MCC-16-RFQ-0204_-_Independent_Evaluation_Services_(Namibia_Tourism).pdf

PAGE 1 OF

1. REQUISITION NO.

2. CONTRACT NO. 3. AWARD/EFFECTIVE DATE 4. ORDER NO. 5. SOLICITATION NUMBER 6. SOLICITATION ISSUE DATE

a. NAME b. TELEPHONE NO. (No Collect Calls) 8. OFFER DUE DATE/LOCAL

TIME

9. ISSUED BY CODE 10. THIS ACQUISITION IS UNRESTRICTED OR SET ASIDE: % FOR:

SMALL BUSINESS

HUBZONE SMALL

BUSINESS

SERVICE-DISABLED

VETERAN-OWNED

SMALL BUSINESS

WOMEN-OWNED SMALL BUSINESS

(WOSB) ELIGIBLE UNDER THE WOMEN-OWNED

SMALL BUSINESS PROGRAM

EDWOSB

8(A)

NAICS:

SIZE STANDARD:

11. DELIVERY FOR FOB DESTINA-

TION UNLESS BLOCK IS

MARKED

SEE SCHEDULE

12. DISCOUNT TERMS

13a. THIS CONTRACT IS A

RATED ORDER UNDER

DPAS (15 CFR 700)

13b. RATING

14. METHOD OF SOLICITATION

RFQ IFB RFP

15. DELIVER TO CODE 16. ADMINISTERED BY CODE

17a. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR CODE FACILITY CODE 18a. PAYMENT WILL BE MADE BY CODE

TELEPHONE NO. DUNS: DUNS+4:

PHONE: FAX:

17b. CHECK IF REMITTANCE IS DIFFERENT AND PUT SUCH ADDRESS IN OFFER 18b. SUBMIT INVOICES TO ADDRESS SHOWN IN BLOCK 18a UNLESS BLOCK BELOW IS CHECKED

SEE ADDENDUM

19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24.

ITEM NO. SCHEDULE OF SUPPLIES/SERVICES QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT

(Use Reverse and/or Attach Additional Sheets as Necessary)

25. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA 26. TOTAL AWARD AMOUNT (For Govt. Use Only)

27a. SOLICITATION INCORPORATES BY REFERENCE FAR 52.212-1, 52.212-4. FAR 52.212-3 AND 52.212-5 ARE ATTACHED. ADDENDA ARE ARE NOT ATTACHED.

27b. CONTRACT/PURCHASE ORDER INCORPORATES BY REFERENCE FAR 52.212-4. FAR 52.212-5 IS ATTACHED. ADDENDA ARE ARE NOT ATTACHED

28. CONTRACTOR IS REQUIRED TO SIGN THIS DOCUMENT AND RETURN _______________ 29. AWARD OF CONTRACT: REF. ___________________________________ OFFER COPIES TO ISSUING OFFICE. CONTRACTOR AGREES TO FURNISH AND DATED ________________________________. YOUR OFFER ON SOLICITATION DELIVER ALL ITEMS SET FORTH OR OTHERWISE IDENTIFIED ABOVE AND ON ANY (BLOCK 5), INCLUDING ANY ADDITIONS OR CHANGES WHICH ARE ADDITIONAL SHEETS SUBJECT TO THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS SPECIFIED SET FORTH HEREIN IS ACCEPTED AS TO ITEMS:

30a. SIGNATURE OF OFFEROR/CONTRACTOR 31a. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA (SIGNATURE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER)

30b. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (TYPE OR PRINT) 30c. DATE SIGNED 31b. NAME OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (TYPE OR PRINT) 31c. DATE SIGNED

AUTHORIZED FOR LOCAL REPRODUCTION (REV. 2/2012)

PREVIOUS EDITION IS NOT USABLE Prescribed by GSA - FAR (48 CFR) 53.212

7. FOR SOLICITATION

INFORMATION CALL:

STANDARD FORM 1449

OFFEROR TO COMPLETE BLOCKS 12, 17, 23, 24, & 30

SOLICITATION/CONTRACT/ORDER FOR COMMERCIAL ITEMS 64

MCC-16-RFQ-0204 08-05-2016

Regina Maxwell (202) 521-7272

09-06-2016 @ 12PM ET

Millennium Challenge Corporation Contracts and Grants Management Division 1099 Fourteenth Street NW Suite 700, Attn: Regina Maxwell Washington DC 20005

X

N/A

Millennium Challenge Corporation

CGM

1099 Fourteenth Street NW, Suite 700 Washington DC 20005

Millennium Challenge Corporation Contracts and Grants Management Division 1099 Fourteenth Street NW Suite 700 Washington DC 20005

Interior Business Center M/S D-2773 7301 West Mansfield Avenue Lakewood CO 80235-2230

This is a combined synopsis/solicitation for commercial items prepared in accordance with the format in FAR Subpart 12.6 and conducted per the procedures of FAR Subpart 13.5, as supplemented with additional information included in this notice.

MCC seeks a Contractor to provide Independent Evaluation Services for the Namibia Tourism Evaluation Project.

See enclosed solicitation and all attachments for pertinent details.

