Attachment 1_Pre-Proposal Conference Presentation_NGO Advocacy for Good Governance.pdf

Pre-Proposal Conference

USAID/Timor-Leste NGO Advocacy for Good Governance

RFP No. 72047220R00001

November 6, 2019, 9 am - 12 pm

Venue: Orchid Room, Timor Plaza

Dili, Timor-Leste

Agenda

Welcome and Opening Remarks Mr. James Wright

USAID/Timor-Leste Mission Director

Introductions All Participants

Presentation on the USAID/Timor-Leste NGO

Advocacy for Good Governance Activity Objectives

Ms. Teresa Miller

General Development Office Director

Summary Proposals Requirements and Proposals

Evaluation

Mr. Gregory Wang

Contracting Officer

Plenary Discussion on Questions All Participants

Closing Remarks Mr. Carl Seagrave

Program Office Director

Light Refreshments/Networking All Participants

Activity Goal

The goal of this Activity is to strengthen the organizational, advocacy, research, networking, and financial capacity of 5-10 local advocacy

NGOs in Timor-Leste while expanding the broader NGO enabling environment. Participating NGOs will be more responsive to community demand by providing sustainable high-quality advocacy services and independently raising long-term operating revenue.

Expected Results

Objective 1: Strengthen NGO Organizational Capacity

• Organizational capacity for participating NGOs to sustainably implement their mandate improved;

• NGOs demonstrate a commitment to integrating women, youth, and other marginalized groups throughout the organization;

• Participating NGOs adopt human resource systems with gender-neutral hiring and promotion policies that include professional mentoring and leadership opportunities for women and other marginalized groups.

Objective 2: Improve Advocacy, Research/Analysis, and Networking Capacity in Response to Constituents

• Community awareness of and satisfaction with participating NGO advocacy services increased;

• Participating NGOs engagement with and responsiveness to constituents, particularly women, youth, and other marginalized groups increased;

• Participating NGOs adapt and respond to constituent input;

• Participating NGOs knowledge and expertise for research, policy analysis, and use of evidence based advocacy increased;

• Participating NGOs research, analysis, and presentation (e.g. writing and speaking) skills improved;

• Like-minded NGOs effectively collaborate to influence policy, responsiveness, and/or delivery of government services;

Objective 3: More Diverse and Regular Revenue Streams

• Performance of participating NGOs in mobilizing financial resources improved;

• Sustainable revenue received from alternative funders e.g. the private sector, philanthropists increased;

• Participating NGOs use market-based approaches to attract investment as a means to accelerate progress on the Journey to Self-Reliance.

Objective 4: Promote an Enabling Environment Fostering Independent NGOs

• Laws and policies impacting the NGO operating environment (e.g. tax, access to information, right to assembly) increasingly include public participation for policy making and government decision-making;

• Identify and reduce policy, legal, regulatory, and customary barriers for women and other marginalized groups from participating in advocacy services and otherwise influencing policy making and government decision-making.

• Increase NGO participation in the decision making on policies, regulations and laws governing

NGO operations.

RFP Requirements

Award: Firm Fixed-Price and Cost Reimbursement

Hybrid Type Contract

Period of Performance: Anticipated 5-year

Funding: Not to Exceed $9,900,000 (650,000 Grants

Under Contract)

Tentative Start date: o/a May 2020

Geographic Code: 937

Payment Schedule

Scheduled Management and Performance Outputs:

NO.

DUE DATE

MANAGEMENT REPORT/

DELIVERABLE

Management Outputs

See Section F.5

Approval of Annual Work Plan

-Year 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5

1.25%

(.25% / year)

TBD

See Section F.5

Approval of Monitoring, Evaluation and

Learning Plan .25%

TBD

See Section F.5

Gender Equality and Social Inclusion (GESI)

Analysis .25%

TBD

See Section F.5

Approval of Annual Reports

-Years 1, 2, 3, and 4

1%

(.25% / year)

TBD

See Section F.5

Approval of Final Report .25%

TBD

NO.

DUE DATE

MANAGEMENT REPORT/

DELIVERABLE

TOTAL COST

Performance Outputs

TBD

TBD TBD

TBD

TBD

TBD TBD

TBD

Proposal Evaluation

1. TECHNICAL EVALUATION FACTORS

a. Performance Work Statement (PWS) and Technical Approach

b. Staffing Plan and Management Approach

c. Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning Plan (MEL Plan)

1. EVALUATION OF PAST PERFORMANCE

1. PRICE PROPOSAL EVALUATION

Source Selection: Best Value Determination Using Tradeoff Process

Technical Evaluation Factors

The evaluation factors are listed below in descending order of relative importance.

FACTOR 1 - PERFORMANCE WORK STATEMENT (PWS) AND TECHNICAL

APPROACH

The extent to which the Offeror’s proposed Performance Work Statement (PWS) and

Technical Approach demonstrates an understanding of current local and regional context and development challenges and convincingly presents a comprehensive, clear, and realistic strategy for achieving the objectives of the SOO.

