: If the response to Q3 is yes, is there the possibility that UNOPS, Stop TB would be able to facilitate with logistical arrangements, and if necessary translators?A4: Not applicable (see A3). Implicitly, logistics costs including translation should be budgeted by the applicants, as required, in the financial proposal. Q5: Have the specific case studies that are to be evaluated been selected with both Kenya and Cambodia? If they have would it be possible to know who they are?A5: The idea is that all info on projects / ‘case studies’ will be made available to the successful bidder. For now, the potential applicants should make searches on their own, with reference to the legal assessment, gender assessment, key populations data, challenge facility, TB Reach, as relevant etc.) Q6: In the ToR it has been proposed that a questionnaire/opinion poll be undertaken with numerous stakeholders, is this a necessary component of the evaluation, or might the consultancy team propose other methods that may complement their proposed methodological approach?A6:  The supplier should propose a methodology for the assignment, which may or may not have questionnaires or other elements. The proposed approach will be evaluated accordingly. Q7: If the response to Q6 is no, what is the sample size that you require for the purpose of the survey? A7: There is no standard sample size as development of a methodology is an integral part of the assignment. The country evaluations per se are intended to test this methodology, which will be further used by Stop TB. Q8: Do you have an indicative budget for this evaluation?R8: No, this is entirely to the supplier to propose as the financial envelope will be submitted separately and evaluated as per the RFP mentioned methodology. Q9: When do you anticipate that the contract would start?R9: UNOPS intends to award the contract with a start date of mid-June as per posted tender. Q10: We assume a level of logistical support will be provided for the field work in Kenya and Cambodia, with introductions made? Could this please be clarified?A10: Information sharing, contacts and other coordination support will be provided. Rest of logistical support should be budgeted by the applicants (international and/or local travel, per diem, translation, printing, refreshments and other relevant costs). Q11: Do you anticipate ethical approval through a local IRB board to be required for both Kenya and Cambodia, in particular if the method includes a level of quantitative assessment, such as surveys? We are aware of the potential influence this may have in particular on timeframes.A11: No ethical committee approval is needed as the assignment is not dealing with clinical patient issues; otherwise, confidentiality should be ensured by the implementers, as needed.