See CONTINUATION Page

X X

Regina E. Maxwell

MCC-16-RFQ-0204 - Namibia Tourism Evaluation Page 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICE/COSTS…………………………………………………………………………4

FAR 52.216-1 -- Type of Contract (APR 1984) Accounting and Appropriation Data Funding Type Limitation of Funds – Incrementally Funded Contracts Labor Rates & Other Direct Costs (ODCs)

DESCRIPTION/SPECIFICATIONS/STATEMENT OF WORK

Introduction Background Scope……………………………………………………………… Ex Post Evaluation Roles and Responsibilities:

Tasks……………………………………………………………… Task 1: Evaluability Assessment Task 2: Develop Evaluation Design Report Task 3: Obtain and/or Develop Evaluation Data Task 4: Develop Final Evaluation Report, Update Economic Analysis, Prepare (any corresponding) Data Files, Conduct Dissemination

PACKAGING AND MARKING

Disclaimer for Deliverables

INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE

Inspection of Reports Quality Control Plan

DELIVERIES OR PERFORMANCE

Period of Performance Place of Performance Reporting Requirements Travel Requirements Deliverables Deliverable Instructions Notice Regarding Late Delivery Acceptance Criteria

CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION DATA

MCC 52.201-70 Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) and/or Project Monitor (PM) (JULY 2012)

MCC 52.232-70 INVOICE INSTRUCTIONS (MCC CUSTOM)

SPECIAL CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS

MCC 52.203-70 -- CONTRACTOR NON-DISCLOSURE AGREEMENT (JULY 2012)

MCC 52.204-70 SECURITY REQUIREMENTS FOR CONTRACTOR PERSONNEL (MAY 2013)

MCC 52.209-70 ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST: PRECLUSION FROM IMPLEMENTATION CONTRACT (JULY 2012)31

MCC 52.232-72 LIMITATION OF FUNDS – INCREMENTALLY FUNDED CONTRACTS (NOV 2006)

MCC 52.232-73 Travel Reimbursement (MAY 2013)

MCC 52.232-74 ODC REIMBURSEMENT (JAN 2007)

MCC 52.242-70 CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT RATING SYSTEM (CPARS) REGISTRATION (AUG 2011)

MCC 52.243-70 INCREASE IN SERVICES (OCT 2006)

MCC 52.245-70 CONTRACTOR ACQUIRED MCC GOVERNMENT PROPERTY OVERSEAS (JULY 2012)

KEY PERSONNEL

KEY PERSONNEL POSITION DESCRIPTIONS

KEY PERSONNEL QUALIFICATIONS

OVERALL STAFFING REQUIREMENTS

Provision on Peer Review and Posting of Reports Provision on Insurance Maintenance Disclaimer for Deliverables Provision on Stakeholder Input for Evaluation Products Provision on Human Subjects Protection Personally Identifiable Information and Confidentiality Provision on Delivered Work Product Free from 3rd Party Rights

PART II – CONTRACT CLAUSES

52.212-4 CONTRACT TERMS AND CONDITIONS—COMMERCIAL ITEMS/ALTERNATE I (MAY 2015/MAY 2014)

52.212-5 CONTRACT TERMS AND CONDITIONS REQUIRED TO IMPLEMENT STATUTES OR EXECUTIVE ORDERS—COMMERCIAL ITEMS

(JUN 2016)

52.214-34 SUBMISSION OF OFFERS IN THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE (APR 1991)

52.214-35 SUBMISSION OF OFFERS IN U.S. CURRENCY (APR 1991)

FAR 52.252-2 - CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE (FEB 1998)

PART III – LIST OF DOCUMENTS, EXHIBITS AND OTHER ATTACHMENTS

Annex A – Tourism Project Description

MCC-16-RFQ-0204 - Namibia Tourism Evaluation Page 3

Annex B – Program logic diagram Annex C– Economic model for ENP Activity Annex D – Economic model for Tourism Marketing Activity Annex E – Project Evaluability Assessment Tool Annex F – Evaluation Services Travel SOW template Annex G – Evaluation Design Report Outline Annex H – MCC’s Evaluation Management and Review Process Annex I – Data Collection Plan Template Annex J – Annex MCC Informed Consent Statement Templates (for qualitative and quantitative data collection) Annex K – Evaluation Final Report Template Annex L – MCC Data Documentation and Anonymization Requirements Annex M – Evaluator Progress Report and Work Plan Annex N - Medical Accommodation Procedures Annex O - Travel Form – DS 4086 Annex P - Travel Form – DS 4086A Annex Q - Past Performance Questionnaire

– REPRESENTATIONS, CERTIFICATIONS AND OTHER STATEMENTS OF OFFERORS OR RESPONDENTS

INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS

INQUIRIES/QUESTIONS CONCERNING THE SOLICITATION

EXCLUSION OF QUOTES AND PRE-AWARD COMMUNICATIONS WITH OFFERORS

QUOTATION DUE DATE

QUOTATION RESPONSE

QUOTATION VOLUMES

QUOTATION FORMAT

PAGE LIMITS

PREPARATION OF VOLUME I – TECHNICAL QUOTATION

PREPARATION OF VOLUME II – COST QUOTATION

SECTION M – EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

FAR 52.212-1 – INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS – COMMERCIAL ITEMS (OCT 2015)

FAR 52.212-2 – EVALUATION – COMMERCIAL ITEMS (OCT 2014)

EVALUATION FACTOR 1 – TECHNICAL CAPABILITY

EVALUATION FACTOR 2 – PAST PERFORMANCE

EVALUATION FACTOR 3 – PRICE

EVALUATION METHODOLOGY

BASIS FOR AWARD

MCC-16-RFQ-0204 - Namibia Tourism Evaluation Page 4

SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICE/COSTS

B.1.1. B.1. PRICE/COST SCHEDULE

CLIN

Description of Supplies/Services Qty U/I Unit Price

Amount

0001 BASE PERIOD

DIRECT LABOR

Period of Performance: TBD Estimated 18 months PoP Start: TBD PoP End: TBD

1 LO ______________ ______________

0002 BASE PERIOD

OTHER DIRECT COSTS (ODCs) Period of Performance: TBD Estimated 18 months PoP Start: TBD PoP End: TBD

1 LO ______________ ______________

TOTAL ESTIMATED PRICE:* _______________

*MCC reserves the right to set the contract ceiling above the total estimated price to account for potential deviations due to unforeseen circumstances. However, the Contractor will be expected to perform in good faith in accordance with their proposed cost estimates.

