MCC-16-RFQ-0220_-_Benin_II_Energy_Evaluation_COSigned.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 73

MCC-16-RFQ-0220 08-03-2016

Regina Maxwell (202) 521-7272

09-02-2016 @ 12PM ET

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

X

X

N/A

X

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 Benin II Energy Compact.

See enclosed solicitation and all attachments for pertinent details.

See CONTINUATION Page

X X

Lisa Smith-Kulley 8-3-2016

MCC-16-RFQ-0220 – Benin II Energy Evaluation Page 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICE/COSTS

PRICE/COST SCHEDULE

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 Scope Background Objectives Roles and Responsibilities Tasks

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 Deliverables Deliverable Format Acceptance Criteria Deliverable Instructions Notice Regarding Late Delivery

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)44

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 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 52.217-9 Option to Extend the Term of the Contract (MAR 2000)

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

PART III – LIST OF DOCUMENTS, EXHIBITS AND OTHER ATTACHMENTS

Annex I – Detailed Program Logics for the Benin II Electricity Generation Project and the Electricity Distribution Project Annex II - Estimated Timeline of Infrastructure Evaluation Activities Annex III - MCC Evaluation Design Report Outline Annex IV - MCC Informed Consent Statement Guidance Annex V – Data Documentation and Anonymization Requirements Annex VI – Interim/Final Report Outline

MCC-16-RFQ-0220 – Benin II Energy Evaluation Page 3

Annex VII – Progress Report Template Annex VIII – Travel Report SOW Annex IX - MCC Independent Evaluation Baseline Report Outline Template Annex X - Benin Power Compact Electricity Distribution Project Annex XI - Medical Accommodation Procedures Annex XII - Travel Form – DS 4086 Annex XIII - Travel Form – DS 4086A Annex XIV - Past Performance Questionnaire

REPRESENTATIONS, CERTIFICATIONS AND OTHER STATEMENTS OF OFFERORS OR RESPONDENTS67

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

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-0220 – Benin II Energy Evaluation Page 4

SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICE/COSTS

PRICE/COST SCHEDULE

CLIN Description of Supplies/Services Qty U/I Unit Price

Amount

0001 BASE PERIOD

DIRECT LABOR

Period of Performance: TBD Estimated 12 months PoP Start: TBD PoP End: TBD

1 LO ______________ ______________

0002 BASE PERIOD

OTHER DIRECT COSTS (ODCs) Period of Performance: TBD Estimated 12 months PoP Start: TBD PoP End: TBD

1 LO ______________ ______________

1001 OPTION PERIOD I

DIRECT LABOR

Period of Performance: TBD Estimated 12 months PoP Start: TBD PoP End: TBD

1 LO ______________ ______________

1002 OPTION PERIOD I

OTHER DIRECT COSTS (ODCs) Period of Performance: TBD Estimated 12 months PoP Start: TBD PoP End: TBD

