RFI_72061719_Systems_and_Institutional_Strengthening_Activity.pdf

REQUEST FOR INFORMATION

RFI Number: RFI_72061719_Systems_and_Institutional_Strengthening_Activity Subject: Systems and Institutional Strengthening Activity Agency Name: USAID/Uganda

Issuance Date: December 20, 2018 Response Due Date: January 14, 2019, 4:00 pm (Washington/EST) Time

Response to: kampalausaidsolicita@usaid.gov

Subject: Systems and Institutional Strengthening Activity

In accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation section 15.201 part (c), USAID/Uganda is sharing a draft Concept Note with all interested parties for the purpose of soliciting comments on its clarity and feasibility as part of the process of designing the Systems and Institutional Strengthening Activity.

The Systems and Institutional Strengthening Activity will complement other market systems development activities under the Mission’s Market Systems Strengthening project and Uganda’s Global Food Security Strategy Country Plan (https://www.usaid.gov/documents/1860/global-food-security-strategy-gfss-uganda-country-plan). A key outcome of the activity is to put Ugandan institutions and systems on a path towards true self-reliance and autonomy.

We invite your review, comments, and questions on the skeleton outline for the activity.

This notice is solely intended to solicit comments on this possible activity and is not a Request for Proposals. Ideas contained herein may change significantly during the mission’s ongoing program design, consultation and approval process.

Interested parties must submit all comments concerning this draft Statement of Work in writing to KampalaUSAIDSolicita@usaid.gov, by January 14, 2019 4:00 pm (EST) Washington, D.C.

Comments sent to any other e-mail address will not be considered. The email transmitting the comments must reference the RFI_72061719_Systems_and_Institutional_Strengthening_Activity.

Please note that responses to this notice are not offers and cannot be accepted by the Government to form a legally binding contract.

This RFI can be downloaded from https://www.fbo.gov/. Interested parties who are not able to retrieve the RFI from the Internet can request a copy by contacting USAID/Uganda’s Office of Acquisition and Assistance via email at kampalausaidsolicita@usaid.gov. Responses in relation to the RFI questions should be submitted in written English to USAID via email in MS Word format only to kampalausaidsolicita@usaid.gov no later than the date and time shown above with a subject line "Response to RFI_72061719_Systems_and_Institutional_Strengthening_Activity mailto:kampalausaidsolicita@usaid.gov https://www.fbo.gov/

BACKGROUND:

During the first round of Feed the Future investments, USAID/Uganda, learned a valuable lesson about the ability of local institutions and ministries, departments and agencies (MDAs) to fulfill their mandates and act as reliable partners for our implementing partners and for other market actors. One example is with respect to producer organizations (POs). At the start of the FtF Uganda’s Commodity Production and Marketing (CPM) activity, CPM targeted local producer organizations as an entry point for reaching farmers and traders up and down the value chain. Unfortunately, the CPM implementer discovered that most POs lacked the capacity to effectively engage with other market actors in the system. Therefore CPM did not have a critical mass of POs with whom to directly work with to facilitate market changes.

Organizational weakness is not limited to POs; many other organizations (particularly MDAs, Civil Society advocacy groups, and agribusinesses) that are mandated to serve important functions in the agriculture sector also lack capacity needed to effectively fulfill their roles.

UPSHOT: The actors we expect our activities and the private sector to partner with in order to drive lasting improvements in the market system frequently lack the leadership, resources, skills and processes needed to fulfill their essential mandates.

DRAFT GOAL STATEMENT:

Transparent, responsive, efficient, and effective public, private, and civil society organizations that sustainably fulfill their mandates and act as partners for other private and public sector actors, development partners, and projects.

WHAT WE PROPOSE:

● An activity focused on building capacity of key partners and systems so that they can better fulfill their mandates and roles in the marketplace. This means focusing on the strengthening and possible redesign of functions, structures, human resources, and even “hardware” of those institutions in question.

● A “push” intervention, meaning it will prioritize more direct service delivery (capacity building/training) as opposed to stricter facilitative or “pull” type investments that focus on creating demand and influencing change. The expectation will be that cost-share and leverage will define the relationship between the activity and those partners in question.

● Deliberate investments in strengthening key functions of partners and systems (skills, procedures/capacities) so that other activities, market actors, and partners can have more meaningful and effective partnerships with them.

● Strengthening business practices, enhancing relationship management, supporting institutional reorganizations/rationalization and development of strategic plans, etc.

● The activity will work in close partnership with other activities under the Market Systems Strengthening project, particularly the upcoming Inclusive Agricultural Markets (IAM) activity (Request for Proposals found here:

https://www.fbo.gov/index.php?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=4eec3b3fc582758f2ac7c507068 0023f&tab=core&_cview=0). However, whereas IAM will work on capacity building and strengthening of largely private sector partners at the firm level, this proposed activity will address higher order systemic issues in public and private institutions. The approaches and scopes complement one another directly but are distinct.

https://www.fbo.gov/index.php?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=4eec3b3fc582758f2ac7c5070680023f&tab=core&_cview=0 https://www.fbo.gov/index.php?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=4eec3b3fc582758f2ac7c5070680023f&tab=core&_cview=0

WHO:

● Any entity in the Government of Uganda (GOU), such as but not limited to the Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries; the Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation;

the Ministry of Karamoja Affairs; the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Cooperatives; the Ministry of Local Government; and GOU-organized funds such as the Youth Livelihoods Fund or Innovation Funds.

● Private sector stakeholders, particularly apex organizations such as, but not limited to, the Uganda National Farmers Federation, the Uganda National Agri-Input Dealers Association, the Uganda Seed Traders Association, and the Private Sector Foundation of Uganda.

● Academic and/or economic policy bodies, such as the Economic Policy Research Centre or the Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources and the Environment at Makerere, and/or other non-Kampala based academic institutions and vocational training institutions.

● Others as defined through stakeholder engagement during the design or implementation phase, through other USAID mechanisms or other sources.

QUESTIONS:

1. Given the consistent budget shortfalls, what does an efficient public or private sector organization that effectively fulfills its mandate and act as a solid partner for other players in the market look like, realistically? In other words, what would success and sustainability under this activity look like?

2. What examples/models have you supported that assist institutions in prioritizing and meeting goals and outcomes, given political economic and budget challenges?

3. If you were to propose indicators that keep the activity focused on outputs, impacts and sustainability what would they be? These need not be Global Food Security Strategic indicators.

4. USAID’s theory of change for the Market Systems Project is that system level improvements will have measurable, lasting impacts in reducing poverty, hunger and malnutrition at the household level. Given this theory of change, what are the most important institutions to target under this activity, and why?

5. Similar to question 4 above, what are the most essential capacity gaps facing public institutions and what would you propose to address them?

6. What are some criteria that you would propose using to identify those institutions with whom to work?

7. Can you identify any activities regionally or worldwide that have attempted to address constraints like this?