FAR 52.216-1 -- Type of Contract (APR 1984)

The Government contemplates award of a Time-and-Materials (T&M) contract resulting from this solicitation.

(End of Provision)

Accounting and Appropriation Data

[RESERVED]

Funding Type

This contract will be funded, at time of award, with no-year Due Diligence funding.

Limitation of Funds – Incrementally Funded Contracts

In accordance with clause MCC 52.232-72, “Limitation of Funds – Incrementally Funded Contracts,” funds in the amount of [TBD] have been allotted to this contract. It is contemplated that funds now obligated under this contract will cover the work to be performed until [TBD].

The Contractor shall not perform work on the contract which exceeds the total amount actually allotted by the Government to the contract. The Government is not obligated to reimburse the Contractor for costs incurred in excess of the total amount allotted by the Government to this contract. The contractor assumes the risk for any increased costs beyond what the Government obligates.

Labor Rates & Other Direct Costs (ODCs)

Labor rates at the inception of a contract period will carry through as “Fixed-Price” without adjustment for the life of that contract period.

Direct Labor Rates and ODCs: Using the template below, Offerors must include all proposed labor categories, MCC-16-RFQ-0204 - Namibia Tourism Evaluation Page 5 fully-burdened hourly rates and Other Direct Costs (ODCs) for each contract year identified in B.1.

Base Period – Period of Performance TBD (est. 18 months) Item # Description(2) U/I Qty Rate Total

LABOR

hr.

hr.

hr.

hr.

Labor Sub-Total ODCs(1) 0002 Subcontract(s) – Data Collection Lot 1 $150,000.00 $150,000.00

ODC Sub-Total Grand Total (Base Period)

NOTE (1): MCC anticipates approximately $150,000 worth of data collection subcontracting costs for which the requirements are unknown at this time. To be fair to all vendors providing a quotation, a plug number is utilized for data collection subcontracting costs in the respective years in which data collection is expected to occur. However, if you believe this plug number is inadequate, please advise during the Question and Answer period of the solicitation. “Data Collection Subcontract(s),” as used in the tables above, refers only to the cost of subcontracting a data collection firm. It does not include any prime contractor labor associated with overseeing/managing the data collection effort; this time should be incorporated into the level of effort proposed under the respective “Direct Labor” CLIN. Subcontracting costs for data collection are subject to the requirements of FAR 52.244-2, Subcontracts.

NOTE (2): A job description shall be included for each labor category proposed. The job description must identify essential and non-essential tasks that are assigned to a specific position. It must also identify reporting relationships and shall also describe required qualifications, minimum requirements, working conditions and desirable qualifications.

(End of SECTION B)

MCC-16-RFQ-0204 - Namibia Tourism Evaluation Page 6

DESCRIPTION/SPECIFICATIONS/STATEMENT OF WORK

Introduction

C.1.1. The Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) is a U.S. Government corporation whose mission is to provide assistance that will support economic growth and poverty reduction in carefully selected countries that demonstrate a commitment to just and democratic governance, economic freedom, and investments in their citizenry. For more information on the MCC, please visit www.mcc.gov.

Background

C.2.1. MCC signed a $304.5 million Compact with the Government of the Republic of Namibia (GRN) in July 2008 with the primary goal of reducing poverty through economic growth. The Compact, which entered into force in September 2009 and closed in September 2014, focused on three key sectors: Agriculture, Education, and Tourism.

C.2.2. The Tourism Project was designed to (a) improve the management and infrastructure of Etosha National Park (“ENP”); (b) enhance the marketing of Namibian tourism; and, (c) develop the capacity of communal conservancies to attract investments in ecotourism and capture a greater share of the revenue generated by tourism in Namibia. Together, these Activities were expected to generate income and create employment opportunities for some of the poorest populations in Namibia, while conserving the natural resources that serve as the foundation for the tourism industry. This evaluation will focus on the first two Activities, which are described in more detail below. (A more comprehensive description of the Tourism Project is available in Annex B and a description of the logic of the Activities to be evaluated is available in Annex A.)

C.2.3. The MCC M&E Policy states that every Project must undergo an independent evaluation.

Scope

C.3.1. MCC requires a Contractor to design and implement an ex post evaluation of the Namibia Compact’s Improved Management and Infrastructure of Etosha National Park and Marketing Namibian Tourism Activities.

C.3.2. This consultancy is expected to cover an ex post evaluation of two Namibia Activities. As described in the Tasks section below, the evaluation will have two phases, with the decision to pursue Phase II dependent on design decisions made in Phase I.

C.3.3. For the purposes of the technical and financial proposal, offerors should provide their estimate for level of effort by task and team member to complete Phase I and Phase II tasks. MCC has estimated approximately three (3) trips over the entire period of performance. Actual travel costs will depend on the agreed evaluation plan and work plan. MCC has also determined that data collection will be included in this requirement. However, actual data collection plans will need to be proposed and justified on the basis of an approved evaluation design.

C.3.4. Improved Management and Infrastructure of Etosha National Park (the “ENP Activity”): This Activity aimed to improve the management capacity of ENP, promote private sector investment in and around Namibia’s national parks, increase tourism revenue nationally, and benefit rural communal conservancies. It included the following sub-activities:

MCC-16-RFQ-0204 - Namibia Tourism Evaluation Page 7

C.3.4.1. Policy reform and technical assistance to support improved management of ENP – aimed to improve the management capacity of ENP by providing technical assistance and a study of tourism carrying capacity and potential tourism investments in and around ENP. This technical assistance included helping (i) ENP to achieve a more balanced budget through growth in park visitors, an increase in park usage fees, and concessions awarded to the private sector, (ii) accelerate reforms in how the Ministry of Environment and Tourism (MET) manages ENP, and (iii) support MET’s efforts to meet certain performance targets on which MCC funding was contingent.

