RFTOP No. 72061324R00012 - Gardens’ Activity June 7, 2024.docx.pdf

Issue Date: June 7, 2024

Deadline for Questions: June 14, 2024

Closing Date & Time: June 28, 2024 (Harare Time)

Solicitation No: 72061324R00012

Subject: Request for Task Order Proposal (RFTOP) - Evaluation of Community Gardens’ Contribution to Household Income and Nutrition.

Reference: Monitoring and Evaluation to Collaborate, Learn, Adapt and Knowledge Management activity (MECLAK) - Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Contracts

The United States Government, represented by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), is seeking proposals from holders of the above-referenced MECLAK IDIQ for work to be performed in Harare, Zimbabwe. Proposals must be sent electronically to the point of contact identified in Section L of the RFP and received by USAID on or before the closing date and time stipulated above.

There is a strict page limitation of fifteen (15) pages in total for the Technical Proposal. Submission of any pages beyond these limits will not be provided to the Technical Evaluation Committee.

Any questions regarding the RFTOP’s requirements must be submitted to jholder@usaid.gov and rmoyo@usaid.gov no later than 5:00 PM, Harare time on Thursday, June 14, 2024.

This requirement is being procured in accordance with FAR 16.505. USAID anticipates awarding one (1) Firm Fixed Price (FFP) type contract under this solicitation. Instructions for responding to this solicitation are contained in Section L of this document. Proposals will be evaluated on the basis of the criteria described in Section M. The approximate period of performance of the task order will span approximately 6 months (August 2024 – February 2025).

The Technical and Cost Proposal must be kept separate from each other, and the Technical Proposal must not make any reference to pricing data in order that the technical evaluation may be made strictly on the basis of technical merit. However, the names of individuals and their associated levels of effort should be part of the technical proposal to indicate overall human resource inputs for the work.

Issuance of this request does not constitute a commitment on the part of the Government, nor does it commit the Government to pay for any costs incurred in preparation or submission of comments/suggestions or a proposal. Proposals are submitted at the risk of the offeror. All preparation and submission costs are at the offeror’s expense.

Sincerely, Contracting Officer

RFTOP No. 72061324R00012 - Evaluation of Community Gardens’ Contribution to Household Income & Nutrition mailto:jholder@usaid.gov mailto:rmoyo@usaid.gov

SECTION B – SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICE/COSTS

B.1 PURPOSE

The MECLAK IDIQ contracts provide a central platform for the procurement of support services that will strengthen, support and facilitate USAID’s Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) to Collaborate, Learn Adapt (CLA), and Knowledge Management (KM) practices and approaches within USAID Missions in Southern Africa and in USAID activities across Southern Africa. USAID’s Evaluation Policy promotes use of evaluations to plan, manage, and guide the development of new project designs. The purpose of this task order is to provide services that fall within the Scope of Work (SOW) specified in Section C of this Task order.

B.2 CONTRACT TYPE

This is a firm fixed price contract.

B.3 FIRM FIXED PRICE

The firm fixed price is $TBD.

B.4 PAYMENT

Electronic invoices are required and must be submitted to harareinvoice@usaid.gov upon COR approval of all deliverables.

B.4 OTHER RFTOP INFORMATION

All Sections from the IDIQ are hereby incorporated. If there are any discrepancies between IDIQ and the Task Order, then the Task Order shall take precedence.

RFTOP No. 72061324R00012 - Evaluation of Community Gardens’ Contribution to Household Income & Nutrition mailto:harareinvoice@usaid.gov

SECTION C – DESCRIPTION/SPECIFICATIONS/ STATEMENT OF WORK

C.1 PURPOSE OF EVALUATION

The purpose of this evaluation is to assess the contribution of community gardens to household nutrition and income. Community gardens and water supply infrastructure are the most common types of assets created by USAID’s Bureau for Humanitarian Assistance (BHA)'s Early Recovery, Risk Reduction and Resilience (ER4) awards in Zimbabwe. Most community gardens are established to promote access to nutritious foods and increase household income. The gardens have had mixed success with some continuing to function after activities ends, while some are abandoned after activities end. This evaluation will look at three aspects related to community gardens: 1) Assess if community gardens are making any meaningful contribution to nutrition, particularly focusing on dietary diversity of women of reproductive age and children 6-23 months old and household income. 2) assess different sizes of plots per participant and establish the minimum plot size necessary for gardens to be effective in improving nutrition and/or income. 3) Assess the functionality and sustainability of gardens focusing on governance, water supply, production, and marketing. The evaluation results will inform BHA on investment in gardens and related infrastructure. It will enable BHA to develop technical guidelines on minimum standards for investment in community gardens and related infrastructure.

SUMMARY INFORMATION

This evaluation will cover BHA awards and those funded under its legacy offices (Food for Peace and OFDA) which had water and garden as part of its interventions from 2011 to 2023.

Below is a list of partners who have received significant support from BHA for garden and complementary assets.

