06 Amendment 0001 Questions.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 20 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Nutrition Toolkit Development Consultancy Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- 95332422Q0090
- Issued by
- Millennium Challenge Corporation
About this file
This document contains responses to questions regarding a solicitation by the Millennium Challenge Corporation for the development of a nutrition toolkit consultancy. The solicitation seeks a contractor to complete three main tasks over the period of one year, including conducting an analysis of economic models related to nutrition and developing nutrition training materials. For task one, the analysis should be universally applicable to candidate countries. While existing economic models are provided as examples, new models may also be proposed. Task two involves creating and training stakeholders on the nutrition materials, targeting audiences like MCC economists and country teams. Africa is identified as the most important region of focus for task three, which will involve piloting and implementing the developed model with MCC support depending on the complexity of the model. The responses indicate flexibility on timelines if a shorter duration is possible, and preference for a fully deployable model that does not require ongoing contractor involvement post delivery.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| 05 95332422Q0090.pdf | ||
| 01 SOW.docx | DOCX document | |
| 05 95332422Q0029.pdf | ||
| 01 SOW.docx | DOCX document |
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Sheet1
| Responses to Questions 95332422Q0090 Nutrition Toolkit Development | ||
| # | Question | MCC Response |
| 1 | Regarding the process for proposal submission, do you expect to receive any formal notice of interest before the submission of the formal proposal/quotation? | We really don't know |
| 2 | In terms of project timelines, do you have any expectations on how long each task would take? You indicate that tasks 1 and 2 are expected to be completed within a year, but are you open to shorter timelines? | Please consider that MCC may require 10-30 days to provide feedback on draft deliverables |
| 3 | For task 1, do you have any focus country, set of countries, or region that will or should guide the analysis and toolkit development process? | Suggest materials be universally applicable to MCC candidate countries |
| 4 | For task 1, you provide a set of economic models and tools to serve as guides (e.g., the HRV and SEEMS models). Do you prefer that we anchor our work on those or are you looking to expand beyond them and bring in new models where necessary? | New models proposed will be evaluated by the MCC Economic Assessment (EA) department for their acceptability |
| 5 | For task 2, while you provide a breakdown of the audiences that these trainings would reach, we wanted a bit more clarity on the number of trainings and expectations. Would you expect two trainings (one for LAE and related, another for DPE and related) or would you expect a series of trainings based on the level of stakeholder (e.g., one for senior leadership, one for practice groups, one for host country teams)? | The first phase consists of creating and then training on the materials. The envisioned audiences include MCC economists, LAE and HCD practice groups, and then country teams and partners in considering either nutrition projects or benefit streams from non-nutrition work. |
| 6 | For task 3, do you have any country or region in mind to serve as a focus? Is there any project in the works currently that you anticipate would serve as a focus? | Africa is likely to be the most important region, but the model should be applicable globally. We do not have a nutrition project as of now, but would like to add benefit streams to some current projects under development. |
| 7 | For task 3, what level of involvement and support would you require from the contractor? Would this support be an ongoing touchpoint for information and implementation advice, or would this require a more involved implementation support where the contractor would be running or directing the pilot development? | The level of involvement depends on the model. Ideally, it would be fully deployable by MCC after the deliverables. However, if a more complex model is needed, MCC may need more support – but the preference is to a model that MCC can use without it |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .