Evaluation Services RFP.pdf

Issuance Date: August 31, 2012 Deadline for Questions: September 21, 2012, 17:00, Eastern Standard Time Closing Date: October 16, 2012 Closing Time: 17:00, Eastern Standard Time

Subject: Request for Proposals/Solicitation SOL-527-12-000014

USAID/PERU EVALUATION SERVICES

To All Prospective Offerors:

The United States Government, represented by the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), is issuing this Request for Proposals (RFP) to obtain technical and advisory services to assist USAID in the evaluation and monitoring of its development activities in Peru and the South America Region. USAID/Peru’s portfolio of activities is comprised of projects in the following sectors: Agricultural and Economic Development, Governance, Health, Education, Conflict, Institutional Capacity Building, and Disaster Prevention and Management.

In accordance with FAR Part 19.5, this acquisition is being set aside for small businesses only. If your organization decides to submit a proposal in response to this solicitation, it must be submitted in accordance with Section L of this RFP. Offerors must also carefully review Section M - Evaluation Factors for Award.

Sections B through I of the solicitation will become a substantive part of the anticipated contract with blanks to be completed by the Contracting Officer upon award. Section K - Representations, Certifications and Acknowledgements must be completed in full.

Any and all decision making related to programmatic direction, strategy formulation, monitoring, budgets, etc is inherently governmental in nature and will not be part of this contract. However, as part of its advisory services, the contractor will be expected to provide assistance in the collection and synthesis of information, as directed by USAID.

USAID/Peru anticipates awarding a cost reimbursement completion-type contract as a result of this solicitation, covering an estimated period of five (5) years, subject to availability of funds and satisfactory performance.

The estimated cost range for this procurement is $5 million to $8.5 million. Offerors must propose costs that they believe are realistic and reasonable for the work described herein.

Under this solicitation, USAID encourages the participation to the maximum extent possible of partnership arrangements with Peruvian or regional organizations or consortia, in accordance with one of the key aspects of USAID FORWARD, Implementation and Procurement Reform (please visit http://forward.usaid.gov/ for more information).

If substantive questions are received, which affect the response to the solicitation, or if changes are made to the closing date and time, as well as any other aspects of the RFP, this solicitation will be amended. Any amendments to this solicitation will be issued and posted on the Federal Business Opportunities (FBO) website. Offerors are encouraged to check this website (http://www.fbo.gov) periodically.

An Interested Vendor List (IVL) is not included in this solicitation. Offerors can register and use the IVL on the FBO webpage, so that firms can contact one another for consideration of teaming arrangements and/or small business subcontracting opportunities in response to this solicitation.

TBD

1. THIS CONTRACT IS A RATED ORDER RATING PAGE OF PAGES

UNDER DPAS (15 CFR 700)

2. CONTRACT NUMBER 3. SOLICITATION NUMBER 4. TYPE OF SOLICITATION 5. DATE ISSUED

August 31, 2102

6. REQUISITION/PURCHASE NUMBER

SEALED BID (IFB)

7. ISSUED BY CODE 8. ADDRESS OFFER TO (If other than Item 7)

NOTE: In sealed bid solicitations "offer" and "Offeror" mean "bid" and "bidder".

9. Sealed offers in original and _____________________________ copies for furnishing the supplies or services in the Schedule will be received at the place specified in Item 8, or if hand carried, in the depository located in until local time _______________________ (Hour) (Date)

CAUTION - LATE Submissions, Modifications, and Withdrawals: See Section L, Provision No. 52.214-7 or 52.215-1. All Offers are subject to all terms and conditions contained in this solicitation.

A. NAME B. TELEPHONE (NO COLLECT CALLS) C. E-MAIL ADDRESS

AREA CODE NUMBER EXT.

(X) SEC. DESCRIPTION PAGE(S) (X) SEC. DESCRIPTION PAGE(S)

PART I - THE SCHEDULE PART II - CONTRACT CLAUSES

A SOLICITATION/CONTRACT FORM I CONTRACT CLAUSES

B SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES/COSTS PART III - LIST OF DOCUMENTS, EXHIBITS AND OTHER ATTACH.

C DESCRIPTION/SPECS./WORK STATEMENT J LIST OF ATTACHMENTS

D PACKAGING AND MARKING PART IV - REPRESENTATIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS

E INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE

F DELIVERIES OR PERFORMANCE

G CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION DATA L INSTR., CONDS., AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS

H SPECIAL CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS M EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

K

REPRESENTATIONS, CERTIFICATIONS AND OTHER

STATEMENTS OF OFFERORS

NOTE: Item 12 does not apply if the solicitation includes the provisions at 52.214-16, Minimum Bid Acceptance Period.

12. In compliance with the above, the undersigned agrees, if this offer is accepted within ________ calendar days (60 calendar days unless a different period is inserted by the Offeror) from the date for receipt of offers specified above, to furnish any or all items upon which prices are offered at the price set opposite each item, delivered at the designated point(s), within the time specified in the schedule.

13. DISCOUNT FOR PROMPT PAYMENT 10 CALENDAR DAYS (%) 20 CALENDAR DAYS (%) 30 CALENDAR DAYS (%) CALENDAR DAYS (%)

(See Section I, Clause No. 52-232-8)

14. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF AMENDMENTS AMENDMENT NO. DATE AMENDMENT NO. DATE

(The Offeror acknowledges receipt of amendments to the SOLICITATION for Offerors and related documents numbered and dated:

CODE FACILITY

16. NAME AND TITLE OF PERSON AUTHORIZED TO SIGN OFFER15A. NAME AND

ADDRESS

OF OFFEROR

(Type or print)

15B. TELEPHONE NUMBER 17. SIGNATURE 18. OFFER DATE

AREA CODE NUMBER EXT.