C.3.4.2. Infrastructure investments in management centers and staff housing – funded the construction of management centers and staff housing in ENP with the aim of improving work conditions and thus attracting and retaining high quality staff to apply their skills in the Park. The construction included: 89 new staff houses; renovation of 30 older homes; and infrastructure at Olifanstrus Rest Camp.

C.3.4.3. Provision of road maintenance and game translocation equipment – included the provision of road maintenance and game translocation equipment to enable ENP staff to improve the tourist experience in the Park and also in conservancies receiving game species from the Park.

C.3.5. Marketing Namibian Tourism (the “Marketing Activity”): The Marketing Activity aimed to increase tourist arrivals to Namibia by expanding marketing to North American tourists, developing and marketing local and regional tourism route packages, and developing a fully interactive website. It included the following sub-activities:

C.3.5.1. Destination marketing to the North American Market – aimed to grow the Namibian tourism industry by carrying out an innovative, trade-focused marketing campaign to increase both arrivals from the North American (NA) market and the number of NA tourism businesses that offered tours and packages to Namibia. This effort involved working closely with the Namibia Tourism Board (NTB) and industry stakeholders to develop and market itineraries that showcased tourism products and services offered by communal conservancies, joint ventures (JV), and locally developed and managed experiences throughout Namibia; and conducting a public relations and marketing campaign to increase recognition and awareness of Namibia’s offerings.

C.3.5.2. The destination marketing sub-activity was comprised of five components: (1) Public Relations, (2) Online Marketing Tools, (3) Online Training, (4) Trade Show-Road Show, and

(5) Festivals and Events, with the aim of increasing tourist arrivals from North America, growing operators who sell Namibia and increasing benefit to Namibians engaged in tourism across the country.

C.3.5.3. The Public Relations component aimed to conduct a targeted campaign to increase the recognition of Namibia’s products and experiences to select North American audiences. The Online Marketing Tools component aimed to develop and distribute widely a variety of innovative tools in order to strengthen the trade market linkages between Namibia and North America.

C.3.5.4. The Online Training component aimed to ensure that the Namibia tourism trade – including those in local communities and conservancy joint ventures – developed the capacity to use online marketing tools, and through their use, maximized outreach and linkages to the North America trade. The Trade Show-Road Show component aimed to provide direct, person to person links between Namibia’s trade and the North American trade, through carefully selected participation in Trade Shows, along with Road Shows and selected speaking engagements. Finally, the Festival and Events component aimed to raise the profile of

MCC-16-RFQ-0204 - Namibia Tourism Evaluation Page 8 existing events in Namibia and create new events that would motivate potential tourists to visit Namibia.

C.3.5.5. Development and marketing of local and regional tourism routes – aimed to develop local and regional tourism routes in Namibia and improve the country’s offerings and appeal to international (and domestic) travelers, thereby increasing rural communities’ prospects for improving their livelihoods through tourism enterprise.

C.3.5.6. This sub-activity focused on developing three self-drive travel routes in Northern Namibia.

While the Namibia tourism sector has grown steadily since independence in 1990, it is still reliant on its peak tourist and travel season where the country sees an influx of international visitors, most of which come from neighboring Angola and South Africa, as well as Germany and other European countries. The aim of this sub-activity was to diversify tourism products and experiences and increase the benefits to communities in rural areas. A massive 42% of Namibia’s land area is under conservation management. Over 240,000 rural Namibians participate in the conservancy program, underwritten in large part by the largest number of Joint Ventures with rural communities in any destination in Africa.

C.3.5.7. The three self-drive routes developed cover most of the northern regions of Namibia where the majority of conservancies are located. The first route covers the north-western part of the country and focuses on the traditional culture of the Himba and Damara people and includes well-known tourist attractions such as Spitzkoppe, Brandberg, Twyfelfontein and Epupa Falls. The route links to Etosha National Park through the Galton Gate. This route is named the Arid Eden Route.

C.3.5.8. The second route aims to highlight various cultural attractions related to traditional royalty and covers areas in North Central Namibia and is linked to Etosha National Park through the King Nehale Gate in the north of the park. This route is named the Omulunga Palm Route.

C.3.5.9. The third route links the well-known Victoria Falls in Zambia to the Okavango Delta via Namibia’s Caprivi Strip. It offers opportunities to view birdlife, wildlife and experience the rich culture of the region. This route is named the Four Rivers Route.

C.3.5.10. The plan was for these routes to each have a route coordinator and be managed by a Tourism Route Management structure with a constitution and consisting of local tourism stakeholders and route participants. They were to report directly NTB, MET and the Federation of Namibian Tourism Associations for technical support.

C.3.6. Interactive website development – aimed to increase the number of tourist arrivals to Namibia by raising the country’s profile in target markets. The specific objective of the online marketing campaign was to assist the NTB and its staff to carry out a global online marketing plan for an initial period of two years to build awareness of the value and effectiveness of online marketing techniques. Concurrent capacity-building intended to enable NTB and the industry to carry related efforts forward after the Namibia Compact ended.

C.3.7. This sub-activity was supported by two consultancies. The first focused on an online marketing campaign with three components: (1) creating an Online Marketing Strategy for the Namibia Tourism Board; (2) creating and implementing a two-year business plan based on this strategy;

and (3) training NTB personnel in online marketing techniques while aiming to improve connectivity of their international network of offices.

C.3.8. The second consultancy aimed to develop a fully interactive website to act as a portal to all tourism activities in Namibia, attract new tourists, facilitate trip planning and serve as a promotional tool in all of its target markets. This website replaced another NTB Website. The website was officially handed over to NTB on July 15, 2013.