Awardee Duration of implementing Assets creation

Geographic areas

ACF 2020 - 2024 Gokwe South & Kariba, Chiredzi

ADRA 2018-2024 Gokwe North, Gokwe South, Mbire, Muzarabani

WFP 2011 - 2024 Binga, Chiredzi, Centenary, Gokwe South, Hwange, Kariba, Masvingo, Mbire, Mudzi, Mwenezi, Rushinga, UMP, Zvishavane

Save the Children

2014 Kariba

RFTOP No. 72061324R00012 - Evaluation of Community Gardens’ Contribution to Household Income & Nutrition

World Vision

(ENSURE)

2013-2020 Buhera, Chimanimani, Chipinge, Zaka, Bikita, Chivi

CNFA 2013-2020

2021 -2025

Gwanda, Bulilima, Mangwe, Tsholotsho. Nkayi, Lupane, Hwange, Binga

CARE

(Takunda)

2021-2025 Buhera, Mutare, Zaka, Chivi

CRS (PRIZE) 2010 - 2013 Beitbridge, Bulilima, Gwanda, Mangwe, Matobo, Mberengwa, Mudzi, Rushinga

C.2 BACKGROUND

Zimbabwe is an agro-based economy with the majority of rural communities relying on rainfed agriculture. With climate change the rainfall pattern has become very erratic and unreliable.

Irrigation is an effective means of addressing the impact of climate change. BHA’s target areas in Zimbabwe are in low rainfall areas where rainfed crop production is increasingly vulnerable to climate shocks. Complementary livelihood options are also limited due to macroeconomic conditions making people more vulnerable to climate change. USAID, through BHA funding, is the largest donor for creating productive assets in Zimbabwe. BHA has invested significantly in building assets in these areas to provide water for household use and for productive purposes for resilience building. To note, USAID through BHA funding has invested in close to 600 community gardens, 359 weirs/small dams and almost 500 boreholes in Zimbabwe since 2011.

Community gardens provide households with access to vegetables for household consumption and excess for selling to get income, which can be used to supplement household food stocks.

In areas where water is a challenge community gardens are the only source of vegetables for the community during the dry season. In Zimbabwe community gardens are communally owned with member composition from 40-120 participants. The plot size per member varies significantly and water sources and conveyance system is also variable.

For gardens to have an impact on nutrition, it is important to examine pathways which may lead to improved diets. To benefit the most vulnerable within a household, especially women and children under five, community gardens must be productive and provide nutrient dense foods and/or income in sufficient quantities throughout the year. If the income is not controlled by the mother, the income may not lead to improved nutrition outcomes. Due to water and other resource limitations, ‘gardens for nutrition’ may not have an impact if these conditions are not met. If the goal is to address needs during difficult periods (lean season) these foods should be accessible and consumed regularly during these months. For children and mothers to benefit from the gardens their diet must be prioritized to ensure they are consuming the diverse diet and/or benefitting directly from the income gained.

OBJECTIVE

RFTOP No. 72061324R00012 - Evaluation of Community Gardens’ Contribution to Household Income & Nutrition

The main objective of this evaluation is to assess the contribution of community gardens to both nutrition and income and to assess sustainability factors for community gardens.

C.3 RESEARCH QUESTIONS

Specifically, the evaluation will answer the following questions.

1. To what extent are community gardens contributing to nutrition?

. What is the (direct and indirect) contribution of community gardens to children under 2 and women of reproductive age nutrition?

. What package of support is necessary for community gardens to contribute meaningfully to nutrition outcomes?

2. To what extent are community gardens contributing to household income?

. What is the contribution of community gardens to household income?

. What factors are necessary for community gardens to generate income all year round?

2. What conditions are necessary for community gardens to offer economic viability?

. What is the minimum plot size per participant for a garden to provide meaningful contribution to household nutrition and income?

. To what extent does garden location affect its viability (reference to water source, market, distance from households)?

. Does choice of crops grown influenced by household needs and/or market needs?

2. What factors contribute to the sustainability of community gardens?

. What are common characteristics of gardens which have remained functional at least three years after the end of the activity?

a. Single support vs multiple support . Are there common designs which are more sustainable than others?

. Are gardens supported by a multi water use system any different than those supplied by other water systems?

. Does composition of garden participants affect sustainability?

. To what extent does the Asset Management Committee (AMC) contribute to the sustainability of the community garden?

. Does land ownership affect sustainability?

2. Targeting . How are plot holders selected?

. What is the socioeconomic status of most garden participants? (are community gardens targeting the most vulnerable members of the community?)

. Are there any gender & youth considerations in the design of community gardens?

. Are there any unintended consequences brought about by community gardens?

RFTOP No. 72061324R00012 - Evaluation of Community Gardens’ Contribution to Household Income & Nutrition

C.4 EVALUATION DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY

The evaluation firm is expected to develop appropriate evaluation design and methodology to answer the above evaluation questions. The evaluation is expected to use a mixed design to answer different evaluation questions. The evaluation should borrow aspects from both exploratory and descriptive designs. The evaluator is expected to do economic analysis on the viability of gardens in improving household income and nutrition. Both qualitative and quantitative data collection methods should be considered as part of the design.

The evaluation firm is expected to review literature and similar evaluation to inform the final design of the evaluation.

To ensure the evaluation covers the different types of garden design and levels of functionality, USAID expects the Evaluation firm to conduct an inventory of assets in the districts covered by this evaluation to assess level of functionality and profiling. This information will then be used to inform sampling and site selection. USAID expects the evaluation firm to sample sites from both functional gardens and non-function gardens to enhance learning on factors affecting functionality or threatens sustainability. The evaluation firm should budget resources for preparatory work.