1 LO ______________ ______________

2001 OPTION PERIOD II

DIRECT LABOR

Period of Performance: TBD Estimated 12 months PoP Start: TBD PoP End: TBD

1 LO ______________ ______________

2002 OPTION PERIOD II

DIRECT LABOR

Period of Performance: TBD Estimated 12 months PoP Start: TBD PoP End: TBD

1 LO ______________ ______________

3001 OPTION PERIOD III

DIRECT LABOR

Period of Performance: TBD Estimated 12 months PoP Start: TBD PoP End: TBD

1 LO ______________ ______________

3002 OPTION PERIOD III

DIRECT LABOR

Period of Performance: TBD Estimated 12 months

1 LO ______________ ______________

MCC-16-RFQ-0220 – Benin II Energy Evaluation Page 5

PoP Start: TBD PoP End: TBD

4001 OPTION PERIOD IV

DIRECT LABOR

Period of Performance: TBD Estimated 12 months PoP Start: TBD PoP End: TBD

1 LO ______________ ______________

4002 OPTION PERIOD IV

DIRECT LABOR

Period of Performance: TBD Estimated 12 months PoP Start: TBD PoP End: TBD

1 LO ______________ ______________

5001 OPTION PERIOD V

DIRECT LABOR

Period of Performance: TBD Estimated 12 months PoP Start: TBD PoP End: TBD

1 LO ______________ ______________

5002 OPTION PERIOD V

DIRECT LABOR

Period of Performance: TBD Estimated 12 months PoP Start: TBD PoP End: TBD

1 LO ______________ ______________

6001 OPTION PERIOD VI

DIRECT LABOR

Period of Performance: TBD Estimated 12 months PoP Start: TBD PoP End: TBD

1 LO ______________ ______________

6002 OPTION PERIOD VI

DIRECT LABOR

Period of Performance: TBD Estimated 12 months PoP Start: TBD PoP End: TBD

1 LO ______________ ______________

7001 OPTION PERIOD VII

DIRECT LABOR

Period of Performance: TBD Estimated 12 months PoP Start: TBD PoP End: TBD

1 LO ______________ ______________

7002 OPTION PERIOD VII

DIRECT LABOR

Period of Performance: TBD Estimated 12 months PoP Start: TBD PoP End: TBD

1 LO ______________ ______________

8001 OPTION PERIOD VIII

DIRECT LABOR

Period of Performance: TBD Estimated 12 months

1 LO ______________ ______________

MCC-16-RFQ-0220 – Benin II Energy Evaluation Page 6

PoP End: TBD

8002 OPTION PERIOD VIII

DIRECT LABOR

Period of Performance: TBD Estimated 12 months

PoP End: TBD

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, fully-burdened hourly rates and Other Direct Costs (ODCs) for each contract year identified in B.1.

Base Period – Period of Performance TBD (est. 12 months) Item # Description(2) U/I Qty Rate Total

LABOR

0001 hr.

hr.

hr.

hr.

Labor Sub-Total

MCC-16-RFQ-0220 – Benin II Energy Evaluation Page 7

ODCs(1)

ODC Sub-Total Grand Total (Base Period)

Option Period I – Period of Performance TBD (est. 12 months)

LABOR

1001 hr.

hr.

hr.

hr.

Labor Sub-Total

1002 Subcontract(s) – Data Collection (optional) Lot 1 $650,000.00 $650,000.00

Grand Total (Option Period I)

Option Period II – Period of Performance TBD (est. 12 months)

LABOR

2001 hr.

hr.

hr.

hr.

Labor Sub-Total

Grand Total (Option Period II)

Option Period III – Period of Performance TBD (est. 12 months)

LABOR

3001 hr.

hr.

hr.

hr.

Labor Sub-Total

Grand Total (Option Period III)

MCC-16-RFQ-0220 – Benin II Energy Evaluation Page 8

Option Period IV – Period of Performance TBD (est. 12 months) Item # Description(2) U/I Qty Rate Total

LABOR

4001 hr.

hr.

hr.

hr.

Labor Sub-Total

4002 Subcontract(s) – Data Collection (optional) Lot 1 $650,000.00 $650,000.00

Grand Total (Option Period IV)

Option Period V – Period of Performance TBD (est. 12 months)

LABOR

5001 hr.

hr.

hr.

hr.

Labor Sub-Total

Grand Total (Option Period V)

Option Period VI – Period of Performance TBD (est. 12 months)

LABOR

6001 hr.

hr.

hr.

hr.

Labor Sub-Total

6002 Subcontract(s) – Data Collection (optional) Lot 1 $650,000.00 $650,000.00

Grand Total (Option Period VI)

Option Period VII – Period of Performance TBD (est. 12 months)

LABOR

7001 hr.

hr.

hr.

hr.

Labor Sub-Total

MCC-16-RFQ-0220 – Benin II Energy Evaluation Page 9

Grand Total (Option Period VII)

Option Period VIII – Period of Performance TBD (est. 12 months)

LABOR

8001 hr.

hr.

hr.

hr.

Labor Sub-Total

Grand Total (Option Period VIII)

NOTE (1): MCC anticipates approximately $1,950,000 worth of optional data collection subcontracting costs for which the requirements are unknown at this time (see Section C.6.16.5).

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-0220 – Benin II Energy Evaluation Page 10

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.