FACTOR 2 - STAFFING PLAN AND MANAGEMENT APPROACH

The extent to which the Offeror convincingly demonstrates that the Staffing Plan and

Management Approach will ensure effective and efficient implementation of the proposed

PWS and achievement of the Activity objectives. This includes a review of the feasibility of the management and staffing plan and the efficiency and utility of the organizational structure.

FACTOR 3 - MONITORING, EVALUATION, AND LEARNING PLAN (MEL PLAN)

The quality and realism of the MEL Plan and how likely it will ensure quality standards are met.

Past Performance

● Quality of product or service

● Cost control

● Schedule

● Business relations

● Management of key personnel

● For prime Offeror who are not small business concerns, their utilization of Small

Business concerns as subcontractors

Price Proposal Evaluation

Evaluation of the price will include a price analysis to establish reasonableness of the

Offeror’s price including the reasonableness of the performance-based payment schedule.

If Grants Under Contract (GUC) are proposed by an Offeror, USAID will review the proposed schedule for the issuance of GUCs by the Offeror.

A price evaluation will not be performed on Offerors whose technical proposal is deemed technically unacceptable.

Technical Proposal Summary

Summary Technical Proposal (28 pages)

I. Cover Page (1 page)

II. Executive Summary (1 page)

III. Technical Approach (12 pages)

IV. Performance Work Statement (PWS) (4 pages)

V. Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning Plan (6 pages)

VI. Staffing Plan and Management Plan (4 pages)

VII. Annexes

III. Technical Approach

Provides how the PWS will be implemented but is not incorporated into the contract.

For the Technical Approach, the Offeror is required to present their solution as well as its approaches, methodologies, and activities broken down into its lowest activity level and linking tasks in a logical flow of interventions that achieve the four objectives of the Activity and the goal.

For this, the Offeror must present a narrative and diagram their Theory of Change and Results

Chain based on the PWS proposed as ANNEX A. The offeror my choose to keep the Theory of

Change in this SOO or propose a Theory of Change aligned with their approach. The Offeror’s technical approach and strategies must include proposed tasks and interventions to achieve the performance standards in the SOO (proposal must clearly qualify and quantify, when possible, these expected results).

IV. Performance Work Statement

Describes what work to be performed and how it will be measured. The PWS will be incorporated as part of the contract in Section C.

The PWS details what the Offeror will do to meet the objectives delineated within the SOO.

The PWS must demonstrate a capability to meet all the objectives requirements described in the SOO. The PWS must clearly articulate what actions the Offeror will perform, the quantifiable results of those actions which will lead to meeting the objective in the SOO (otherwise known as

“success”), measurable quality standards for all work performed, and what the Offeror will do to ensure the quality standards are met (otherwise known as quality control). Offeror must address the four objectives presented in the SOO in their PWS.

Annex B: Deliverables Metrics

In addition, the Offeror must provide a table that includes the name/title/description of the deliverable, due date, standard, and Acceptable Quality Level (AQL) as Annex B. The Offeror must provide results and deliverables for the activity separately.

Illustrative Deliverables Metrics Table:

Deliverables Due Date Performance Standard Acceptable Quality

Level (AQL)

Performance Assessment

Method

Number of USG-assisted organizations with increased performance improvement

Year 1: 5% over baseline; Year 2: 10% over baseline; Year 3: 15% over baseline; Year 4:

20% over baseline

Number of organizations with increased performance improvement:

Overall HICD scores increase year over year.

HICD Scores

V. Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning Plan

• The Offeror must provide a preliminary Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning

(MEL) Plan.

• The MEL plan must include

– 1) USAID/Timor-Leste NGO Advocacy for Good Governance Project

Performance Indicators, including Standard Foreign Assistance

Indicators aligned with the PWS, and

– 2) Performance Reporting Schedule.

• The Offeror will use the Theories of Change (TOC) and Results Chains (RC) methodology as the basis for achieving the objectives presented in the SOO and further refined in the proposed PWS. The MEL Plan must track progress towards achieving the desired results in the SOO, and meeting annual and life of activity targets.

• A full MEL Plan will be completed as outlined in Section F after award.

VI. Staffing Plan and Management Plan

A. Staffing Plan

• The Offeror must describe how the team composition (including technical staff, non-technical staff) demonstrates an appropriate balance of skills and expertise needed and contribute to successful implementation.

• Organogram of the staffing plan

• Proposed Key Personnel positions and qualifications (not specific individuals)

A. Management Approach

• The Offeror must clearly describe how the team with balance of skills and expertise will manage and execute the objectives described in the PWS and sustainably achieve the results in an efficient and effective manner.

• The Offeror must also clearly describe the role and business agreement of each subcontractor (if any) proposed, and the proposed approach for managing them.

• Mobilization plan

Planned Award Schedule

Solicitation Posted October 22, 2019

Due Date for Receipt of Questions October 30, 2019

Pre-Proposal Conference November 6, 2019

Amendment for Q&A November 14, 2019

Due Date for Proposals November 29, 2019

Review of Proposals December 2019 – January 2020

Selection of Competitive Range February 2020

Anticipated Award Date May 2020