The evaluation firm may adopt a cluster approach to sampling to reduce logistical costs but should sample a large enough number of gardens to produce conclusive results for factors contributing to success and sustainability and factors which negatively affect sustainability of gardens. The evaluator should also be able to review gardens with different participant plot sizes to be able to deduce the minimum plot size to significantly contribute to household income and food availability.

USAID expects that, at a minimum, the evaluation team will:

● Conduct a desk review on related literature.

● Conduct site visits to community gardens in selected districts to assess functionality and guide sampling.

● Sample gardens for in depth study and conduct site visits for both key informant interviews, focus group discussions and household interviews using structured data collection tools.

● Conduct econometric analysis to determine minimum plot size per participant for the garden to have economic viability.

● Interview USAID and Implementing Partner staff who have experience supporting or implementing community gardens.

● Conduct analysis of improvements in diets of women and children

The desk review includes at a minimum:

● Project descriptions of selected Activities

● Baseline and endline evaluations where available

● Final reports for selected Activities

RFTOP No. 72061324R00012 - Evaluation of Community Gardens’ Contribution to Household Income & Nutrition

● Previous evaluations on the impact of gardens including:

o Evaluation of Multi Water Use System (MWUS) study o Amalima Loko Garden study o PRP Garden cost effective analysis

The contractor will submit the preliminary evaluation design in response to the [Request for Task Order Proposal (RFTOP), for review by USAID. The evaluation Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) will approve the finalized evaluation design.

Annex 1

Distribution of community gardens by district

District Number of Gardens Partners

Bikita 8 WV/ENSURE

Binga 26 WFP, SC,CNFA

Buhera 8 WV/ENSURE

Bulilima 23 CRS/PRIZE, CNFA/Amalima

Chimanimani 12 WV/ENSURE

Chipinge 9 WV/ENSURE

Chiredzi 6 ACF

Chivi 16 WV/ENSURE

Gokwe South 5 ACF

Gwanda 14 CRS/PRIZE, CNFA/Amalima

Hwange 6 WFP

Kariba 30 WFP, SC

Mangwe 36 CRS/PRIZE, CNFA/Amalima

Masvingo 38 WFP

Mbire 20 WFP

Mutare 10 CARE

Mudzi 15 CRS/PRIZE, WFP

Muzarabani 3 WFP

Mwenezi 60 WFP , ACF

Rushinga 18 WFP, CRS PRIZE

Tsholotsho 4 CNFA/Amalima

UMP 11 WFP

RFTOP No. 72061324R00012 - Evaluation of Community Gardens’ Contribution to Household Income & Nutrition

Zaka 20 WV/ENSURE, CARE

Zvishavane 14 WFP

RFTOP No. 72061324R00012 - Evaluation of Community Gardens’ Contribution to Household Income & Nutrition

SECTION D – BRANDING AND MARKING

D.1 BRANDING

The Contractor shall comply with the requirements of the USAID “Graphic Standards Manual” available at www.usaid.gov/branding or any successor branding policy.

D.2 AIDAR 752.7009 MARKING (JAN 1993)

(a) It is USAID policy that USAID-financed commodities and shipping containers, and project construction sites and other project locations be suitably marked with the USAID emblem. Shipping containers are also to be marked with the last five digits of the USAID financing document number. As a general rule, marking is not required for raw materials shipped in bulk (such as coal, grain, etc.), or for semifinished products which are not packaged.

(b) Specific guidance on marking requirements should be obtained prior to procurement of commodities to be shipped, and as early as possible for project construction sites and other project locations. This guidance will be provided through the cognizant technical office indicated on the cover page of this contract, or by the Mission Director in the Cooperating Country to which commodities are being shipped, or in which the project site is located.

(c) Authority to waive marking requirements is vested with the Regional Assistant Administrators, and with Mission Directors.

(d) A copy of any specific marking instructions or waivers from marking requirements is to be sent to the contracting officer; the original should be retained by the Contractor.

RFTOP No. 72061324R00012 - Evaluation of Community Gardens’ Contribution to Household Income & Nutrition http://www.usaid.gov/branding

SECTION E – INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE

E.1 INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE/RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL

In accordance with the clause of the IDIQ contract entitled Inspection of Services – Fixed-price, (FAR 52.246-4), inspection of results or other deliverables required by the TO must be made by the cognizant TOCOR. Acceptance of goods/services and reports or other deliverables by the cognizant TOCOR for the TO must form the basis for payments to the Contractor and will form the basis of the Contractor’s permanent performance record with regard to this contract.

RFTOP No. 72061324R00012 - Evaluation of Community Gardens’ Contribution to Household Income & Nutrition

SECTION F – DELIVERABLES

F.1 PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE

The estimated period of performance for this Task Order is August 2024 – February 2025. The period of implementation is an estimate, and the actual dates may vary, the start and end dates will be reflected in the Task Order (TO).

F.2 PLACE OF PERFORMANCE

The place of performance of this Task Order is Zimbabwe.

F.3 EVALUATION DELIVERABLES AND SCHEDULE

Activities specified in the Mission Facilitation and Drafting Work Plan have established specific deliverables. Those deliverables are based on the schedule established in the Work Plan and may only be updated through modifications to the Work Plan.

Note: All documentation must be submitted electronically. All deliverables shall be produced in Professional American English.