Scope

C.2.1. The Contractor shall provide support to MCC for Independent Evaluation Services in support of the Benin II Energy Compact.

Background

C.3.1. The Benin II Compact between MCC and the Government of Benin was signed on September 9, 2015. The Compact objective is to expand business production and productivity, generate greater economic opportunities for households and improve the capacity to provide public and social services by improving the quantity and quality of the supply of electricity in Benin. The Benin II Compact has not yet “Entered Into Force” (EIF), meaning that implementation has not yet commenced. EIF is anticipated in early 2017. A full copy of the Benin II Compact can be accessed on MCC’s website.

C.3.2. The Program targets poor electricity infrastructure, a binding constraint to economic growth in Benin, where the insufficient quantity and quality of electricity results in reduced productivity, output, and investment for businesses, less effective delivery of public and social services and diminished well-being and economic opportunity for households. The root causes of these problems are lack of resources, and public policies and institutions that have been unable to deliver sufficient power to meet growing national demand.

C.3.3. The Program will address these core problems through policy reforms and institutional strengthening, large-scale investments in energy generation and distribution infrastructure and off-grid electrification to expand access in a country where only one-third of the population has access to electricity. As a result of these interventions, the Program is expected to expand business production and productivity, increase economic opportunities for households and improve the capacity to provide public and social services.

C.3.4. The Compact includes four Projects, each with a related project objective:

C.3.4.1. The Policy Reform and Institutional Strengthening Project, with the objective of strengthening the capacity of the Société Béninoise d’Energie Electrique (“SBEE”), Autorité de Régulation de l’Electricité (“ARE”), and other Government of Benin institutions to improve the governance, management, and operations of the electricity sector

C.3.4.2. The Electricity Generation Project, with the objectives of: (A) increasing the hours of operation for businesses and public and social services; (B) reducing reliance on costlier sources of energy;

(C) reducing losses of products and perishable goods; and (D) improving productivity for users of electricity.

MCC-16-RFQ-0220 – Benin II Energy Evaluation Page 11

C.3.4.3. The Electricity Distribution Project, with the objectives of: (A) increasing the hours of operation for businesses and public and social services, (B) reducing reliance on costlier sources of energy,

(C) reducing losses of products and perishable goods, and (D) improving productivity for users of electricity.

C.3.5. The Off-Grid Electricity Access Project, with the objective of increasing access to electricity and thereby (A) increasing the hours of operation for businesses and public and social services, (B) reducing reliance on costlier sources of energy, (C) reducing losses of products and perishable goods, and (D) improving productivity for users of electricity.

C.3.6. The below program logic outlines the anticipated logic and theory of change for the Benin II Compact.

C.3.6.1. The Policy Reform and Institutional Strengthening Project is anticipated to provide the necessary base- both in terms of policy as well as in terms of institutional capacity- to improve the energy sector and support the other efforts under the Compact. The Objective of the Policy Reform and Institutional Strengthening Project is to strengthen the capacity of the Société Béninoise d’Energie Electrique (“SBEE”), Autorité de Régulation de l’Electricité (“ARE”), and other Government of Benin institutions to improve the governance, management, and operations of the electricity sector (“Policy Reform and Institutional Strengthening Project Objective”). To achieve the Policy Reform and Institutional Strengthening Project Objective, MCC Funding will support interventions to (A) improve governance in the electricity sector by supporting an independent and professional regulator, by reforming tariffs, by introducing independent power producers (“IPP”) and by enhancing energy efficiency; (B) improve management, operations and

MCC-16-RFQ-0220 – Benin II Energy Evaluation Page 12 maintenance within SBEE; and (C) inform and educate the public on tariffs, energy efficiency and other key electricity sector issues.

C.3.6.2. The Electricity Generation and Electricity Distribution Projects comprise the primary infrastructure investments to be made under the Compact and work together to improve the quality and quantity of energy delivered to users in Benin.