MCC-16-RFQ-0204 - Namibia Tourism Evaluation Page 9

C.3.9. Expected Benefits and Beneficiaries. The main benefits of the Tourism Project were expected to accrue through increased tourism visits and value added to the Namibian economy. The economic rate of return was estimated to be 9.8% for the ENP Activity and 25.5% for the Tourism Marketing Activity. The economic models are attached as Annexes C and D, respectively. Nearly 170,000 people are expected to benefit from these interventions over 20 years, with the beneficiaries including employees within the tourism industry and members of their households.

The distribution of Tourism Project benefits were expected to track the general distribution of income in Namibia, with approximately one-quarter of benefits accruing to the poor.

Ex Post Evaluation

C.4.1. Evaluation questions for the ENP Activity include:

C.4.1.1. Was the ENP Activity evaluable?1 C.4.1.2. Was the ENP Activity implemented according to plan?

C.4.1.3. What has been the trend in the following key program outcomes, and how and to what extent, if any, might the ENP Activity have contributed to those trends?

C.4.1.4. Annual park revenue C.4.1.5. Quality of ENP staffing and management C.4.1.6. Number of ENP visitors and length of visitors’ stays in or around the park C.4.1.7. Quality of visitor experience C.4.1.8. Private sector investment around the park on communal lands C.4.1.9. How sustainable are outcomes related to Compact-related ENP investments?

C.4.1.10. What is the current condition of Compact-supported infrastructure and what resources have been allocated to maintain it? 1 See Task 1, below, and the Evaluability Assessment Tool in Annex E for context on this evaluation question.

C.4.2. Evaluation questions for the Tourism Marketing Activity include:

C.4.2.1. Was the Tourism Marketing Activity evaluable?2 C.4.2.2. Was the Tourism Marketing Activity implemented according to plan?

C.4.2.3. To what extent, if any, did the individual tourism marketing efforts, and the activity as a whole, help contribute to increased tourist arrivals in Namibia generally, from North America specifically and to conservancy sites in particular?

C.4.2.4. How effective are the online marketing efforts, particularly compared with traditional tourism marketing?

C.4.2.5. To what extent, if any, have North American tourism destination marketing efforts contributed to changes in perception among tour operators or potential tourists?

C.4.2.6. How sustainable are Compact investments in tourism marketing?

Roles and Responsibilities:

C.5.1. The MCC, country counterparts, along with the independent evaluator, play critical roles in designing, implementing, and disseminating the independent evaluations. The MCC and country counterpart roles are as follows.

1 See Task 1, below, and the Evaluability Assessment Tool in Annex E for context on this evaluation question.

2 The Evaluation Management Committee is chaired by the MCC M&E Managing Director and is comprised of each Compact’s M&E lead, Sector lead, Economist, Country Representative, and other staff (SGA, ESP) as necessary.

MCC-16-RFQ-0204 - Namibia Tourism Evaluation Page 10

C.5.2. Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC): MCC is responsible for oversight of the independent evaluator and quality control of evaluation activities, including the following specific responsibilities:

C.5.2.1. Guide the evaluation priorities and evaluation questions. MCC will guide the evaluation priorities and evaluation questions based on the learning priorities for the sector and agency.

C.5.2.2. Build buy-in and ownership of the evaluation. MCC will work with the independent evaluator and country counterparts to ensure there is local support for the independent evaluator.

C.5.2.3. Manage the independent evaluators. MCC will develop Terms of Reference for the independent evaluators and manage the contracting process, including Request for Proposals, Proposal Review, selection of the independent evaluator, development of a work plan, and supervision of the independent evaluator in line with the work plan and agreed deliverables.

C.5.2.4. Quality review of evaluation materials. Using the program logic as a foundation, MCC is responsible for reviewing evaluation materials, including the design report and survey materials, for feasibility, technical and factual accuracy, and adherence with international standards (when applicable).

C.5.2.5. Quality review of evaluation reports. MCC is responsible for reviewing independent evaluators’ reports to ensure technical and factual accuracy. While MCC will provide feedback, the independent evaluator is ultimately the author of the evaluation reports and may or may not take into consideration MCC’s comments. MCC therefore develops an Official Statement for each evaluation report to confirm the technical and factual accuracy of the report, or clarify any differences on technical or factual issues between MCC and the independent evaluator.

C.5.2.6. Lead initial public dissemination efforts. MCC is responsible for leading initial public dissemination of results, in particular ensuring a feedback loop internally in order to inform future decision making on similar program investment, design, and implementation. This requires ensuring the evaluation results are disseminated on the MCC website, and results are disseminated to appropriate stakeholders in a timely fashion.

C.5.2.7. Country Counterparts: During implementation, the Millennium Challenge Account (MCA) is the accountable entity responsible for building local ownership and commitment to the evaluation, oversight of the data collection firm, and quality control of evaluation activities.

After implementation ends, partner countries may also have a Designated Post-Compact M&E Counterpart that will serve in this capacity and carry out the following specific responsibilities:

C.5.2.7.1. Build buy-in and ownership of the evaluation. The Designated Post-Compact M&E Counterpart will work with the independent evaluator and MCC to ensure the evaluation design follows the rules of program design and implementation.

C.5.2.7.2. Quality review of evaluation materials. Using the program logic as a foundation, the Designated Post-Compact M&E Counterpart is responsible for reviewing evaluation materials, including the design report and survey materials, for feasibility, technical and factual accuracy, and adherence with international standards (when applicable).