The final report shall comply with USAID guidance and branding and marking requirements. As noted previously, modifications to the deliverables may be proposed to the COR prior to their drafting. The COR will have the authority to approve or reject any such proposed modifications in his/her role of providing technical direction so long as they do not affect the contract budget.

(a) Financial reporting will consist of:

Accruals: USAID performs an accrual exercise at the end of each quarter on December 31, March 30, June 30, and September 30. Contractors are required to submit 4 quarterly accrual expenditures reports per year. The reports are due 15 days before the end of a quarter.

Quarterly Financial Reports: Thirty days after the end of each calendar quarter, the recipient will submit to the COR a report on expenditures accrued during the report period and projected accrued expenditures for the next quarter. This will report against the Award(s) line items.

Annual Financial Reports: The July-September Quarterly Financial Report normally constitutes the Annual Financial Progress Report; however, in this case the final financial report submitted will constitute the Annual Financial Progress Report.

The Offeror will suggest a timetable for conducting the evaluation and completing the final evaluation report. USAID expects accomplishment of the following key tasks and deliverables from the successful offeror:

1. In briefing:

Within two weeks of contract award, the evaluation team will meet with the COR and relevant USAID staff for introductions and to discuss the team’s understanding of the assignment, initial

RFTOP No. 72061324R00012 - Evaluation of Community Gardens’ Contribution to Household Income & Nutrition assumptions, evaluation questions, methodology, and work plan, and/or to adjust the SOW, if necessary. The evaluation team will present findings from the desk review and examination of data to date.

2. Evaluation Work Plan:

Within three weeks of the award of the contract, the lead evaluator shall complete and present a draft work plan of the evaluation to the COR. The work plan will include at a minimum:

a) Draft schedule and logistical arrangements.

b) Members of the evaluation team, delineated by roles and responsibilities.

c) Evaluation milestones.

d) Anticipated schedule of evaluation team data collection efforts.

e) Proposed evaluation methodology including selection criteria for comparison groups, if applicable; and

f) Evaluation Report outline.

The contractor will update the evaluation work plan (the lists of interviewees, survey participants, the schedule) and submit the updated version to the COR on a biweekly basis.

3. Evaluation Design:

Within two weeks of approval of the work plan, the evaluation team must submit an evaluation design to the COR. The design will become an annex to the evaluation report.

The evaluation design will include at a minimum:

a) Detailed evaluation design matrix that links the Evaluation Questions from the SOW (in their finalized form) to data sources, methods, and the data analysis plan.

b) Draft questionnaires and other data collection instruments or their main features.

c) List of potential interviewees and sites to be visited and proposed selection criteria and/or sampling plan (must include sampling methodology and methods, including a justification of sample size and any applicable calculations);

d) Limitations to the evaluation design; and

e) Dissemination plan (designed in collaboration with USAID).

The data analysis plan should clearly describe the evaluation team’s approach for analyzing quantitative and qualitative data (as applicable), including proposed sample sizes, specific data analysis tools, and any software proposed to be used, with an explanation of how/why these selections will be useful in answering the evaluation questions for this task. Qualitative data should be coded as part of the analysis approach, and the coding used should be included in the appendix of the final report. Gender, geographic, and role (beneficiary, implementer, government official, NGO, etc.) disaggregation must be included in the data analysis where applicable.

All dissemination plans should be developed with USAID and include information on audiences, activities, and deliverables, including any data visualizations, multimedia products, or events to help communicate evaluation findings and conclusions. See the Evaluation Toolkit for guidance on Developing an Evaluation Dissemination Plan.

RFTOP No. 72061324R00012 - Evaluation of Community Gardens’ Contribution to Household Income & Nutrition https://usaidlearninglab.org/evaluation-toolkit https://usaidlearninglab.org/library/developing-evaluation-dissemination-plan-0 https://usaidlearninglab.org/library/developing-evaluation-dissemination-plan-0

If applicable based on the Disclosure of Conflict of Interests Forms (or see Attachment 2 in Section J), is to be submitted with the awardee’s proposal for all persons named in the proposal submission;

the evaluation design will include a conflict of interest mitigation plan.

USAID offices and relevant stakeholders are asked to take up to 10 working days to review and consolidate comments through the COR. Once the evaluation team receives the consolidated comments on the initial evaluation design and work plan, they are expected to return with a revised evaluation design and work plan within 5 working days.

4. Regular Briefing and Updates:

The evaluation team is expected to provide bi-weekly updates on the status of the evaluation, including potential challenges, emerging opportunities, and team’s findings to the USAID COR.

Updates can be done via online conferencing and phone and documented via email. More frequent updates can be arranged where necessary.

5. Preliminary Findings Presentation Meeting and Recommendations Development:

The evaluation team is expected to hold a preliminary presentation to discuss the summary of findings and conclusions with USAID and to draft collaboratively any requested recommendations.

This presentation date will be determined in the evaluation work plan.

6. Stakeholders’ Presentation of Findings:

The evaluation team is expected to hold a final presentation to discuss the summary of findings and conclusions (and recommendations, if applicable) with USAID and internal and external stakeholders.

This presentation date will be determined in consultation with USAID.