C.3.6.3. The Electricity Generation Project aims to increase domestic energy capacity by 78MW, including 45MW of new solar plants, rehabilitating 32MW of thermal generation units, and rehabilitating and expanding a 1MW hydropower plant

C.3.6.4. The Electricity Distribution Project includes: (A) replacement of lines, upgrading substations, installing new switchgear connection in Natitingou, Parakou, and Djougou, and the construction of a new 63kV line from Porto Novo to Akpakpa; (B) increasing the capacity of the Cotonou grid through new lines, switchgears, substations, network extensions, and a limited number of new connections; (C) the construction of and technical support for the creation of a national distribution control center.

C.3.6.5. The Off-Grid Electricity Access Project targets those individuals, businesses, and communities that currently do not have access to the grid. In addition to improving the enabling environment for off-grid electricity solutions, the Project will also fund the Off-Grid Clean Energy Facility in order to fund projects aimed at critical public infrastructure, mini-grids, household generation and storage, and energy efficiency measures.

C.3.6.6. Annex I: Detailed Program Logics for the Benin II Electricity Generation Project and the Electricity Distribution Project includes detailed program logics (as elaborated to date) for each of the four projects.

Objectives

C.4.1. The Benin II Infrastructure Evaluation will assess the outcomes and impact of the two infrastructure projects- Generation and Distribution.

C.4.2. The Infrastructure Evaluation will assess the extent to which the Electricity Generation and Electricity Distribution Projects have met their desired goals (as well as assess any unanticipated consequences). Though feasibility studies have been conducted, final engineering designs are not yet completed for these projects. Therefore, it shall be understood that the details of the project components may shift somewhat as the Benin II Compact enters into implementation (estimated to enter implementation in early 2017). The Evaluator will be responsible for maintaining contact with MCC and MCA implementers to ensure that the evaluation design will take these changes into account.

C.4.3. Tentative research questions for this evaluation are included below. However, these lists are tentative. The Evaluator is expected to work with MCC, the MCA, and other stakeholders to finalize the list of research questions. The final list of research questions for each evaluation component shall be included in the respective design report.

C.4.4. The evaluation shall include an evaluability assessment. Anticipated research questions for the evaluability assessment include:

C.4.4.1. To what extent was the project understood and defined at the beginning of the Compact?

MCC-16-RFQ-0220 – Benin II Energy Evaluation Page 13

C.4.4.2. To what extent were the expected outcomes laid out in the program logic based on evidence?

How cohesive was the overall program logic?

C.4.4.3. How do the program assumptions hold up? Including (but not limited to):

C.4.4.3.1. How and to what extent have factors outside the compact (such as availability of energy imports from Ghana and Nigeria, completion of the North-South 161kv line, the role of CEB, increases in overall demand, etc.), influenced the ability of the project to meet its expected outcomes?

C.4.4.3.2. To what extent are MCC’s maintenance expectations for the new infrastructure works being met?

C.4.4.3.3. To what extent was the project implemented as designed?

C.4.5. In addition to questions on specific outcomes, several overarching questions should also be included, such as (but not limited to):

C.4.5.1. Based on the outcome findings from the evaluation, what is the estimated Economic Rate of Return (ERR) for MCC’s investments in energy infrastructure in Benin?

C.4.5.2. The Distribution and Generation projects were intended to be complementary. To what extent was this complementarity maintained through implementation?

C.4.5.3. What changes occurred to the original design? How did those changes affect the ability of the program to reach its objectives?

C.4.5.4. How well were the projects implemented? Did the way in which they were implemented help or hinder their success?

C.4.5.5. How sustainable are the impacts achieved through the Compact? To what extent will the benefits continue to be felt after the end of the Compact?

C.4.5.6. What lessons can be drawn from the Benin II Distribution and Generation Projects to inform future projects?

C.4.6. For the Infrastructure Evaluation, the Independent Evaluator will be responsible for finalizing and then implementing an evaluation design covering these two projects. Though MCC expects the Evaluator to finalize the design that best matches the research questions, MCC is currently considering a multi-pronged approach to evaluating the impacts of the Electricity Generation and Electricity Distribution Projects:

C.4.6.1. The first component would focus on grid improvements and their effects on the medium-term outcomes of improved quality and reliability of the energy delivered, in particular technical and non-technical losses, the frequency and duration of outages, as well as voltage quality and stability.