C.5.2.7.3. Quality review of evaluation reports. The Designated Post-Compact M&E Counterpart is responsible for reviewing independent evaluators’ reports to ensure technical and factual accuracy. While the Designated Post-Compact M&E

MCC-16-RFQ-0204 - Namibia Tourism Evaluation Page 11

Counterpart will provide feedback, the independent evaluator is ultimately the author of the evaluation reports and may or may not take into consideration the comments provided. MCC partner countries may therefore develop an Official Statement for each evaluation report to confirm the technical and factual accuracy of the report, or clarify any differences on technical or factual issues between them and the independent evaluator.

C.5.2.7.4. Facilitate public dissemination efforts. The Designated Post-Compact M&E Counterpart is responsible for facilitating public dissemination of results, in particular ensuring a feedback loop in-country in order to inform future decision making on similar program investment, design, and implementation.

Tasks

C.6.1. Phase 1 Tasks (Evaluability Assessment and Evaluation Design Report) and Phase 2 Tasks (Evaluation Materials/Data collection and Final report/dissemination) will be fully funded but the decision about whether to pursue Phase 2 will depend on approval of the Evaluation Design Report and associated budget.

C.6.2. Independent Evaluator Roles and Responsibilities:

C.6.2.1. The independent evaluator is responsible for the overall design, implementation, and dissemination of the evaluation, including the following specific responsibilities:

C.6.2.2. Develop an evaluation design. Independent evaluators must assess the program design and implementation to develop the most rigorous evaluation design feasible, whether it is a performance or impact evaluation, and identify the most appropriate evaluation methodology feasible given the context. The independent evaluator is responsible for developing an evaluation design report, in consultation with MCC and the Designated Post-Compact M&E Counterpart, which summarizes the program logic, evaluation design, sampling, analysis plan, and other critical design elements of the evaluation.

C.6.2.3. Develop evaluation materials that are held to international standards. Using the program logic as a foundation, the independent evaluators define how key outcomes will be measured and develop the survey instruments or other data collection tools in order to answer critical evaluation questions. Note that “survey” here refers primarily to quantitative surveys, but may also refer to qualitative instruments where appropriate.

C.6.2.4. Ensure appropriate review of evaluation materials and research protocols. Independent evaluators are responsible for ensuring all evaluation materials, including the evaluation design, survey instruments, sampling strategy, data collection and entry protocols are reviewed by an institutional review board (IRB).

IRB review and approval is required before any data collection commences. The independent evaluators will document all approvals and informed consent procedures throughout the evaluation time period.

C.6.2.5. Manage the data collection firm. The evaluator will develop and draft the technical components of the Terms of Reference for the data collection firms, with support from MCC and the Designated Post-Compact M&E Counterpart. The independent evaluator is also responsible for managing the contracting process, including Request for Proposals, Proposal Review, selection of the data collection firm, development of a work plan, and supervision of the data collection firm in line with the work plan and agreed deliverables.

C.6.2.6. Supervise data collection. If any primary data collection is required, the independent

MCC-16-RFQ-0204 - Namibia Tourism Evaluation Page 12 evaluator is responsible for quality control over data collection activities, including interviewer training, pre-testing, and implementing data quality review checks during data collection.

C.6.2.7. Lead data cleaning, analysis, interpretation of results. The independent evaluator is responsible for leading any necessary data cleaning and consultation with any data collection firms to produce final analysis files. The independent evaluator is responsible for leading all analysis in line with the agreed analysis plan developed with MCC, and consulting with MCC should the analysis plan need to be revised or adapted.

C.6.2.8. Produce evaluation reports. The independent evaluator is responsible for sharing initial evaluation reports with local stakeholders and MCC for review and feedback. However, given the independent evaluator is the author of the evaluation reports, local stakeholder and MCC feedback may or may not be taken into consideration for the final report. The independent evaluator is responsible for documenting all feedback and evaluator responses.

C.6.2.9. Lead public dissemination efforts. The independent evaluator is responsible for leading public dissemination efforts facilitated by the Designated Post-Compact M&E Counterpart and MCC (such as local workshops and conferences), but also additional conferences or other opportunities to publicly disseminate the results of the evaluation. The evaluator will advise MCC on any public dissemination opportunities and collaborate as appropriate.

Task 1: Evaluability Assessment

C.7.1. The Evaluator is responsible for conducting an evaluability assessment (using the Evaluability Assessment Tool in Annex E) on existing program documentation, including the M&E Plan, ERRs, project description document, implementer reports.

C.7.2. In particular, the Evaluability Assessment should focus on the extent to which the justification for the Activities was clear at the time of the investment decision and whether program documentation provides a clear and consistent foundation for the populations that should be targeted, key outcomes that should be measured, or assumptions that should be tested, as a part of an evaluation.

C.7.3. The Evaluability Assessment should also critically assess the program logic and consider its connection to other project documentation, including the underlying economic analysis. Finally, if the Evaluator is considering multiple options for evaluating the ENP and Tourism Marketing Activities, it may present a high-level discussion of those options along with rough budget estimates in order to facilitate a discussion and help focus the development of the Evaluation Design Report, which will be produced during Task 2.

C.7.4. The Evaluator will provide an Evaluability Assessment Report to MCC. The result of the Evaluability Assessment Report will determine how to proceed with the Evaluation Design Report.

Task 2: Develop Evaluation Design Report

C.8.1. Develop a Work Plan with expected deadlines for deliverables. Any revisions to the Work Plan will be requested in the Evaluator’s Progress Reports.

C.8.2. The Evaluator will develop a travel SOW (see Evaluation Services Travel SOW template in Annex F) and conduct a field mission as needed to discuss program design and implementation issues to inform the evaluation design, as well as engage local stakeholders (Designated Post- Compact M&E Counterpart, former MCA staff, and Implementing Entities, as well as local

MCC-16-RFQ-0204 - Namibia Tourism Evaluation Page 13 government) on the evaluation. A trip report is expected within two weeks of return.