7. Draft Evaluation Report:

The draft evaluation report should be consistent with USAID guidance for quality evaluation. The report will address each of the questions identified in the SOW and any other issues the team considers having a bearing on the objectives of the evaluation. Any such issues can be included in the report only after consultation with USAID. The submission date for the draft evaluation report will be determined in the evaluation work plan. Once the initial draft evaluation report is submitted, USAID will have 10 working days in which to review and comment on the initial draft, after which point the COR will submit the consolidated comments to the evaluation team. The evaluation team will then be asked to submit a revised final draft report within 10 working days, and again USAID will review and send comments on this final draft report within 10 days of its submission. Depending on the quality of the second draft more rounds may be added to adequately address information gaps.

Where comments are substantial, a meeting may be scheduled to discuss substantial comments to reduce the number of back and forth.

8. Final Evaluation Report:

The evaluation team will be asked to take no more than 10 working days to respond to and incorporate final draft evaluation report comments from USAID. The evaluation team lead will then submit the final report to the COR.

RFTOP No. 72061324R00012 - Evaluation of Community Gardens’ Contribution to Household Income & Nutrition https://usaidlearninglab.org/library/sample-disclosure-conflict-interest-form

9. Revised PowerPoint presentation summarizing evaluation findings:

The Offeror will revise the Power Point Presentation delivered as part of the final presentation in (5) to summarize the main findings and recommendations from the final evaluation report and submit to USAID along with the final report.

10. Recommendations and best practices Briefer

The Offeror will present to USAID a recommendations and best practices briefer which should be 5-7 pages outlining recommendations on how best to establish community gardens and some of the best practices identified during the review.

11. Submission of Dataset(s) to the Development Data Library:

Per USAID’s Open Data policy (see ADS 579, USAID Development Data) the contractor must also submit to the COR and the Development Data Library (DDL) in a machine-readable, non-proprietary format, a copy of any dataset created or obtained in performance of this award, if applicable. The dataset should be organized and documented for use by those not fully familiar with the intervention or evaluation. Please review ADS 579.3.2.2 Types of Data To Be Submitted to the DDL to determine applicability.

12. Submission of Final Report to the Development Experience Clearinghouse:

Per USAID policy (ADS 201.3.5.18) the contractor must submit the evaluation final report and its summary or summaries to the Development Experience Clearinghouse (DEC) within three months of final approval by USAID.

Schedule of Deliverables:

Task Deliverables Timeframe

1. In briefing: The evaluation team will meet with the COR and relevant USAID staff for introductions and to discuss the team’s understanding of the assignment, initial assumptions, evaluation questions, methodology, and work plan, and/or to adjust the SOW, if necessary. The evaluation team will present findings from the desk review and examination of data to date.

Within two weeks of award of the contract

RFTOP No. 72061324R00012 - Evaluation of Community Gardens’ Contribution to Household Income & Nutrition https://www.usaid.gov/ads/policy/500/579 https://www.usaid.gov/ads/policy/500/579 https://www.usaid.gov/ads/policy/200/201 https://dec.usaid.gov/dec/home/Default.aspx

2. Evaluation Work Plan The contract will complete and present a draft work plan for the evaluation to the COR. The contractor will update the evaluation work plan (the lists of interviewees, survey participants, the schedule) and submit the updated version to the COR. USAID will take up to 10 working days to review and consolidate comments through the COR. Once the evaluation team receives the consolidated comments on the initial submission, they are expected to return with a revised version within 5 working days.

Within three weeks of contract award and thereafter biweekly updates thereafter as necessary

3. Evaluation Design: The evaluation team must submit an evaluation design to the COR. The design will become an annex to the evaluation report.

The evaluation design will be shared with partner country stakeholders as well as with the implementing partners for comment before being finalized. USAID will take up to 10 working days to review and consolidate comments through the COR. Once the evaluation team receives the consolidated comments on the initial submission, they are expected to return with a revised version within 5 working days.

Within two weeks of approval of the work plan

4. Regular Briefing Meetings:

The evaluation team is expected to provide weekly updates on the status of the evaluation, including potential challenges, emerging opportunities, and team’s findings to the USAID COR. Updates can be done via online conferencing and phone and documented via email.

Bi-Weekly

5. Preliminary Findings Presentation Meeting:

The evaluation team is expected to hold a virtual preliminary presentation to discuss the summary of findings and conclusions with USAID and to draft collaboratively any requested recommendations.

The presentation date will be determined in the evaluation work plan.

RFTOP No. 72061324R00012 - Evaluation of Community Gardens’ Contribution to Household Income & Nutrition

6. Stakeholders’ Presentation of findings

The evaluation team is expected to hold a final presentation to discuss the summary of findings and conclusions (and recommendations, if applicable) with USAID and all internal and external stakeholders.

The presentation date will be determined in the evaluation work plan.

7. Draft Report The draft evaluation report should follow the report outlined approved with evaluation design. Once the initial draft evaluation report is submitted, USAID will have 10 working days in which to review and comment on the initial draft, after which point the COR will submit the consolidated comments to the evaluation team.

The submission date for the draft evaluation report will be determined in the evaluation work plan.

8. Final Report The final evaluation report in USAID format.

Within 10 business days of receipt of USAID comments to the draft report

9. Revised PowerPoint presentation summarizing evaluation findings:

The Offeror will revise the Power Point Presentation delivered as part of the final presentation in (6) to summarize the main findings and recommendations from the final evaluation report.