C.4.6.1.1. One method MCC has considered is a longitudinal approach based on high frequency measurements of power quality and reliability. To that end, several methods could be considered using high frequency data: 1- A multi-level, longitudinal approach (such as hierarchical linear modeling or similar), which could

MCC-16-RFQ-0220 – Benin II Energy Evaluation Page 14 allow for the measurement of impacts that differ across different segments of the grid system; 2- An interrupted time-series model, to estimate changes after the completion of different components; 3- An event study, to estimate changes resulting from each of the installed components. Though these methodologies are some of the options MCC has been contemplating, bidders should recommend the methodology they see as most appropriate.

C.4.6.1.2. In support of the above analysis regarding quality and reliability of delivered power, the MCA, in collaboration with MCC, is contracting for the design and installation of grid monitoring (data logging) equipment to be installed at various points on the grid. This firm will also be preparing the detailed designs for the Electricity Distribution Project and is anticipated to be hired around the same time as the award for this evaluation solicitation. Thus, it would be expected that the Evaluator would work closely with the design firm to identify the necessary specifications, locations, and sampling for the data logging system, the data from which, should feed into the evaluation.

C.4.6.2. The second component would examine longer-term outcomes on households, businesses, and other entities. As MCC’s infrastructure investments are anticipated to affect, to varying degrees, the entire grid, and because those not yet connected to the grid are substantially different than those who are already connected, it is unlikely that a quasi-experimental approach is feasible.

However, MCC looks to the Evaluator to design as rigorous of a methodology as possible to examine long-term, user-level effects.

C.4.7. MCC would also like the Evaluator to assess potential options for disaggregating the impacts of different project components (the Dispatch Center, solar plants, thermal plants, substation upgrades, line upgrades, etc.). Potential options, if any, shall be discussed in preparation for the Evaluation Design Report.

C.4.8. It is expected that the Evaluator will be able to weave together their proposed approaches into a cohesive evaluation strategy that will be able to test the continuum of project outcomes. MCC anticipates that the final evaluation methodology will include a combination of quantitative and qualitative methods to examine the key research questions. The final research questions will be determined by the Evaluator in collaboration with MCC and the MCA, however, an initial list of relevant research questions of interest are below.

C.4.9. Research Questions on Long-Term Outcomes:

C.4.9.1. To what extent has firm productivity or output changed as a result of the projects? Are the changes different across different types of firms (size, formality, sector)?

C.4.9.2. To what extent have improvements in outages and voltage stability (if any) affected the hours of operations of businesses and public/social services?

C.4.9.3. To what extent have users improved their productivity? Has the effect been the same across sub-groups (income groups, by gender, etc.)?

C.4.9.4. To what extent have users reduced their reliance on costlier energy sources? How has the use of different energy sources changed? Has the effect been the same across sub-groups (income groups, by gender, etc.)?

MCC-16-RFQ-0220 – Benin II Energy Evaluation Page 15

C.4.9.5. To what extent has user’s time use changed as a result of the project (for instance, less time collecting water or cooking, more time spent studying or engaging in paid labor, etc)?

C.4.9.6. To what extent has investment in energy-intensive appliances/equipment changed as a result of the project?

C.4.9.7. To what extent have users seen reduced degradation of their grid-connected equipment as a result of improved quality of delivered electricity?

C.4.9.8. To what extent have users seen a reduction in spoilage linked with power availability and quality (such as spoilage of perishable food without refrigeration during extended outages)?

C.4.10. Research Questions on Short and Medium-Term Outcomes:

C.4.10.1. To what extent were the projects able to increase domestic energy output?

C.4.10.2. To what extent did the increase in domestic energy output (if any) decrease the gap between supply and demand for grid electricity?

C.4.10.3. To what extent were the projects able to reduce on-grid losses?

C.4.10.4. How have Compact investments affected the gap between electricity supply and demand?

C.4.10.5. How has the response time to technical problems on the grid changed as a result of the projects?

C.4.10.6. To what extent were the projects able to reduce the frequency and duration of outages? Has the change been different across planned vs unplanned outages?