15C. CHECK IF REMITTANCE ADDRESS IS DIFFERENT FROM

ABOVE - ENTER SUCH ADDRESS IN SCHEDULE

19. ACCEPTED AS TO ITEMS NUMBERED 20. AMOUNT 21. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION

22. AUTHORITY FOR USING OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION: 23. SUBMIT INVOICES TO ADDRESS SHOWN IN ITEM (4 copies unless otherwise specified)

10 U.S.C. 2304(a) ( ) 41 U.S.C. 253(c) ( )

24. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 7) 25. PAYMENT WILL BE MADE BYCODE CODE

26. NAME OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print) 27. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 28. AWARD DATE

IMPORTANT - Award will be made on this Form, or on Standard Form 26, or by other authorized official written notice.

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

(REV. 9-97)

10. FOR INFORMATION CALL:

11. TABLE OF CONTENTS

STANDARD FORM 33

SOLICITATION, OFFER AND AWARD

SOLICITATION

OFFER (Must be fully completed by Offeror)

AWARD (To be completed by Government)

3 113

527-12-000014

REGIONAL OFFICE OF ACQUISITION

AND ASSISTANCE (ROAA)

DOS/USAID, 3230 Lima Place Washington, DC 20521-3230

See Section L

Electronic Submissions Only – see Block 10.C and Section L

Nathan Olah 202-216-6345 LimaSolicitations@usaid.gov See Attached Table of Contents

X X X X X X X X

X

X

X X X

TBD See Section G

_ _ See Section G.5

FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT OFFICE

DOS/USAID

DOS/USAID, 3230 Lima Place Washington, DC 20521-3230

Sonila Hysi Supervisory Contracting Officer

ABBREVIATIONS

AAPD Acquisition & Assistance Policy Directive ADS Automated Directives System AIDAR Agency for International Development Acquisition Regulation CCR Central Contractor Registration CFR Code of Federal Regulation CO Contracting Officer CPFF Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee COR Contracting Officer’s Representative D&B Dun and Bradstreet, Inc DBA Defense Base Act DEC Development Experience Clearinghouse DO Development Objective DUNS Data Universal Numbering System EFT Electronic Funds Transfer FAR Federal Acquisition Regulation GAO General Accounting Office GCC Global Climate Change GHG Global Greenhouse Gas GOP Government of Peru HSPD-12 Homeland Security Presidential Directive-12 IT Information Technology M/IRM Office of Information Resource Management MEDEVAC Medical Evacuation MRV Measurement, Reporting and Verification OMB Office of Management and Budget ORCA Online Representations and Certifications Application PDF Portable Document Format PIV Personal Identity Verification PMP Performance Monitoring Plan RFP Request for Proposals SAR South America region SES Social and Environmental Standards SOW Statement of Work TIN Taxpayer Identification Number US United States of America USAID United States Agency for International Development USAID/W USAID Washington USG United States Government

SOL-527-12-000014

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PART I – THE SCHEDULE …………………………………………………………………………….7

SECTION B – SOLICITATION/CONTRACT FORM

B.1 PURPOSE

B.2 CONTRACT TYPE

B.3 ESTIMATED COST, FIXED FEE, AND OBLIGATED AMOUNT

B.5 FEE SCHEDULE

B.6 INDIRECT COSTS (DEC 1997)

B.7 ADVANCE UNDERSTANDINGS ON CEILING INDIRECT COST RATES AND FINAL

REIMBURSEMENT FOR INDIRECT COSTS

B.8 COST REIMBURSABLE

SECTION C – DESCRIPTION/SPECIFICATIONS/STATEMENT OF WORK

C.1 BACKGROUND

C.2 DEFINITIONS

C.3 STATEMENT OF WORK

C.4 STAFFING

C.5 SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS

SECTION D - PACKAGING AND MARKING

D.1 AIDAR 752.7009 MARKING (JAN 1993)

D.2 BRANDING AND MARKING POLICY

D.3 BRANDING STRATEGY

SECTION E - INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE

E.1 NOTICE LISTING CONTRACT CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

E.2 INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE

SECTION F - DELIVERIES OR PERFORMANCE

F.1 NOTICE LISTING CONTRACT CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

F.2 PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE

F.3 PLACE OF PERFORMANCE

F.4 TECHNICAL DIRECTION AND DESIGNATION OF RESPONSIBLE USAID OFFICIALS37

F.5 AUTHORIZED WORK DAY / WEEK

F.6 REPORTS AND DELIVERABLES

F.7 752.242-70 PERIODIC PROGRESS REPORTS (OCT 2007)

F.8 AIDAR 752.7005 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS FOR DEVELOPMENT

EXPERIENCE DOCUMENTS (JAN 2004)

F.9 KEY PERSONNEL

SECTION G - CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION DATA

G.1 CONTRACTING OFFICER'S AUTHORITY

G.2 TECHNICAL DIRECTION AND RELATIONSHIP WITH USAID

G.3 ACCEPTANCE AND APPROVAL

G.4 INVOICES

G.5 AIDAR 752.7003 DOCUMENTATION FOR PAYMENT (NOV 1998)

G.6 ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA

SECTION H - SPECIAL CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS

H.1 NOTICE LISTING CONTRACT CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

H.2 AIDAR 752.225-70 SOURCE AND NATIONALITY REQUIREMENTS (FEB 2012)

(Pursuant to Class Deviation No. OAA-DEV-12-01c)

H.3 AIDAR 752.7004 EMERGENCY LOCATOR INFORMATION (JUL 1997)

H.4 AIDAR 752.228-3 WORKER’S COMPENSATION INSURANCE

H.5 INSURANCE AND SERVICES

H.6 AIDAR 752.7007 PERSONNEL COMPENSATION (JULY 2007)

H.7 ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR PERSONNEL COMPENSATION