Along with the final report

10. Recommendations and Best Practices Briefer

The Offeror will present to USAID a recommendations and best practices briefer which should be 5-7 pages outlining recommendations on how best to establish community gardens and some of the best practices identified during the review.

2 weeks after final report

9. Data and Records All data and records from the evaluation must be submitted to USAID/Zimbabwe in an easily readable and organized electronic format along with the final report

Along with the final report

RFTOP No. 72061324R00012 - Evaluation of Community Gardens’ Contribution to Household Income & Nutrition

11. Submission of Dataset(s) to the Development Data Library:

Per USAID’s Open Data policy (see ADS 579, USAID Development Data) the contractor must also submit to the COR and the Development Data Library (DDL), at www.usaid.gov/data, in a machine-readable, non-proprietary format, a copy of any dataset created or obtained in performance of this award, if applicable..

Please review ADS 579.3.2.2 Types of Data To Be Submitted to the DDL to determine applicability.

Along with the final report

12. Submission of Final Report to Development Experience Clearinghouse:

Per USAID policy (ADS 201.3.5.18) the contractor must submit the evaluation final report and its summary or summaries to the Development Experience Clearinghouse

Within three months of final approval by USAID.

FINAL REPORT FORMAT

The Evaluation firm will propose a final evaluation format as part of evaluation design.

See the Evaluation Toolkit for the How-To Note on Preparing Evaluation Reports and ADS 201mah, USAID Evaluation Report Requirements. An optional Evaluation Report Template is also available in the Evaluation Toolkit.

F.4 EVALUATION TEAM COMPOSITION

The evaluation is looking into different dimensions and the evaluation firm needs to ensure it has technical specialists to cover these areas. The evaluation team should have specialists from the following disciplines: nutrition, agriculture, economics/business management, and gender. The evaluation team members should have experience in evaluations including data collection and analysis for both qualitative and quantitative data. The team leader should have experience in evaluating similar programs particularly focusing on the impact of development programs.

The evaluation effort will be led by the contractor, who will be managed directly by USAID/Zimbabwe.

The Mission anticipates a team of at least 4 key personnel and additional non key personnel that allow efficient and quality data collection in line with the final evaluation design and methods. The Evaluation Team Leader must have demonstrated experience in providing successful leadership under similar circumstances. The evaluation team will need the following key personnel.

a) Nutritionist with food security background

b) Agriculture expert with irrigation background

c) Economics and business management expert

d) Governance and sustainability expert

RFTOP No. 72061324R00012 - Evaluation of Community Gardens’ Contribution to Household Income & Nutrition https://www.usaid.gov/ads/policy/500/579 https://www.usaid.gov/ads/policy/500/579 https://www.usaid.gov/data https://www.usaid.gov/data https://www.usaid.gov/ads/policy/500/579 https://www.usaid.gov/ads/policy/500/579 https://www.usaid.gov/ads/policy/200/201 https://dec.usaid.gov/dec/home/Default.aspx https://dec.usaid.gov/dec/home/Default.aspx https://usaidlearninglab.org/evaluation-toolkit https://usaidlearninglab.org/library/how-note-preparing-evaluation-reports https://www.usaid.gov/ads/policy/200/201mah https://www.usaid.gov/ads/policy/200/201mah https://usaidlearninglab.org/library/evaluation-report-template

Where the desired expertise is not possessed in groupings above offeror can propose different configurations ensuring all desired skills are met. At least one of the team members should have experience in Zimbabwe and experience with community gardens either through prior evaluation or implementation.

The offer must provide information about evaluation team members, including their curriculum vitae (not more than 3 pages), and explain how they meet the requirements in the evaluation SOW.

Submissions of writing samples or links to past evaluation reports and related deliverables composed by proposed team members are highly desirable. Per ADS 201.3.5.14, all team members must provide to USAID a signed statement attesting to a lack of conflict of interest or describing an existing conflict of interest relative to the project or activity being evaluated (i.e., a conflict of interest form).

Proposed key personnel are expected to be the people who execute the work of this contract. Any substitutes to the proposed key personnel must be vetted and approved by the COR before they begin work. USAID may request an interview with any of the proposed evaluation team members via conference call or other means.

The evaluation COR may observe some of the data collection efforts. USAID may also delegate one or more staff members to work full-time with the evaluation team or to participate in selected evaluation activities. The evaluation COR will inform the contractor in writing about any full-time or part-time USAID delegates no later than 10 working days after the submission of the first draft of the evaluation work plan. USAID will pre-define any staff’s level of involvement by indicating the purpose of their inclusion, their role on the team and in which components of the evaluation they will participate, their expertise in the topic or sector, their expertise in evaluation design or implementation, and their anticipated level of effort (LOE).

USAID maintains primary responsibility for management of its own staff. USAID will outline collaboration, delivery, and performance expectations for its staff as well as reporting lines and how staff management roles and responsibilities will be coordinated between USAID, the contractor, and the evaluation team lead. This plan will be finalized in consultation with the contractor and the evaluation team lead, with final approval by the COR, to ensure it is feasible and appropriate to the evaluation objectives and USAID/Zimbabwe needs and that it addresses mitigation of risk of impeding evaluation implementation or biasing findings. All costs associated with the participation of full-time or part-time USAID delegates in the evaluation will be the responsibility of USAID.