C.4.10.7. To what extent where the projects able to improve the quality and stability of delivered electricity?

C.4.10.8. How have the above effects (if any) varied across different portions of the grid- areas where new/rehabilitated infrastructure were install vs other areas?

C.4.10.9. If possible through the analysis, what is the differentiated impact between different project components (for instance, the impact of installing a new generation plant vs the impact of the dispatching center vs the impact of substation and line upgrade)? Which components had the greatest impact on grid quality and reliability outcomes?

C.4.11. During the Compact period, MCC evaluations often rely on data collected by data collection firms that are contracted by the MCAs. However, in some cases, data must be collected outside of the Compact period, or the data would be more easily or effectively collected directly by the Evaluator. The current status of planning for data collection related to the Infrastructure Evaluation is as follows:

C.4.11.1. It is expected that grid-level monitoring data will be collected through a consultant hired by the MCA. This same consultant will also be responsible for finalizing the design of the distribution project. This procurement is currently underway. The SOW for this consultancy foresees the installation of autonomous data logging equipment at various parts of the grid in support of the evaluation, as well as on going monitoring during implementation. It is expected that the Evaluator would work with the design consultant to ensure that the equipment and data collected

MCC-16-RFQ-0220 – Benin II Energy Evaluation Page 16 will support the evaluation and its ability to appropriately answer the identified research questions. These tasks are included in Option B of the RFQ, which is included in Annex X.

C.4.11.2. Additional data collection beyond the above is anticipated, however, such as household or business level data. MCC is currently exploring options for funding this data collection through this evaluation contract. However, the feasibility of doing so is not yet clear. For this reason, data collection, with an associated plug number, is included as Optional Task 16 of this RFQ.

This Optional Task may, if elected by MCC, include data collection before, during, or after Compact implementation. If the optional task is elected by MCC, the Evaluator will be expected to design, contract for (if a subcontract is necessary), and conduct all aspects of data collection.

A separate modification would be required for the election of each phase of data collection. In order to be elected, the Evaluator must be able to justify both the technical need for the data collection effort and the proposed costs. The plug number figures constitute a ceiling for data collection costs, not an estimate of actual costs. If, for any reason, MCC does not elect Optional Task 16 for particular rounds of data collection, it should be assumed that data collection will be procured and managed by MCA, in collaboration with the Evaluator. In this case, the Evaluator is still expected to design the scope of data collection and conduct oversight to ensure timeliness and good data quality. See Optional Task 16 for additional information.

C.4.12. When creating their cost proposals, the direct costs for data collection shall be assumed under the plug number assigned to Optional Task 16 (also see Section B.6). However, anticipated labor and other direct costs for the Evaluator to develop the evaluation materials, supervise data collection, and perform data cleaning and ensuring data quality should be included in the offerors price proposal as these costs are applicable regardless of the data collection procurement method.

Roles and Responsibilities

The MCC, MCA, along with the independent evaluator, play critical roles in designing, implementing, and disseminating the independent evaluations. The MCC and MCA roles are as follows:

C.5.1. 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.5.1.1.1. Set the evaluation priorities and evaluation questions. Using the program logic as the foundation, MCC, with support from the Evaluator, will develop the evaluation priorities and evaluation questions based on existing evidence, the evidence gap, and the learning priorities for the sector and agency.

C.5.1.1.2. Build buy-in and ownership of the evaluation. MCC will work with the independent evaluator and MCA to ensure the evaluation design follows the rules of program design and implementation. When possible, MCC will work with the independent evaluator and MCA to develop a program implementation roll-out plan that enables a rigorous evaluation design. When it is not possible to develop a coordinated roll-out plan, MCC and the evaluator will ensure the evaluation design is based on feasible methodologies given program design and implementation. MCC will work with MCA to ensure commitment to the roll-out plan by local stakeholders, and if is not possible to adhere to the roll-out plan, will inform the independent evaluator in order to adapt the evaluation design.

MCC-16-RFQ-0220 – Benin II Energy Evaluation Page 17

C.5.1.1.3. Determine the evaluation budgets. MCC will develop an evaluation budget, including independent evaluators, expected data collection requirements, and any other activities related to the evaluation.