H.8 AIDAR 752.231-71 SALARY SUPPLEMENTS FOR HOST GOVERNMENT (HG)

EMPLOYEES (OCT 1998)

H.9 AIDAR 752.7031 LEAVE AND HOLIDAYS (OCT 1989)

H.10 AIDAR 752.228-70 MEDICAL EVACUATION (MEDEVAC) SERVICES (JULY 2007)

H.11 USAID DISABILITY POLICY – ACQUISITION (DECEMBER 2004)

H.12 AUTHORIZED GEOGRAPHIC CODE

H.13 EXECUTIVE ORDER ON TERRORISM FINANCING

H.14 NONEXPENDABLE PROPERTY PURCHASES AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

RESOURCES

H.15 GOVERNMENT FURNISHED FACILITIES OR PROPERTY

H.16 USAID IMPLEMENTATION OF SECTION 508 OF THE REHABILITATION ACT OF

1973 AND FEDERAL ACQUISITION CIRCULAR (FAC) 97-27 "ELECTRONIC AND

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ACCESSIBILITY

H.17 CONSENT TO SUBCONTRACT

H.18 REPORTING OF FOREIGN TAXES (JULY 2007)

H.19 CONFLICT OF INTEREST

H.20 LOGISTIC SUPPORT

H.21 LANGUAGE REQUIREMENTS AND REPORTING

H.22 GENDER CONSIDERATION

H.23 ENVIRONMENTAL PROCEDURES AND GUIDELINES

H.24 TRANSITION OF KNOWLEDGE, SKILLS AND ABILITIES

H.25 AIDAR 752.7032 INTERNATIONAL TRAVEL APPROVAL AND NOTIFICATION

REQUIREMENTS AND AIDAR 752.7027 PERSONNEL

H.26 AIDAR 752.245.71 TITLE TO AND CARE OF PROPERTY

H.27 PROHIBITION ON THE USE OF FEDERAL FUNDS TO PROMOTE, SUPPORT, OR

ADVOCATE THE LEGALIZATION OR PRACTICE OF PROSTITUTION– TIP

ACQUISITION (MAY 2007)

H.28 PERSONAL IDENTITY VERIFICATION OF CONTRACTOR PERSONNEL (JULY 2007)67

H.29 HOMELAND SECURITY PRESIDENTIAL DIRECTIVE-12 (HSPD-12) (SEPTEMBER

2006)

H.30 STANDARDS OF CONDUCT -- IMPROPER BUSINESS PRACTICES

H.31 FOREIGN GOVERNMENT DELEGATIONS TO INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCES ... 69

H.32 NONDISCRIMINATION (JUNE 2012)

PART II - CONTRACT CLAUSES

SECTION I - CONTRACT CLAUSES

I.1 NOTICE LISTING CONTRACT CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

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

I.3 FAR 52.209–9 UPDATES OF PUBLICLY AVAILABLE INFORMATION REGARDING

RESPONSIBILITY MATTERS. (JAN 2011)

I.4 AIDAR 752.4101 VOLUNTARY POPULATION PLANNING ACTIVITIES (JUN 2008) ... 76

PART III - LIST OF DOCUMENTS, EXHIBITS AND OTHER ATTACHMENTS

SECTION J - LIST OF ATTACHMENTS

PART IV - REPRESENTATIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS

SECTION K - REPRESENTATIONS, CERTIFICATIONS AND OTHER STATEMENTS OF

OFFERORS

K.1 NOTICE LISTING SOLICITATION PROVISIONS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE 79

K.2 52.219-1 SMALL BUSINESS PROGRAM REPRESENTATIONS (APR 2012)

K.3 52.209-5 CERTIFICATION REGARDING RESPONSIBILITY MATTERS (APR 2010) .. 81

K.4 52.209-7 INFORMATION REGARDING RESPONSIBILITY MATTERS (FEB 2012)

K.5 52.230-1 COST ACCOUNTING STANDARDS NOTICES AND CERTIFICATION

(OCTOBER 2008)

K.6 52.230-7 PROPOSAL DISCLOSURE--COST ACCOUNTING PRACTICE CHANGES

(APR 2005)

K.7 52.222-21 PROHIBITION OF SEGREGATED FACILITIES (FEB 1999)

K.8 INSURANCE - IMMUNITY FROM TORT LIABILITY

K.9 SIGNATURE

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS

L.1 52.252-1 SOLICITATION PROVISIONS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE (FEB

1998)

L.2 FAR 52.216-1 TYPE OF CONTRACT (APR 1984)

L.3 FAR 52.233-2 SERVICE OF PROTEST (SEPT 2006)

L.4 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

L.5 PROPOSAL SUBMISSION

L.6 INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE PREPARATION OF THE TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

L.7 INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE PREPARATION OF THE COST/BUSINESS PROPOSAL100

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

M.1 52.252-1 SOLICITATION PROVISIONS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE (FEB

1998)

M.2 GENERAL INFORMATION

M.3 TECHNICAL EVALUATION CRITERIA

M.4 COST PROPOSAL EVALUATION

M.5 SOURCE SELECTION

M.6 DETERMINATION OF COMPETITIVE RANGE

ATTACHMENT J.1 - BUDGET FORMAT (TEMPLATE)

ATTACHMENT J.2 - PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE

ATTACHMENT J.3 - USAID FORM 1420-17

ATTACHMENT J.4 – MATRIX OF BRANDING AND MARKING PLAN FOR CONTRACTS . 118

ATTACHMENT J.5 – RESULTS FRAMEWORK

PART I - THE SCHEDULE

SECTION B – SOLICITATION/CONTRACT FORM

B.1 PURPOSE

The purpose of this contract is to provide USAID/Peru and USAID/South America Regional operating units with evaluation services (both technical and advisory). Additionally this award will assist with the development of objective, program, and activity levels in accordance with USAID’s January 2011 Evaluation Policy. Requirements are as follows:

1. Design and implement both evaluation studies (quantitative and qualitative) and also assessments of USAID/Peru programs.