F.5 FINAL REPORT FORMAT

1. Abstract

2. Executive Summary

3. Evaluation Purpose

4. Background on the Context and the Activity

5. Evaluation Questions

6. Methodology

7. Limitations to the Evaluation

8. Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendations

9. Annexes

RFTOP No. 72061324R00012 - Evaluation of Community Gardens’ Contribution to Household Income & Nutrition

The executive summary should succinctly capture the evaluation purpose and evaluation questions, project background, evaluation design, methods, and limitations, and the findings, conclusions, and recommendations.

See the Evaluation Toolkit for the How-To Note on Preparing Evaluation Reports and ADS 201mah, USAID/Zimbabwe Evaluation Report Requirements. An optional Evaluation Report Template is also available in the Evaluation Toolkit.

The evaluation abstract of no more than 250 words should describe what was evaluated, evaluation questions, methods, and key findings or conclusions. The executive summary should be 2–5 pages and summarize the purpose, background of the project being evaluated, main evaluation questions, methods, findings, and conclusions (plus recommendations and lessons learned, if applicable). The evaluation methodology shall be explained in the report in detail. Limitations to the evaluation shall be disclosed in the report, with particular attention to the limitations associated with the evaluation methods (e.g., in sampling; data availability; measurement; analysis; any potential bias such as sampling/selection, measurement, interviewer, response, etc.) and their implications for conclusions drawn from the evaluation findings.

Annexes to the report must include:

● Evaluation SOW (updated, not the original, if there were any modifications);

● Evaluation methods.

● All data collection and analysis tools used in conducting the evaluation, such as questionnaires, checklists, and discussion guides.

● All sources of information or data identified and listed.

● Statements of difference regarding significant unresolved differences of opinion by funders, implementers, and/or members of the evaluation team, if applicable.

● Signed disclosure of conflict-of-interest forms for all evaluation team members, either attesting to a lack of or describing existing conflicts of interest; and

● Summary information about evaluation team members, including qualifications, experience, and role on the team.

● Evaluation data or link to data.

F.6 CRITERIA TO ENSURE THE QUALITY OF THE EVALUATION

USAID will adhere to ADS 201maa, Criteria to Ensure the Quality of the Evaluation Report, when reviewing and approving draft and final evaluation reports to ensure quality.

● Evaluations must have the required sections outlined in ADS 201mah, USAID/Zimbabwe Evaluation Report Requirements.

● Evaluation reports should represent a thoughtful, well-researched, and well-organized effort to objectively evaluate the subject of the evaluation (e.g., strategy, project, activity).

● Evaluation reports should use clear language per the USAID/Zimbabwe Style Guide.

● Evaluation reports should adequately address all evaluation questions included in the statement of work, or the evaluation questions subsequently revised and documented in consultation and agreement with USAID/Zimbabwe.

● According to the ADS 201.3.6.2 principle that evaluations should be based on the best methods of appropriate rigor, evaluations must produce well documented findings that are verifiable, reproducible, and on which stakeholders can confidently rely, while providing clear explanations of limitations. Evaluation methodology should be explained in detail and sources of information

RFTOP No. 72061324R00012 - Evaluation of Community Gardens’ Contribution to Household Income & Nutrition https://usaidlearninglab.org/evaluation-toolkit https://usaidlearninglab.org/library/how-note-preparing-evaluation-reports https://www.usaid.gov/ads/policy/200/201mah https://www.usaid.gov/ads/policy/200/201mah https://usaidlearninglab.org/library/evaluation-report-template http://usaidlearninglab.org/library/sample-disclosure-conflict-interest-form https://www.usaid.gov/ads/policy/200/201maa https://www.usaid.gov/ads/policy/200/201mah https://www.usaid.gov/ads/policy/200/201mah https://www.usaid.gov/work-usaid/style-guide properly identified. Sufficient information on methodology and data collection should be included to allow for stakeholders to make informed judgements about the quality and accuracy of the findings, and to allow other evaluators to replicate the protocol.

● In support of ADS 201.3.6.2 principle that evaluations should be independent, objective, and unbiased in measuring and reporting, limitations to the evaluation should be adequately disclosed in the report, with particular attention to the limitations associated with the evaluation methodology (selection bias, recall bias, unobservable differences between comparator groups, etc.). Evaluators should strive for objectivity in the planning and conduct of evaluations and in the interpretation and dissemination of findings, avoiding conflicts of interest, bias, and other partiality.

● Evaluation reports should adequately capture the situations and experiences of both males and females. If evaluation findings or data include people-level indicators they must be disaggregated by sex and youth. For more information, see How-To Note: Engendering Evaluation at USAID/Zimbabwe.

● Findings, conclusions, and recommendations (if any) should be specific, concise, and supported by strong quantitative and/or qualitative evidence.

o Evaluation findings should be presented as analyzed facts, evidence, and data and not based on anecdotes, hearsay, or simply the compilation of people’s opinions.

o Conclusions should clearly be based on the evaluation findings.

If recommendations are included, they should be supported by a specific set of referenced findings, and should be prioritized, action-oriented, practical, and specific. To support the ADS 201.3.6.2 evaluation principle that evaluations should be oriented to reinforcing local ownership, when possible, evaluators should include relevant local stakeholders in joint development of recommendations. See ADS 201mah, USAID/Zimbabwe Evaluation Report Requirements and the Evaluation Report Checklist and Review Template from the Evaluation Toolkit for additional guidance.

