Amendment 0009 for the NOFO APS to Announce two new tech areas FINAL.pdf

Amendment 0009 for the NOFO APS No: 95332418N0002

NOFO APS Name: “PARTNERSHIPS with MCC Program”

The purpose of Amendment 0009 is to:

I. Announce two additional technical areas (the technical areas will be numbered based on the initial numbering in original NOFO):

a. Technical Area #7: Long-Term Evaluation Capacity Building

b. Technical Area #8: National Infrastructure Master Planning

II. Respond to the questions for the Technical Area #3 Agribusiness in Niger.

III. Announce results for the Technical Area #2 Urban Growth Analysis and Urban Management, and provide an updated applications summary table.

I. MCC is adding two additional technical areas: Technical area #7 Long-Term Evaluation

Capacity Building and the Technical area #8 National Infrastructure Master Planning (Technical area #8 is a one-time call, see explanation below), and the original NOFO has been amended throughout the document. Specifically the added changes are:

Cover Letter:

7. Technical Area #7 Long-Term Evaluation Capacity Building

8. Technical Area #8: National Infrastructure Master Planning

Key Dates:

1. For the Technical area #7 Long-Term Evaluation Capacity Building the key dates will follow the original NOFO key dates with all remaining windows announced;

2. For the Technical area #8: National Infrastructure Master Planning, this is a one-time call opportunity and the Concept Papers for Phase I are due on May 18, 2018 at 2.00 pm ET. After this deadline this technical area will be considered removed from the APS and no further Concept

Notes will be accepted.

SECTION A. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Technical Area #7 Long-Term Evaluation Capacity Building

Introduction

The Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) seeks to partner with research organizations, non-profits, and universities to co-design, develop, and implement new technical recommendations and methodological guidance related to evidence gathering methods. Since its inception, MCC has been dedicated to the idea of rigorously evaluating every project and producing evidence that can inform future policy decisions. To further our efforts towards this goal, MCC strives to build capacity in partner countries to conduct evaluations and to make use of the data and evidence produced by evaluations. This type of technical assistance can help support MCC’s evaluations during the Compact lifetime, and also promote evidence based policy making in the long-term.

Trainings and Workshops:

MCC seeks to collaborate further with Millennium Challenge Accounts (MCAs) and partner governments to conduct trainings for public officials in MCC partner countries to sensitize participants to the need for evaluations and support an understanding of fundamental evaluation concepts and general skills to conduct evaluations. The target audience includes technical staff that can work directly with evaluators, as well as higher-level ministers who can be champions of evaluations. The trainings would ideally be held 2-3 times during the Compact life cycle (including the 2 years in Development and 5 years in

Implementation). During Compact Development, the trainings would help sensitize our partners to the need for evaluation work. Towards the end of Compact Implementation further training would help ensure the sustainability of our programs by promoting the use of the evidence generated by our evaluations in future policy and programming. Trainings and workshops should:

Promote the importance of designing public policies informed by evidence, and the challenges faced by decision makers.

Develop competencies in public officials regarding processes of evaluation of projects, programs, and public policies that facilitate economic and social development.

Impart knowledge of methodologies and tools for project evaluation, programs, and public policies, generating understanding about their rigorousness.

Foster the development of capacities in monitoring and evaluation for the project management team.

MCC has worked on several initiatives to date to further progress in these areas. In several countries

MCC has worked with the MCAs to organize evidence workshops, conduct capacity building for national statistical offices, and sensitize government officials to the need for evaluation work and how to use evaluations results. MCC has learned that one-time trainings are not as effective as sustained technical support. In addition, the information given needs to be tailored to the audience as well. High level officials do not need or have interest in the statistical methodology of an evaluation, but technical staff will use that knowledge frequently.

Long-term technical assistance

Aside from conducting trainings, it maybe be worthwhile to offer country partners longer-term technical assistance to support the culture of evidence-based policy making and help institutionalize those principles. This may take the form of an individual advisor or consultant to the government or refresher trainings for public officials in technical roles.

Countries and POP

The opportunities might include MCC Compact Countries (but not limited to) – Lesotho, Kosovo, Timor-

Leste and Togo. The estimated period of performance is three years.

Technical Area #8: National Infrastructure Master Planning

Summary

MCC is seeking experienced partners to support national infrastructure master planning in Threshold and

Compact eligible countries.

Since its inception MCC has funded $11.7 billion in projects in emerging markets primarily in the energy, water and sanitation, transportation and vertical structures/facilities sectors. Through this focus on critical infrastructure needs, MCC has developed deep experience in sector specific infrastructure planning, development and implementation. Increasingly MCC is undertaking sector specific master plans (such as power sector master plan or generation or transmission system master plan) and routinely reviews and builds on sector-specific mater plans in the process of identifying potential investments in a country.

Infrastructure master planning is critical for identifying opportunities for coordinated and complementary investments among public sector, private sector, and civil society partners; and the rise of blended finance in emerging markets further underscores the value of comprehensive planning from project conception to closure. MCC sees an opportunity to strategically expand the impact of its sector specific infrastructure planning experience in its portfolio to integrated infrastructure master planning at a national level.