2. Provide performance monitoring and evaluation technical assistance and training for USAID/Peru, its implementing partners and host country government counterparts.

3. Strengthen the capacity of local evaluation institutions to design and implement evaluation studies and assessments according to international standards.

B.2 CONTRACT TYPE

This is a Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee (CPFF) completion-type contract. For the consideration set forth below, the Contractor will provide the performance requirements described in Section C and the deliverables or outputs described in Section F.

B.3 ESTIMATED COST, FIXED FEE, AND OBLIGATED AMOUNT

(a) The estimated cost for the performance of the work required hereunder, exclusive of fixed fee, if any, is: $TBD. The fixed fee, if any, is $TBD. The estimated cost plus fixed fee, if any, is $TBD.

(b) Within the estimated cost plus fixed fee (if any) specified in paragraph (a) above, the amount currently obligated and available for reimbursement of allowable costs incurred by the Contractor (and payment of fee, if any), and in accordance with Section B.5 below for performance hereunder is $TBD. The Contractor will not exceed the aforesaid obligated amount.

(c) Funds obligated hereunder are anticipated to be sufficient through TBD.

B.4 CONTRACT BUDGET

CLIN

No

CLIN Description Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5

Design and Implementation of evaluation studies (quantitative and qualitative) and assessments of USAID/Peru programs

Performance Monitoring and Evaluation Technical Assistance and Training for USAID/Peru, its Implementing Partners and Host Country Government Counterparts

Strengthen the capacity of local evaluation institutions to design and implementation of evaluation studies and assessments according to international standards

004 Fixed Fee Total CPFF

B.5 FEE SCHEDULE

Pursuant to FAR 16.306(d), the fixed fee payable under this contract will be tied to the Completion of the reports and deliverables specified in Section F.6 of this contract and in accordance with approved Fee Schedule below (if any).

[TBD UPON AWARD]

B.6 INDIRECT COSTS (DEC 1997)

The contract clause entitled “Allowable Cost and Payment (DEC 2002)”, FAR Subpart 52.216-7, specifies that the indirect cost rates will be established for each of the Contractor’s accounting periods which apply to this contract. Pending establishment of revised provisional or final indirect cost rates, allowable indirect costs will be reimbursed on the basis of the following negotiated provisional or predetermined rates and the appropriate bases:

Description Rate Base Type Period 1/ 1/ 1/ 2/ 2/ 2/ 3/ 3/ 3/

1/Base of Application:

Type of Rate: Provisional Period:

2/Base of Application:

Type of Rate: Provisional Period:

3/Base of Application:

Type of Rate: Provisional Period:

B.7 ADVANCE UNDERSTANDINGS ON CEILING INDIRECT COST RATES AND FINAL

REIMBURSEMENT FOR INDIRECT COSTS

(1) Reimbursement for indirect costs will be at the lower of the negotiated final (or predetermined rates) or the following ceiling rates:

Description Rate Base Type Period 1/ 2/ 3/ 1/ 2/ 3/

(2) The Government will not be obligated to pay any additional amount should the final indirect cost rates exceed the negotiated ceiling rates. If the final indirect costs are less than the negotiated ceiling rates, the negotiated rates will be reduced to conform to the lower rates.

(3) This understanding will not change any monetary ceiling, obligation, or specific cost allowance or disallowance. Any changes in classifying or allocating indirect costs required the prior written approval of the Contracting Officer.

B.8 COST REIMBURSABLE

Allowable costs will be limited to reasonable, allocable and necessary costs determined in accordance with FAR 52.216-7, Allowable Cost and Payment (DEC 2002), FAR 52.216-8, Fixed Fee (MAR 1997), if applicable, and AIDAR 752.7003, Documentation for Payment (NOV 1998).

In addition, the requirement and conditions concerning estimated cost and funding apply as detailed in FAR 52.232-22, Limitation of Funds (APR 1984).

[END OF SECTION B]

SECTION C – DESCRIPTION/SPECIFICATIONS/STATEMENT OF WORK

C.1 BACKGROUND

USAID Forward is an ambitious reform effort which expects to change the way USAID does business—with new partnerships, an emphasis on innovation and a relentless focus on results.

This includes a renewed effort to strengthen the use of monitoring and evaluation, to build local capacity to improve aid effectiveness, and to strengthen collaboration and partnership with bilateral donors, multilateral and international organizations which will hopefully increase synergies and avoid duplication.

Towards this goal, in January of 2011, USAID released a new evaluation policy aimed at improving accountability, learning, and evidence-based decision making. This new policy will require increased rigor, objectivity, and transparency in all of USAID’s evaluations. Notable new requirements include:

1. Identifying key evaluation questions during the project design phase;

2. Collecting high-quality baseline data for variables that correspond to key project outcomes and impacts;

3. In cases where impact evaluations are undertaken, establishing a parallel evaluation mechanism at project inception to accompany implementation;

4. Conducting at least one performance evaluation of each large project (defined as equal or exceeding in dollar value the mean (average) project size for the mission); and

5. Conducting an impact evaluation of any activity within a project involving untested hypotheses or designed as a “pilot” or “proof of concept”

As a result, USAID/Peru will make every effort to not only strengthen its monitoring and evaluation oversight, but to also ensure that the local capacity is built to carry on these functions and make them sustainable.

USAID/Peru is increasing its partnerships with local partners and host country governments with limited monitoring and evaluation expertise at the regional level. USAID/Peru’s new country strategy will need to align its monitoring and evaluation activities with the new Agency’s goal of building local capacity, managing for results, improving accountability, and learning efforts.