RFTOP No. 72061324R00012 - Evaluation of Community Gardens’ Contribution to Household Income & Nutrition https://www.usaid.gov/ads/policy/200/201 https://programnet.usaid.gov/resource/how-note-engendering-evaluation-usaid https://programnet.usaid.gov/resource/how-note-engendering-evaluation-usaid https://www.usaid.gov/ads/policy/200/201 https://www.usaid.gov/ads/policy/200/201mah https://www.usaid.gov/ads/policy/200/201mah https://usaidlearninglab.org/library/evaluation-report-checklist-and-review-template https://usaidlearninglab.org/library/evaluation-report-checklist-and-review-template https://usaidlearninglab.org/evaluation-toolkit

SECTION G – CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION DATA

G.1 CONTRACTING OFFICER’S AUTHORITY

The Contracting Officer is the only person authorized to make or approve any changes in the requirements of this Task Order and notwithstanding any provisions contained elsewhere in this task order, the said authority remains solely in the Contracting Officer. In the event the Contractor makes any changes at the direction of any person other than the Contracting Officer, the change shall be considered to have been made without authority and no adjustment shall be made in the contract terms and conditions, including price.

CONTRACTING OFFICE

Office of Acquisition and Assistance

USAID ZIMBABWE

2 Lorraine Drive Westgate, Harare

G.2 TECHNICAL DIRECTION AND DESIGNATION OF RESPONSIBLE USAID OFFICIALS

The USAID/Zimbabwe/BHA office shall provide technical oversight to the Contractor through the designated COR. The Contracting Officer shall issue a letter appointing the COR for the task order and provide a copy of the designation letter to the Contractor.

G.3 RELATIONSHIPS AND RESPONSIBILITIES

The Contractor shall work under the technical direction of the COR (who will coordinate with the USAID/Zimbabwe/BHA office team). The COR will provide advanced technical direction in the form of approval or disapproval of the Contractor’s proposed scopes of work and maximum costs for sub-activities. Subject to the availability of funds, the COR may require additional activities and/or deliverables that may enhance the program described within this SOW. The COR and alternate for this award are as follows (COR designation letter will be distributed separately):

Name: Andrea Plucknett Title: Contracting Officer (CO) Email: aplucknett@usaid.gov

G.4 ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA

To be filled in at time of award.

RFTOP No. 72061324R00012 - Evaluation of Community Gardens’ Contribution to Household Income & Nutrition mailto:aplucknett@usaid.gov

SECTION H – SPECIAL CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS

H.1 NOTICE LISTING CONTRACT CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Per the MECLAK IDIQ Contract (FAR 52.216-18 ORDERING), all FAR and AIDAR clauses included in the contract are applicable to task orders as issued based on their individual statements.

of work. Clauses and provisions remain applicable throughout the terms of the contract and orders.

RFTOP No. 72061324R00012 - Evaluation of Community Gardens’ Contribution to Household Income & Nutrition

SECTION I – CONTRACT CLAUSES

I.1 NOTICE LISTING CONTRACT CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Per the MECLAK IDIQ Contract (FAR 52.216-18 ORDERING), all FAR and AIDAR clauses included in the contract are applicable to task orders as issued based on their individual statements of work. Clauses and provisions remain applicable throughout the terms of the contract and orders.

Additionally, the following clauses/provisions apply only to this task order.

AIDAR 752.7005 Submission requirements for development experience documents.

Submission Requirements for Development Experience Documents (Sept 2013)

(a) Contract Reports and Information/Intellectual Products.

(1) Within thirty (30) calendar days of obtaining the contracting officer representative's approval, the contractor must submit to USAID's Development Experience Clearinghouse (DEC) one copy each of reports and information products which describe, communicate or organize program/project development assistance activities, methods, technologies, management, research, results and experience. These reports include Assessments, evaluations, studies, technical and periodic reports, annual and final reports, and development experience documents (defined as documents that:

(i) Describe the planning, design, implementation, evaluation, and results of development assistance; and

(ii) Are generated during the life cycle of development assistance programs or activities.)

The contractor must also submit copies of information products including training materials, publications, videos and other intellectual deliverable materials required under the Contract Schedule. The following information is not to be submitted:

(A) Time-sensitive materials such as newsletters, brochures or bulletins.

(B) The contractor's information that is incidental to award administration, such as financial, administrative, cost or pricing, or management information.

(2) Within thirty (30) calendar days after completion of the contract, the contractor must submit to the DEC any reports that have not been previously submitted and an index of all reports and information/intellectual products referenced in paragraph (a)(1) of this clause.

(b) Submission requirements. The contractor must review the DEC Web site for the most up to-date submission instructions, including the DEC address for paper submissions, the document formatting and the types of documents to be submitted. The submission instructions can be found at:

https://dec.usaid.gov.

(1) Standards.

(i) Material must not include financially sensitive information or personally identifiable information (PII) such as social security numbers, home addresses and dates of birth. Such information must be removed prior to submission.

RFTOP No. 72061324R00012 - Evaluation of Community Gardens’ Contribution to Household Income & Nutrition https://dec.usaid.gov

(ii) All submissions must conform to current USAID branding requirements.

(iii) Contract reports and information/intellectual…