C.5.1.1.4. 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.5.1.1.5. 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.

C.5.1.1.6. 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.5.1.1.7. Through this review process, MCC’s role is to enable the independent evaluator’s independence in order to produce a high quality, unbiased evaluation of the program. MCC should ensure that various stakeholders understand that while MCC, MCA, and other stakeholders may provide guidance and leadership on evaluation questions and feasibility of methodology, once an approved evaluation design is in place, feedback on analysis and interpretation of results is limited to statements on the continued technical and factual accuracy of the analysis.

C.5.1.1.8. Support final public dissemination efforts. MCC is responsible for supporting public dissemination of results, which will be led by the Evaluator, 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. Millennium Challenge Account (MCA): MCA is responsible for building local ownership and commitment to the evaluation, oversight of the data collection firm, and quality control of evaluation activities, including the following specific responsibilities:

C.5.2.1.1. Build buy-in and ownership of the evaluation. MCA will work with the independent evaluator and MCC to ensure the evaluation design follows the rules of program design and implementation. When possible, MCA will work with the independent evaluator and MCC to develop a program implementation roll-out plan that enables a rigorous evaluation design. MCA will work with MCC to ensure commitment to the roll-out plan by local stakeholders, and if it is not possible to adhere to the roll-out plan, will inform MCC in order to request the independent evaluator adapt the evaluation design.

MCC-16-RFQ-0220 – Benin II Energy Evaluation Page 18

C.5.2.1.2. Manage the data collection firms. As applicable in light of Optional Task 16, in cases where MCA is to be responsible for procuring data collection, MCA is responsible for managing the contracting process, including 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. However, despite the managerial role of the MCA, the Evaluator will be responsible for writing the TOR, in conformity with the evaluation plan.

C.5.2.1.3. Quality review of evaluation materials. Using the program logic as a foundation, MCA is responsible for reviewing evaluation materials, including the design report and survey materials, for feasibility, technical and factual accuracy, and adherence with international standards.

C.5.2.1.4. Quality review of evaluation reports. MCA, or a designated representative, is responsible for reviewing independent evaluators’ reports to ensure technical and factual accuracy. While MCA will provide feedback, the independent evaluator is ultimately the author of the evaluation reports and may or may not take into consideration MCA’s comments. MCA 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 MCA and the independent evaluator.

C.5.2.1.5. Facilitate public dissemination efforts. MCA, or a designated representative, 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.

C.5.3. Independent Evaluator Roles and Responsibilities: The independent evaluator is responsible for the overall design, implementation, and dissemination of the evaluation, including the following specific responsibilities:

C.5.3.1.1. Develop a rigorous evaluation design given rules of implementation and feasibility of options. Using the program logic as the foundation, 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 MCA, which summarizes the evaluation design, sampling, analysis plan, and other critical design elements of the evaluation.

(Tasks 1-2)

C.5.3.1.2. Support MCC and MCA to build buy-in and ownership of evaluation. The independent evaluator will meet with MCC and local stakeholders to develop the evaluation design based on program design and implementation. When possible, the independent evaluator will work with MCC and MCA to advise on a program implementation roll-out plan that enables a rigorous evaluation design. In addition, the independent evaluator will continuously present the evaluation objectives, materials, and interim and final results for MCC and local stakeholders to maintain commitment to the evaluation. (Task 2 and Task 7)

MCC-16-RFQ-0220 – Benin II Energy Evaluation Page 19

C.5.3.1.3. 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 both to quantitative surveys as well as qualitative instruments, where appropriate (Task 3, Task 8, and Task 12)

C.5.3.1.4. 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. (Task 3, Task 8, and Task 12)

C.5.3.1.5. In certain cases, the Evaluator will be responsible for all aspects of data collection, as outlined in Optional Task 16. In these cases, the Evaluator will be responsible for all aspects of data collection- from design of data collection tools to recruitment of a data collection firm (if a subcontract is necessary), to supervision, and analysis.