C.8.3. The Evaluator will develop the Evaluation Design Report, based on an outline agreed in consultation with the MCC M&E lead. Please reference Annex G (Evaluation Design Report Outline) as an example.

C.8.4. As per MCC’s Gender Policy and Gender Integration Guidelines, the Evaluator will ensure that the evaluation design, data collection requirements, and analysis address gender and other social differences as appropriate and feasible. This involves including research questions that address social and gender dimensions of the project logic, assumptions, and project design; disaggregating impacts by gender, age, income, and other social difference (e.g., ethnicity) as appropriate;

including special modules or studies as needed.

C.8.5. If the evaluation includes primary data collection, the gender analysis will include, at the minimum, analysis of sex-disaggregated data for respondents. With respect to any institutional reforms, the evaluation will be required to examine the impact of a gender focus on institutional policies, practices and outcomes. Social and Gender Integration Plans or other related studies and reports completed during the compact term should be consulted for additional key topics of interest. The evaluation will disaggregate and analyze data for other key groups that may be deemed vulnerable in Namibia, such as ethnic or religious minorities.

C.8.6. The Evaluator shall document feedback from local stakeholders and the response to that feedback in accordance with MCC’s Evaluation Management and Review Process (see Annex H).

C.8.7. The Evaluator will submit the Evaluation Design Report to MCC and may be asked to present to the Evaluation Management Committee.3 All feedback and response to feedback will be documented by the Evaluator. The Evaluator shall maintain the Evaluation Design Report as the evaluation develops. The Evaluation Design Report will remain a living document that is updated by the Evaluator as necessary and resubmitted to MCC as necessary.

Task 3: Obtain and/or Develop Evaluation Data

C.9.1. The Evaluator will develop a Draft Data Collection Plan (DCP) that describes the logistical and methodological planning for all final data collection efforts. (Please reference the DCP template in Annex I.)

C.9.2. The Evaluator shall develop a travel SOW (see Evaluation Services Travel SOW template in Annex F) as per the agreed evaluation plan for any necessary travel. A trip report is expected within two weeks of return.

C.9.3. The Evaluator should expect that this ex post evaluation will rely heavily on (i) existing data, and/or (ii) low-cost data collection, such as mini-surveys or focus groups that can be managed directly by the evaluator. To the extent required per the approved evaluation design, the Evaluator will fully develop any data collection firm TORs and subcontract a data collection firm.

C.9.4. The Evaluator will lead development of any necessary survey instruments for data extraction from existing sources or data collection for new sources.

C.9.5. The Evaluator will develop survey materials in English, unless otherwise agreed with MCC. When

MCC-16-RFQ-0204 - Namibia Tourism Evaluation Page 14 necessary, the Evaluator will utilize existing instruments to improve coordination across MCC independent evaluations for meta-analysis. The Evaluator is responsible for any necessary pilot testing of survey instruments and review of back-translations conducted by data collection firms prior to data collection start.

C.9.6. The Evaluator is responsible for ensuring surveys last no longer than 120 minutes without written consent from the Evaluation Management Committee. The Evaluator is responsible for reporting on the average survey time resulting from the pilot test and from field work.

C.9.7. The Evaluator will document feedback from local stakeholders and response to the feedback.

C.9.8. The Evaluator will submit the Evaluation Materials to MCC and may be asked to present to the

Evaluation Management Committee. All feedback and response to feedback will be documented by the Evaluator.

C.9.9. The Evaluator is responsible for the quality of the English and local language survey instruments.

C.9.10. The Evaluator is responsible for developing and overseeing any data extraction and collection and entry protocols and implementation. This requires ensuring appropriate Institutional Review Board (IRB) review and approval of research protocols, survey instruments, and informed consent procedures (please reference the MCC Informed Consent Statement Templates in Annex J).

C.9.11. In accordance with Section H.17, the Contractor should assess the local IRB requirements and determine whether or not additional, international-level IRB approval is required in order to ensure adherence to international standards.

C.9.12. The Evaluator will develop a training plan and is responsible for overseeing the training of data collection staff, piloting efforts, field work, and data entry. This must be managed in coordination with MCC and the Designated Post-Compact M&E Counterpart.

The Evaluator will update the Draft DCP to reflect stakeholder feedback, a summary of enumerator training, results of piloting, and other needed updates. The Revised DCP must be approved before data collection may begin. (Please reference the DCP template in Annex I.)

C.9.13. The Evaluator is responsible for conducting and documenting quality control checks of data as it is collected and entered in order to reduce data collection and entry error.

C.9.14. The Evaluator is responsible for establishing a system for frequent communication with the data collection firm throughout data collection and entry, through email, phone, and site visits.

The Evaluator will submit a Data Collection Report that summarizes data collection fieldwork. (Please reference the Data Collection Report template in Annex K.)

Task 4: Develop Final Evaluation Report, Update Economic Analysis, Prepare (any corresponding) Data Files, Conduct Dissemination

C.10.1. Develop Final Evaluation Report

C.10.1.1. The Evaluator is responsible for data analysis and developing the Final Report. The Final Report outline will be developed in consultation with the MCC M&E lead. Please see Annex K (Interim/Final Report Outline) as a reference.

C.10.1.2. The Evaluator will document feedback from local stakeholders and response to feedback. In order to obtain feedback, the Evaluator may lead local workshops and/or virtual reviews of Final Report by the Designated Post-Compact M&E Counterpart, former MCA staff, and Implementing Entities.

C.10.1.3. In accordance with Section H, the Evaluator is responsible for allowing any key local stakeholders the opportunity to submit a public Statement of Difference or Support, as agreed with MCC and the Designated Post-Compact M&E Counterpart.

C.10.1.4. The Evaluator will submit the Report to MCC and present to the Evaluation Management

MCC-16-RFQ-0204 - Namibia Tourism Evaluation Page 15

Committee. All feedback and response to feedback will be documented by the Evaluator.