C.2 DEFINITIONS

To ensure consistency in the use of key concepts, the terms and classifications described below will be used by USAID in this contract:

Assessment: A comprehensive review of activities (conducted by USAID, host governments or other institution) in a given development sector of a specific country or region and the institutional, environmental, and policy context in which these activities occur. Assessments highlight issues prevailing in the sector and identify possible approaches to address these issues. Assessments inform the strategy design and revision process of donors and host country partners.

Baseline study: An analysis describing the situation prior to a development intervention, against which progress can be assessed or comparisons made.

Case study design: A non-experimental design that provides an in-depth comprehensive description and understanding of an intervention as a whole and in its context.

Counterfactual: A hypothetical statement of what would have happened (or not) had the program not been implemented.

Evaluation: Systematic collection and analysis of information about the characteristics and outcomes of programs and projects as a basis for judgments, to improve effectiveness, and/or inform decisions about current and future programming. Evaluation is distinct from assessment, which may be designed to examine country or sector context to inform project design, or an informal review of projects. There are two types of evaluations in USAID:

(1) Performance Evaluation: Focuses on descriptive and normative questions: what a particular project or program has achieved (either at an intermediate point in execution or at the conclusion of an implementation period); how it is being implemented; how it is perceived and valued; whether expected results are occurring; and other questions that are pertinent to program design, management and operational decision making.

Performance evaluations often incorporated before-after comparisons, but generally lack a rigorously defined counterfactual. Mixed qualitative and quantitative methods are appropriate (USAID Evaluation Policy).

(2) Impact Evaluation: Measures the change in a development outcome that is attributable to a defined intervention. Impact evaluations are based on models of cause and effect.

Requires a credible counterfactual, or comparison group, to control for factors other than the intervention that might account for the observed change. Experimental methods are preferred, but quasi-experimental methods may be used (USAID Evaluation Policy).

Experimental design: A methodology in which research subjects are randomly assigned to either a treatment or control group, data is collected both before and after the intervention, and results for the treatment group are benchmarked against a counterfactual established by results from the control group.

Ex-post: (after the fact) refers to the time period after a given intervention has been administered. Usually used in outcome and impact evaluations to determine the effect of a given intervention on the outcomes measured.

Meta-evaluation: A systematic and objective assessment that aggregates findings and recommendations from a series of evaluations.

Performance management: (Managing for Results) is the systematic process of monitoring the achievements of program activities; collecting and analyzing performance information to track progress toward planned results; using performance information and evaluations to influence decision-making and resource allocation; and communicating results to advance organizational learning and communicate results to stakeholders (USAID Evaluation Policy).

Quasi-experimental Design: A methodology in which research subjects are assigned to treatment and comparison groups typically through some sort of matching strategy that attempts to minimize the differences between the two groups in order to approximate random assignment.

C.3 STATEMENT OF WORK

The Contractor shall provide technical and advisory services in these three major components:

Component 1: Evaluation Studies and Assessments

a. Overview

The purpose of this component, in accordance with the USAID Evaluation Policy, is to perform high quality evaluation studies of the Peru bilateral and South America Regional portfolios.

Studies include evaluations that assess the impact of USAID's development objectives that identify lessons learned concerning which development interventions work and which do not, and that focus on issues that cut across USAID’s technical areas.

Towards this end, the Contractor is required throughout the performance period of this contract to provide services for implementing quantitative and qualitative baseline studies, evaluation case studies, performance evaluations, impact (experimental and quasi-experimental) evaluations, cross-sector and multi-country evaluations, survey research and statistical analysis and other evaluative studies.

b. General approach

The Contractor will implement activities under this component taking into account USAID principles and requirements, including those within USAID’s Evaluation Policy and ADS 203.

Prior to carrying out each scheduled evaluation, the USAID/Peru Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) in cooperation with other USAID/Peru staff will prepare a detailed description of the work to be conducted in close coordination with the Contractor. The Contractor will use its expertise to propose the evaluation design that best meets USAID Evaluation Policy standards and principles, USAID/Peru needs, resources, and complexity of the program. In addition to designing and conducting the evaluation, the SOW could include, among others, the following tasks:

(i) Conduct background research and analytic expertise to assist USAID/Peru to plan evaluation studies;

(ii) Facilitate team planning meetings for research and evaluation designs for proposed studies;

(iii) Design and implement baseline studies, per USAID instruction;

(iv) Conduct national or regional level population surveys;

(v) Prepare action plans with stakeholders to implement evaluation recommendations;

(vi) Based on evaluation results, draft, edit, and prepare evaluation synthesis for publications related to evaluation, including newsletters and technical journals, and other technical printed or electronic publications;

(vii) Organize and implement workshops, meetings, conferences, and seminars to present and disseminate evaluation findings to USAID, stakeholders and other public;

(viii) Translate evaluation reports into Spanish.

c. Activities

USAID/Peru has identified a list of evaluation studies, which are summarized below, that the Contractor will carry out under this component. This list includes evaluations of projects, programs and development objectives that have been referenced above, and projects that are currently in the solicitation stage, but that are included here to give a general notion of the services required. Planned evaluations may be modified in the future due to USAID/Peru's senior management request, funding changes, changes in the Mission’s Performance Management Plan or evaluation agenda, or USAID decisions to perform joint evaluations and assessments with other donors. However, the planned evaluations will remain within the scope of this contract. USAID will confirm scheduled evaluations through the Contractor’s annual workplan.

d. Impact evaluations

The contractor is required to conduct the following impact evaluations of USAID assistance under each Development Objective (DO). Impact evaluations will construct a counterfactual case of what would have occurred in the absence of USAID intervention. Tasks for impact evaluations will include but are not limited to the design of the evaluation approach, including the design of the counterfactual, collection of baseline data, reconstruction of baseline information (in the event a baseline was not collected for an activity), mid-term and final data collection, analysis and dissemination of results. All evaluation designs must be approved by the USAID/Peru COR. The USAID/Peru COR will share evaluation designs with country-level stakeholders and implementing partners before approval.