(Task 4, Task 9, and Task 12)

C.5.3.1.6. Regardless of whether data collection is procured by the MCA or by the evaluator, the evaluator will develop the Terms of Reference for the data collection firms, with technical support from MCC and the MCA. (Task 3)

C.5.3.1.7. Supervise data collection. Whether the MCA, MCC or independent evaluator contracts the data collection firm, the independent evaluator is responsible for quality control over data collection activities, including interviewer training, pre-testing, and implementing data quality review checks during data collection. (Task 4, Task 9, and Task 12)

C.5.3.1.8. Lead data cleaning, analysis, interpretation of results. The independent evaluator is responsible for leading any necessary data cleaning and consultation with the data collection firm 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. (Task 5, Task 10, and Task 14)

C.5.3.1.9. 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. (Task 5, Task 10, and Task 14)

C.5.3.1.10. Through this review process, the independent evaluator’s role is to assert independence in order to produce a high quality, unbiased evaluation of the program. The independent evaluator should ensure that various stakeholders understand that while MCC, MCA, and other stakeholders may provide guidance and leadership on evaluation questions and feasibility of methodology, once an

MCC-16-RFQ-0220 – Benin II Energy Evaluation Page 20 approved evaluation design is in place, feedback on analysis and interpretation of results is limited to statements on the continued technical and factual accuracy of the analysis.

C.5.3.1.11. Lead public dissemination efforts. The independent evaluator is responsible for leading public dissemination efforts facilitated by MCA 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. As per Section H, the independent evaluator is responsible for ensuring that all public release documentation is reviewed to minimize any risk to respondent confidentiality. This may require submission of internal use only and public release reports. (Task 6, Task 11, and Task 15)

Tasks

C.6.1. Task 1: Assess Evaluation Plan

C.6.1.1. The Evaluator is responsible for conducting an Evaluability Assessment on all existing documentation related to the program and proposed evaluation plan provided by MCC and MCA using the MCC Evaluability Assessment Tool.

C.6.1.2. MCC and the Evaluator should identify all MCC and MCA self-evaluation activities and determine how the independent evaluation will (i) validate findings of self-evaluation(s), (ii) use self-evaluation(s) to inform the independent evaluation, particularly around understanding what was designed, what was implemented, and understanding any necessary course corrections, (iii) complement the self-evaluation(s) by expanding on self-evaluation activities.

C.6.1.3. The Evaluator will provide an Evaluability Assessment Report on the Problem Diagnostic, Program Logic, Risks & Assumptions, Proposed Research Questions, Methodology, and other Metrics

C.6.1.4. Develop a Work Plan with expected deadlines for deliverables. Any revisions to the Work Plan will be submitted in the Evaluator’s Progress Reports.

C.6.2. Task 2: Develop Evaluation Design Report

C.6.2.1. The Evaluator will conduct missions to the field as needed to discuss program design and implementation issues to inform the evaluation design, as well as engage local stakeholders (MCA and Implementing Entities, as well as local government) on the proposed evaluation. This includes hosting local stakeholder workshops to develop/refine research questions, assess appropriate and feasible quantitative and qualitative evaluation methodologies, develop evaluation timeline, and build local stakeholder commitment to the evaluation design.

C.6.2.2. The Evaluator will develop the Evaluation Design Report, including all technical analysis required for assessing and confirming internal validity, power calculations, and required sample sizes. The Evaluation Design Report outline will be developed in consultation with the MCC M&E lead. Please reference Annex III Evaluation Design Report Outline as a reference.

C.6.2.3. As per MCC’s Gender Policy and Gender Integration Guidelines, the Evaluator will ensure that evaluation design, data collection requirements (including make up of the data collection team, MCC-16-RFQ-0220 – Benin II Energy Evaluation Page 21 and analysis address gender and other social differences as appropriate. 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.6.2.4. The Evaluator will document feedback from local stakeholders and the response to that feedback.

In order to obtain feedback, the Evaluator may lead local workshops and/or virtual reviews of the Design Report by MCA and Implementing Entities.

C.6.2.5. 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 MCA/designated representative.

C.6.2.6. The Evaluator will submit the Evaluation Design Report to MCC and may be asked to present to the Evaluation Management…