National level infrastructure master planning would deliver value to MCC eligible country governments by assisting them in prioritizing and coordinating investments (e.g., Public Private Partnerships) with those of technical and financial partners including the private sector, and could inform possible MCC

Compact investments, depending on the implementation model developed by MCC and the selected partner(s).

By using a partnership approach, MCC is seeking to blend its experience and engagement model with that of an organization that brings experience in both national level infrastructure master planning and implementation, so that recommendations developed for MCC eligible countries are both practical and actionable. MCC’s engagement with MCC eligible countries occurs at the highest levels of government and broadly throughout ministries, agencies, beneficiaries and affected communities themselves. This level of engagement seeks to ensure that MCC programs are informed by all available relevant information and in consultation with local stakeholders as well as beneficiaries themselves. MCC expects to engage stakeholders with a similar approach on this partnership, especially bi-lateral and multi-lateral institutions that also develop sector specific master plans. Beyond the government and stakeholder engagement, MCC also brings its deep experience of infrastructure planning and execution in emerging markets to the partnership.

MCC expects that partners will likewise bring not only financial resources, but their own infrastructure master planning processes, procedures, experience and dedicated human resources. A partner should have experience in infrastructure sectors including transport, energy and water. A competitive partner would provide the capability to identify the synergies that can arise when infrastructure planning for sectors is coordinated at a national level. A partner should be able to identify high-priority medium-to-long term investment opportunities with a strategy to mobilize financial resources. The partner would rely on a data-driven approach that justifies infrastructure investments with expected outputs.

MCC is seeking partners to develop a methodology and create national level infrastructure master plans in one or more MCC eligible countries. While MCC has initial ideas for implementation of the partnership, MCC expects to co-create the partnership. While the format and content of formal deliverables for the partnerships will be mutually-defined, MCC anticipates that the main output of the partnership will be an actionable detailed national infrastructure master plan. MCC expects the partnership to last for three years.

MCC aspires to conduct a co-creation session with prospective partners whose Concept Notes will be accepted for a Complete Application, Phase 2, during the week of May 28th. The co-creation session would be in-person in Washington, DC. MCC desires to receive Phase 2 Applications from selected prospective partner(s) on/about June 15, 2018. The final Phase 2 Application date will be confirmed with selected prospective partner(s) during the co-creation session.

ESTIMATED FUNDING AND NUMBER OF AWARDS

7. Technical area #7 Long-Term Evaluation Capacity Building – approximately $300,000.

8. Technical area #8: MCC Infrastructure Master Planning – approximately $500,000.

MCC may choose to make no award, one award, or multiple awards for each of Technical areas 7 & 8.

II. Please see below the responses to questions for the Technical Area #3 Agribusiness in Niger:

I. Questions and Request for Clarification

A. General Questions

1. Estimated Timeline for Phase 1 and Phase 2

When will the review and selection process begin for Phase 1, and approximately how long will the process take before all respondents are informed and invited to participate in the next phase?

A - Please see the information about the process in the Amendment 0006. Generally the applications received for each window will be reviewed on a rolling basis and a response will be provided in a timely manner. Information on applications received will be published regularly with the upcoming amendment.

2. Estimated Start of Project

Approximately when will the Project itself commence?

A - A start date would depend on the nature of the partnership concept proposed. The timelines are developed individually together with the applicants during the co-creation and Phase II.

3. Local Partner Requirements and Arrangement

a. Is it a requirement for local partners to be specifically identified in Phase 1 (e.g., Name of

Organization), or can we provide a list of potential local partners by types of organization (e.g., Non-

Profit, Local Enterprise, Government Agency, Research Institution)?

A - It would be helpful to include at least prospective local partners in Phase 1.

b. What other information and requirements does MCC need for the local partners?

A - Depending on the nature of the each partnership application, MCC may communicate additional information needed during co-creation and Phase II. Please see sub recipient monitoring and management requirements in 2CFR 200, sections 330, 331 and 332.

B. Specific / Page-Referenced Questions

1. Page 9, Last Paragraph under Technical Area 3: Agribusiness in Niger

a. “Selected organizations will be expected to engage with MCA-Niger as well as

MCC to finalize the implementation.”

Could MCC please further explain and clarify the structure of the engagement between the selected organizations, MCA-Niger, and MCC?

A – MCA-Niger is the country-level implementing agency for the MCC compact. MCC funds the compact and provides technical direction and oversight to MCA-Niger. For implementation of the partnership, the applicant organization would ultimately need to work directly with MCA-Niger.

MCC

b. “MCA-Niger will employ a Private Sector Engagement Manager who will serve as the primary on-the-ground contact for selected partners.”

i. Could MCC please clarify the role of the Private Sector Engagement Manager and provide some specific examples of the responsibilities of the Private Sector Engagement Manager?

ii. What is the envisioned reporting structure and ways of working between the Private Sector

Engagement Manager and the project resources of the selected organization?