Any revisions to the report deemed necessary by the Evaluator will be incorporated into the final draft.

C.10.1.5. As per Section H, MCC may: (i) elect to obtain external peer review; and (ii) make the Report and peer reviews public on the MCC website.

C.10.2. Review and Update Economic Analysis

C.10.2.1. The Evaluator will review the economic analysis that was produced at Compact closeout and recommend to MCC whether it can be updated with the evaluation findings. The Evaluator will also review the economic models and consider whether any lessons can be applied to future models by comparing the assumptions made ex ante to how the programs were implemented and any results that have been achieved, considering:

C.10.2.1.1. Were the estimated benefits and timing of when they would accrue plausible given evaluation findings?

C.10.2.1.2. What are the key assumptions in the model? How could those assumptions be estimated? Are assumptions reasonable?

C.10.2.1.3. The updated economic analysis or insights/lessons learned from the model will be included in the Final Report. The Evaluator should review and ensure this analysis is consistent with MCC’s Guidelines for Economic and Beneficiary Analysis, which are available at: https://www.mcc.gov/resources/doc/guidelines-for-economic-and-beneficiary-analysis.

C.10.3. Prepare (any corresponding) Data Files

C.10.3.1. Using any raw data, the Evaluator will produce a cleaned analysis dataset that follows MCC’s guidelines for public use data, see Annex M (MCC Data Documentation and Anonymization Requirements). For preparation of qualitative data files, the consultant will work with MCC to determine how to assess the files for public dissemination, and prepare them for dissemination as appropriate. All transcripts and codebooks shall be submitted to

MCC.

C.10.3.2. This will include STATA do files and final merged analysis files for documentation purposes.

C.10.3.3. In addition, the Evaluator will produce a full set of metadata for each survey that follows MCC’s guidelines for public use data, see Annex M (MCC Data Documentation and Anonymization Requirements).

C.10.3.4. For preparation of qualitative data files, the consultant will work with MCC to determine what material should be made public, and prepare those files for dissemination as appropriate. All transcripts and codebooks shall be submitted to MCC.

C.10.4. Conduct Dissemination

C.10.4.1. The Evaluator shall prepare a policy brief of 5-10 pages based on the Final Report. This brief should target decision-makers within MCC and the Namibian government. It should focus on key findings and lessons learned from the evaluation, while using accessible language and infographics that help to illustrate key messages. This brief will be shared with local stakeholders and the Evaluation Management Committee for review and feedback. The

MCC-16-RFQ-0204 - Namibia Tourism Evaluation Page 16

Evaluator shall document all feedback and their response to feedback received.

C.10.4.2. The Evaluator will also be responsible for reviewing any materials developed by MCC public relations for dissemination on the MCC website for quality assurance.

C.10.4.3. The Evaluator may also be asked to participate in other MCC-financed dissemination and training events, such as MCC M&E College and the Annual MCC Impact Evaluation Workshop.

MCC-16-RFQ-0204 - Namibia Tourism Evaluation Page 17

PACKAGING AND MARKING

Disclaimer for Deliverables

The Contractor shall ensure that each report prepared by the Contractor and delivered under this Contract contains the following statement on the first or cover page of such report:

“The views and opinions expressed herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent those of MCC or any other U.S. Government entity.”

(End of SECTION D)

MCC-16-RFQ-0204 - Namibia Tourism Evaluation Page 18

INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE

Inspection and acceptance shall be in accordance with the terms of FAR 52.212-4/Alternate I, Contract Terms and Conditions – Commercial Items. In addition, the following terms apply:

Inspection of Reports

MCC may take at least two weeks to provide detailed comments from submittal of the full report. MCC only accepts full submittals, not partial submittals; submittals must be in full accordance with the Contractor’s approved methodology and QA/QC plan. Delays greater than two weeks may be used to adjust the contractor’s required delivery schedule.

Quality Control Plan

E.2.1. The contractor shall have in place and maintain a Quality Assurance/Quality Control Plan (QA/QC) that covers, as a minimum, how the contractor intends to meet the requirements of all performance objectives, monitor and proactively manage contract requirements.

E.2.2. It shall also include the mechanism by which MCC will be notified of performance-related incidents that are likely to affect quality of service. The contractor shall provide a copy of its QA/QC plan to the Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) as part of the Evaluation Design Report. Any changes to the QA/QC shall be provided to MCC for approval within 10 working days.

(End of SECTION E)

MCC-16-RFQ-0204 - Namibia Tourism Evaluation Page 19

DELIVERIES OR PERFORMANCE

Period of Performance

The anticipated timeframe for this contract will be a Base Period of 18 months starting upon contract award.

The overall anticipated period of performance is as follows:

Base Period: September 2016 through March 2018

Place of Performance

Generally, the Contractor shall perform services in Namibia or at their home offices, as needed by MCC.

During missions to Namibia, the Contractor shall perform services on MCA- Namibia’s project sites, as needed by MCC. MCC may also require the Contractor to travel to MCC offices in Washington, DC from time to time to perform services.

Reporting Requirements

F.3.1. The Evaluator is required to submit a Progress Report (see Annex M Evaluator Progress Report and Work Plan as a reference) and any draft or final deliverables with each invoice.

F.3.2. If invoices are submitted less frequently than quarterly, the Evaluator is required to submit a quarterly Progress Report with a summary of activities, status of deliverables, and any draft or final deliverables by April 1 (for January-March quarter); July 1 (for April-June quarter); October 1 (for July-September 1); and January 1 (for October-December quarter).

Travel Requirements

F.4.1. Travel will be required as part of this Call Order. The travel budget assumes up to three (3) trips to Namibia will be required (up to a total of 84 days in-country), however, this travel plan may be amended based on…