(1) San Martin Model Impact Evaluation

DO 1: Sustainable, coca-free economic and social model adopted by communities in targeted regions

Program: Alternative Development

Evaluation timeframe: January-June 2013

USAID has implemented a comprehensive alternative development program in the region of San Martin including activities to strengthen the regional government, improve health and education, and provide technical assistance to farmers making the transition from illicit coca to licit crops. The objectives of the AD program are to reduce poverty and reduce the replanting of coca in the targeted areas.

The Contractor will design and conduct an impact evaluation of alternative development (AD) programs in San Martin carried out by USAID and its partners (including actions carried out by the San Martin Regional Government in coordination with USAID). The evaluation will be limited to the region of San Martin and the time period from 2002 to present.

The Contractor is responsible for developing a testable hypothesis to show whether or not AD programs have had an impact on poverty reduction and replanting of coca. The Contractor must identify and collect the required data needed and then conduct an empirical test using scientifically sound statistical or econometric techniques.

(2) New Decentralization Project Impact Evaluation

DO 2: Improved governance in targeted regions Program: Good Governance Evaluation timeframe:

Baseline: December 2012-February 2013.

Mid-term: September 2014-October 2014.

Final: June 2016-September 2016

USAID/Peru will support GOP efforts to further advance the decentralization process through this new project in decentralization. This project will pursue the goal of: Improved decentralized management for effective service delivery benefitting marginalized populations in target regions. Assistance will be provided at the national level to the Executive and Legislative Branches, and at the sub-national level to the target regions that include, but are not limited to:

Amazonas, Loreto, Madre de Dios, San Martin, and Ucayali. The project will focus on three objectives to promote efficient and effective public service delivery by sub-national governments:

● National Policy: Improve key policies and implement reforms that directly impact decentralization and sub-national governance.

● Institutional Strengthening: Strengthen sub-national institutions for effective public service delivery and improved management of social conflict and disaster risk reduction.

● Transparency and Accountability: Enhance government accountability through improved formal transparency mechanisms and expanded participatory processes.

The impact evaluation will assess the project’s achievements in improving decentralized management and the delivery of public services. It will summarize lessons learned and best practices, analyze the project’s sustainability, and provide recommendations for future projects.

The Contractor will propose an appropriate design of the evaluation, as well as will conduct the baseline study and a mid-term review. Impact could be measured through indicators such as, but not limited to, citizen perception, improved sub-national public expenditures in terms of quality and quantity, increased local taxation, and improved internal control mechanisms.

Indicators measuring access to public services could also be evaluated, with the understanding that project activities are intended to indirectly improve the provision of services.

(3) Ucayali Impact Evaluation

DO 1: Sustainable, coca-free economic and social model adopted by communities in targeted regions

Program: Alternative Development

Evaluation timeframe:

Baseline: December 2012-February 2013.

Mid-term: May-June 2014.

Final: July-October 2016.

USAID plans to implement a comprehensive alternative development program in the region of Ucayali including activities to strengthen the regional government, improve health and education, and provide technical assistance to farmers making the transition from illicit coca to licit crops. The objectives of the AD program are to reduce poverty and reduce the replanting of coca in the targeted areas.

The Contractor will design and conduct an evaluation of alternative development (AD) programs in Ucayali carried out by USAID and its partners (including actions carried out by the Ucayali Regional Government in coordination with USAID). The evaluation will be limited to the region of Ucayali and the time period 2012 to 2016.

The Contractor is responsible for developing a testable hypothesis to show whether or not AD programs have achieved their objectives. The contractor must identify and collect the required data and then conduct an empirical test using scientifically sound statistical or econometric techniques.

e. Performance evaluations

The Contractor will be required to conduct the following mid-term and final performance evaluations of USAID projects. Tasks for performance evaluations may include but are not limited to the design of the evaluation approach, baseline reconstruction, data collection, analysis and dissemination of results. All evaluation designs must be approved by the USAID/Peru COR. The USAID/Peru COR will share evaluation designs with country-level stakeholders and implementing partners before approval.

(1) Health Sector Exit Plan (final)

DO 2: Improved governance in targeted regions Program: Health Evaluation timeframe: Baseline: December 2012. Final: July-September 2014.

USAID/Peru is scheduled to end its main assistance in the health sector by FY 2014.

USAID/Peru has developed a Bilateral Health Exit Plan that focuses on development of a replicable approach to improve the performance of decentralized health services at the regional level.

The strategy to achieve the plan objectives entails concentrating efforts in the Region of San Martin; aligning activities to focus on a priority health outcome (chronic childhood malnutrition);

and work with the central Ministry of Health to transfer and scale-up use of USAID products.

The Exit Plan will focus on the desired health outcome as the starting point for identifying the health system constraints (at the regional and central levels) that limit effective delivery of services. This “diagonal approach” to health systems strengthening leads to identification of system constraints and bottlenecks in such a way that, when appropriately addressed, system-wide improvements are achieved.

Ideally, the evaluation should include two phases: a snapshot at the time of award of this contract and another in 2014 (March-May), to assess the exit plan approach and its replicability.

Illustrative evaluation questions: a) Did the approach achieve the main objective of improving the delivery of effective and efficient health services in San Martin for Chronic Child Malnutrition?; b) Is the approach replicable in other regions?; c) To what extent did each project contribute to the implementation and result of the approach?