A- The Private Sector Engagement Manager is responsible for engaging private sector investment and partnerships to support Niger compact activities. The Private Sector Engagement Manager develops and executes the Private Sector Engagement Plan, which, among other things, could include working the compact project leads to identify market opportunities for products produced by compact beneficiaries, developing relationships with local and international private sector agribusiness, and encouraging private sector participation in the fertilizer and input sectors. A full job description for the Private Sector Engagement Manager can be provided to the applicant during the co-creation stage. The partner organization is expected to manage and oversee their own project resources. Therefore the relationship and interaction with the Private Sector

Engagement Manager is primarily to ensure coordination with the activities of the compact. Any reporting and M&E requirements of the partnership will be defined during the co-creation process and in the partnership agreement.

c. “Applications should specify the support requested from MCC/MCA-Niger.” Could MCC please provide additional specifics (e.g., financial, technical support), and does MCC require respondents to specify such support in the Concept Note in Phase 1?

A - It is up to the applicant to determine what support they are requesting from MCC based on review of the MCC Compact with the Government of Niger. Yes this is required in the Concept Note as this determines the scope of the APS application.

d. “While applications are expected to reach commercial viability within a reasonable time period, MCC may be able to provide limited co-investment in projects that partner with local cooperatives, farmers groups, enterprises, and/or women’s and youth groups in MCC’s target intervention areas (see

MCC Compact for details).”

Could MCC please elaborate on what would be considered “reasonable time period” and how will MCC decide on its co-investment, what will be the criteria to determine co-investment from MCC?

A - This depends on the specific nature of each application, but as a rule of thumb, we would like projects to be self-sustaining the latest after the end of year 5 of the compact. Co-investment in implementation will be the decision of MCA-Niger based on the merits of the proposal as outlined in the technical criteria. It is requested that the proposing partner bring a contribution of at least 50% to the project.

2. Page 25, Content of Concept Paper

a. Question 2: “Discussion of method of approach, amount of effort to be employed, types of resources to be contributed by the respondent; this should include a distinction between the components that can be accomplished during the design and development stage of a compact and the components that relate or extend to the compact implementation stage.” Please elaborate on the distinction between design and development stage and what MCC expects respondents to focus on when providing method of approach and resourcing pan for each phase/stage.

A - The Niger opportunity is in the implementation phase so you do not need to address the design and development stage of the compact.

b. Question 7: “Proposed estimated budget cost and any other support being requested by the respondent (e.g., funds, facilities, equipment, materials, personnel resources, etc.), based on the preliminary description of the projects and intended to be the basis for discussion with MCC.”

i. Does MCC require respondents to include details of the cost-sharing commitment and/or leverage funding in the proposed estimated budget in the Concept Paper for Phase 1?

A - Phase 1 should include the overall vision for cost-sharing/leverage - i.e. what the partners would bring in terms of financial or in-kind contribution and what would be expected from MCC/MCA-Niger and the amounts. More detailed budgets would be anticipated if the concept advances to Phase II.

ii. Does MCC also require all local partners to offer cost-sharing and what would be the implication if the local partners are not able to meet the 2% minimum cost-sharing requirement?

A- -No. The cost-share requirement is for the proposed partnership as a whole, either prime or subpartners. As part of the partnership design, there may be local entities that are fully paid for their services.

III. Below are results for the Technical Area #2 Urban Growth Analysis and Urban

Management.

The list of organizations that applied to NOFO but were not selected to continue to Phase II for the

Technical Area #2 Urban Growth Analysis and Urban Management are:

1. Arcadis U.S., Inc.

2. The Brookings Institution

Updated applications summary:

MCC is looking forward to receiving applications for Window 4, which closes on May 31, 2018.

Organizations are invited to submit Concept Papers for any of the Technical Areas that remain open under the APS.

Jacqueline H. Naranjo

Agreement Officer

End of Amendment 0009

1 Growth Diagnostics and Economic Policy Reform $100,000 to $250,000 CFID Harvard

Arcadis U.S., Inc.

The Brookings

Institution

3 Agribusiness in Niger $50,000 - $500,000 Kuli-Kili Netafim Ltd

4 DCLI in Tanzania and Cote d’Ivoire $50,000 - $300,000

AidData Westat, Inc.

Portland

State

University

IMC

Worldwide

MSI

High Frequency Monitoring Data (El Salvador Roads) $150,000 - $250,000

LIRNEasia

Deloitte Touche

Tohmatsu India

LLP

Cloudburst

Consulting

Group, Inc Urban Institute

7 Long-Term Evaluation Capacity Building appr. $300,000

8 MCC Infrastructure Master Planning appr. $500,000

Green - phase II SC review

Red - in co-creation

Blue - rejected

Purple - has not been evaluated yet

Black - Phase I SC review

W3N/N Program Areas Budget Range per award W1 W2

Data Collection and Analysis in Sri Lanka $200,000 - $500,000

100,000 - $200,000

Urban Growth Analysis and Urban Management2

High Frequency Monitoring Data $200,000 - $400,000