(2) Support Reforms to Improve Basic Education Quality in Disadvantaged

Areas- SUMA (final)

DO 2: Improved governance in targeted regions Program: Basic Education Evaluation timeframe: Final: April-June 2013

In 2009, USAID/Peru started a five-year education program, SUMA, which supports Government of Peru (GOP) efforts to improve basic education in the most disadvantaged communities of the regions of San Martín, Ucayali, Junín, Ayacucho, Lima Province, Amazonas, and Cajamarca. Building on the methodologies and results achieved under AprenDes model, an earlier USAID program, SUMA is helping the GOP achieve two key objectives: (1) strengthen participatory and decentralized education management through policy reforms and improved management; and (2) improve the quality of teaching by helping set standards and incentives for improved teacher performance. Through a Partnership Challenge Fund, the program actively supports public-private partnerships to leverage resources and further enhance results. For more information, review these websites:

http://www.sumaeducacion.pe/index.php http://www.usaid.gov/pe/downloads/educacion-ingles-february2011.pdf

The Contractor will design and conduct a performance evaluation of the SUMA program carried out by the USAID’s partner. The evaluation will cover efforts in the seven regions targeted by the program and work done at the national level in support of the Ministry of Education and efforts contributing to strengthening decentralization of the sector. The time period will cover September 2009 to present. The Contractor is responsible for identifying, collecting and processing required data in order to provide information related to performance, implementation, results achieved, program design and management.

(3) Peru Forest Sector Initiative PFSI (midterm and final)

This project promotes and supports processes to improve sustainable management of Peru’s ecosystems by drawing on Forest Service best practices to develop capacity, strengthen coordination, and promote transparency. In particular, the program objective is to provide technical assistance and resources in collaboration with Peruvian national and local governments and other diverse partners, to improve forest sector governance and promote legal trade in timber products.

The purpose of the performance evaluation is to assess the project’s accomplishments related to the improvement of natural resources management in Peru. Two performance evaluations are required for this activity – a midterm and a final.

DO 3: Natural resources sustainably managed in targeted regions

Program: Environment

Evaluation timeframe: Mid-term: April-May 2014. Final: January-March 2016

(4) Environmental Management and Forest Governance Support Activity (midterm and final)

DO 3: Natural resources sustainably managed in targeted regions

Program: Environment

Evaluation timeframe: Midterm: July-August 2014. Final: February-April 2016

The principal objectives of the EMFG are to improve environmental management capacity of public sector actors and to promote economic development in the Peruvian Amazon region.

The purpose of the performance evaluation is to assess project’s accomplishments related to improving forest governance and reducing illegal logging. Two performance evaluations are required for this activity – a midterm and a final.

(5) Strengthen MINAM’s Capacities to Implement the Environmental Chapter of the Free Trade Agreement between the U.S. and Peru (final)

DO 3: Natural resources sustainably managed in targeted regions

Program: Environment

Evaluation timeframe: Final: October-November 2015

USAID helps Environment Ministry (MINAM) meet environmental challenges related to the management and conservation of vital natural resources in the country, including the Amazon rainforest. Forest conservation, in particular, contributes to the mitigation of climate change impacts in Peru and MINAM will work with regional and local governments, indigenous communities, and other organizations to preserve and improve forest management. This assistance will also be used to develop tools to generate forest conservation funds from future carbon markets, thereby mitigating climate change impact.

The performance evaluation will address capacity building in MINAM to improve the management of species listed under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES); to introduce payment for environmental services—a key component of Peru’s strategy for the Reduction of Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation of Forests (REDD);

to support the implementation of a National System for Environmental Impact Evaluation (SEIA), and to promote improved environmental management in selected sectors through an economic incentive program targeting indigenous communities.

(6) Peru and Andean Trade Capacity Building Program: USAID/Facilitando Comercio (final)

DO 2: Improved governance in targeted regions Program: Trade and Investment Evaluation timeframe: Final: April-June 2013

The Facilitando Comercio activity works to improve Peru’s competitiveness, specifically works to:(1) Build the capacity of labor inspectors and the Judiciary in labor matters; (2) Improve enforcement and use of intellectual property rights; (3) Facilitate trade and market access; (4) Promote simplified business registration and reduce transaction costs; (5) Strengthen regulation and oversight of medicines and pharmaceuticals; (6) Increase competitiveness of Peru’s telecommunications industry.

The purpose of the performance evaluation is to assess project’s accomplishments related to improving Peru’s competitiveness.

(7) Alternative Development support for the Regional Government of San Martin (final)

DO 1: Sustainable, coca-free economic and social model adopted by communities in targeted regions

Program: Alternative Development

Evaluation timeframe: Final: September- November 2014

Under the Procurement Reform, USAID is supporting the Regional Government of San Martin (GORESAM), in several initiatives as follows:

i. Recovery of Degraded Areas in the Buffer Zone of the Rio Abiseo National Park through Reforestation;

ii. Forest Development in Native Communities and Forestry Production Zone;

iii. Strategic Program for Learning Achievements (PELA) for Completion of 3rd Cycle of Regular Basic Education;

iv. Comprehensive Child Nutrition Program in the San Martin Region; and

v. Supporting the Construction of Cacao Warehouses in the Alternative Development Program Areas in San Martín.

The Contractor will evaluate this project in order to be able to respond to the following illustrative questions: a) How efficient was the GORESAM in achieving the targets proposed under these initiatives, b) How effective was the GORESAM in achieving main results, c) To what extent these interventions reinforced the ADP objectives in San Martin, d) What was the impact in terms of the Procurement Reform objectives. Estimated date for evaluation is 2014/2015.

(8) Palm Oil and Cacao Promotion in Tocache (final)

DO 1: Sustainable, coca-free economic and social model adopted by communities in targeted regions

Program: Alternative Development

Evaluation timeframe: Final: October-November

Since 2006, USAID has supported post-eradication activities in the regions of San Martín and Huánuco under a cooperation agreement with the United Nations Office of Drugs and Crime (UNODC). This agreement was modified in February 2011 to expand UNODC activities (to other areas such as Ucayali, Pongo de Caynarachi, and Bolson Cuchara) and consolidate gains made until January 2014.

From July 2006 to December 2010, UNODC, with USAID funding, helped plant 5,296 hectares of sustainable alternative crops (oil palm, cacao, and heart of palm) in Tocache and Paraiso, benefiting 2,139 families who previously grew coca. With the expansion, the program will focus on consolidating these industries while also furthering post-eradication efforts. By the end of the project, 11,450 hectares of alternative crops will be under cultivation. It is expected that in the oil palm sector alone, small producer sales will increase to $30 million per year.

The Contractor is responsible to evaluate this intervention in terms of main achievements and results in areas of consolidation and expansion, emphasizing the likelihood of beneficiary families regressing back to coca cultivation. Estimated date for evaluation is 2013/2014

(9) Amazon Malaria Initiative (midterm and final)

South America Regional Program: Health Evaluation timeframe: Midterm: May-June 2013 Final: May-July 2015

The Amazon Malaria Initiative (AMI) strategic objective is to substantially improve malaria control programs in the Amazon Basin sub-region through selected best practices. Expected results are:

(i) Reliable and standardized surveillance information on malaria drug resistance and vector control used to monitor trends and more effectively target disease control efforts;

(ii) Laboratory diagnosis of malaria improved; and

(iii) Tools and approaches developed, adapted, tested in local settings, and disseminated.

Through training and high value technical assistance activities in i) surveillance of antimalarial resistance, ii) Drug policy implementation, iii) Access to and quality of diagnosis and treatment,

iv) Evidence based vector control, and v) Epidemiological surveillance, AMI activities during 2011-2015 are expected to contribute to:

(i) Consolidate and further progress achieved during AMI’s first 10 years of work, providing further attention to vivax malaria and to malaria in populations under special circumstances.

(ii) Make RAVREDA activities more independent of AMI contribution (i.e. make RAVREDA and NMCPs activities more sustainable).

(iii) Strengthen the regional approach to malaria prevention and control.

(iv) Have NMCPs effective and efficient in the context of decentralized health sectors, and adequately implementing all malaria control strategies they adopt in varied epidemiological settings.

(v) Successfully implement the Strategy and Plan of Action for Malaria in the Americas for 2011-2015.

Evaluators will verify that activities planned and implemented under AMI respond to these results and lines of work, and collect information on improvements achieved in each of these areas by the countries, and assess progress achieved in each line of work. An intermediate (May-June 2013) and a final (May-July 2015) performance evaluation are expected.

Illustrative questions to answer through the evaluation: a) To what extent did AMI contribute to improvements and sustainability of malaria prevention and control programs within countries and regionally?; b) To what extent were AMI activities implemented and how effective were they?; c) 3) To what extent did AMI contribute to improve country implementation of malaria prevention and control interventions?; d) 4) To what extent did AMI contribute to the sustainability of RAVREDA?; e) Was AMI efficient?; f) Which recommendations can be made for AMI beyond 2015?

Link to AMI information: http://www.usaidami.org/

(10) MAXIMUS project for people with disabilities (final)

Latin America Regional Program: Social Services Evaluation timeframe: Final: June-July 2014

In September 2011, USAID/Peru signed a three-year Cooperative Agreement with Arcangeles Foundation, a Colombian NGO, to implement the Maximus Project (MP), to increase the social inclusion of people with disabilities (PWDs) through the creation of a South American Quad Rugby Network across nine countries (Peru, Colombia, Ecuador, Chile, Brazil, Uruguay, and three others). MP is an innovative, cross-cultural program that utilizes team sports to promote peace, empowerment, and social inclusion specifically for PWDs. Quad Rugby is a wheelchair sport for players who are quadriplegic, meaning they have some degree of disability with a loss of function in both the upper and lower limbs.

USAID anticipates future programs in the area of strengthen the capacity of disabled people’s organizations. The purpose of this evaluation is to determine best practices to guide and improve future USAID programs.

Illustrative questions to answer through the evaluation: a) To what extent did the program accomplish expected results?; b) To what extent did the program achieve the objective of developing Quad Rugby as a high performance sport discipline in the six participating countries?; c) To what extent did the program achieve the objective of transforming the cultural stereotype of PWD by empowering the quadriplegic athletes?; d) To what extent did the program achieve the objective of developing a sustainable communications strategy for wheelchair athletes to continue to spread the message of inclusion beyond the life of the project?

(11) Other Performance Evaluations

This contract may also carry out performance evaluations for upcoming projects in the areas of education, environment, and democracy, as directed by USAID. Please see http://www.usaid.gov/business/business_opportunities/forecast/MissionCompetitiveForecastMar ch21_2012.pdf for general information on future projects.

f. Sector and cross-cutting assessments

The Contractor will be required to conduct the following sector and cross-cutting assessments to identify lessons learned and opportunities for enhancing sector performance. Assessments shall entail a status update on a particular sector or sub-sector and its weaknesses, strengths, gaps, and opportunities for value-added intervention by USAID/Peru based on its comparative advantage.

(1) Conflict Prevention and Mitigation Activities

DO 2: Improved governance in targeted regions Program: Good Governance Evaluation timeframe: January-March 2014

Since 2006, Peru has seen a dramatic increase of social conflicts, especially those related to the environment, natural resource use and illegal activities. Indigenous communities, extractive companies, and government actors have been the primary stakeholders in the majority of these conflicts, and their capacity to reach agreements has been weak and ineffective. As a result, USAID/Peru seeks to prevent, mitigate and manage social conflicts at the national, sub-national, and grassroots levels.