SOL-612-14-000001.docx

Date Issued: November 20, 2013 Closing Date for Receiving Questions: December 3, 2013 , 5:00 PM, Malawi Time Closing Date: December 23, 2013 (Electronic) Closing Time: 5:00 PM, Malawi Time

The United States Government represented by the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) Mission in Lilongwe, Malawi, is seeking proposals from qualified organizations to provide and perform strategy impact evaluation in Malawi to accomplish the work described in Section C of this solicitation. USAID intends to award a five (5) year contract.

The purpose of the resulting contract is to determine the validity of USAID/Malawi’s CDCS development hypothesis. This will assist USAID/Malawi in determining if an integrated methodology coupled with an emphasis on local capacity building is more cost effective, and produces more sustainable development results.

USAID/Malawi anticipates awarding one cost reimbursement completion-type contract as a result of this solicitation, covering an estimated period of five (5) years. Offerors must propose costs that they believe are realistic and reasonable for the work described herein. You are invited to submit a proposal in accordance with the requirements of the enclosed RFP No. SOL-612-14-000001. As set forth in the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 15, Contracting by Negotiation will be used for this procurement. The RFP contains clauses incorporated by reference. The full text of the FAR clauses is available on the internet at http://www.arnet.gov/far/. The full text of the Agency for International Development Regulation (AIDAR) clauses is available at http://www.usaid.gov. Pursuant to Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 15.204-1), Uniform Contract Format, Sections A through J of the attached RFP represent the draft contract and will be the basis for the contractual relationship between USAID and the selected Prime Contractor.

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. All Amendments to this solicitation will be issued and posted on the Federal Business Opportunities (FBO) website. It is the contractor’s responsibility to check this website periodically for official updates and amendments to the solicitation.

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.

It is the responsibility of the recipient of this solicitation to ensure that the solicitation has been received from the internet in its entirety. USAID bears no responsibility for data errors resulting from the download or conversion process.

Proposals must be signed by an official who is authorized to bind the Offeror’s organization.

Please submit your technical and cost proposal as a response to this RFP no later than the date and time indicated above and in Section L of this solicitation. Proposals received after the closing date and time will be processed as late and handled in accordance with FAR 15.208.

Only electronic submission will be accepted at the following address:

criegler@usaid.gov and a copy to ayamak@usaid.gov. No other forms of submission will be accepted.

Any questions related to this solicitation must be submitted electronically by the time and date specified above in order to provide for a timely response to such questions prior to the closing date. Any explanation desired by an Offeror regarding the meaning or interpretation of the solicitation must be requested in writing from the Contracting Officer at criegler@usaid.gov and a copy to ayamak@usaid.gov, in sufficient time to allow for a reply to reach all Offerors before submission of their offers. Oral explanations or instructions given before the award of the contract will not be binding.

Any information given to a prospective Offeror concerning a solicitation will be furnished by the Contracting Officer to all prospective Offerors as an amendment to the solicitation, if such information is necessary to Offerors in submitting proposals or if the lack of such information would be prejudicial to uninformed Offerors.

The Government reserves the right to award a contract without discussions or the submittal of final proposed revisions, based upon evaluation of the offeror’s submitted technical and cost information. Accordingly the offeror’s initial offer should contain its best terms for both of the cost and technical proposals. Offerors should retain for their records a complete copy of their proposals for future reference.

Issuance of this solicitation does not constitute an award commitment on the part of the U.S. Government nor does it commit the Government to pay for costs incurred by firms or associations relative to the collection of preliminary information, participation in technical discussions, preparation and submittal of the technical proposals or any subsequent negotiations. Further, the Government reserves the right to reject any or all proposals if such action is considered to be in the best interest of the Government. Thank you for your interest in USAID programs.

Sincerely, Craig Riegler Supervisory Contracting Officer

Encl: SOL-612-14-000001

UNDER DPAS (15 CFR 700)

|X| NEGOTIATED (RFP)

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

Office of Acquisition & Assistance USAID/Malawi NICO House Lilongwe/ Malawi

See Section L

NOTE: In sealed bid solicitations “offer” and “offeror” mean “bid” and “bidder”

SOLICITATION

9. Electronic submission only – see Section L 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.

FOR INFORMATION

CALL:

11. TABLE OF CONTENTS

PART III - LIST OF DOCUMENTS, EXHIBITS AND OTHER ATTACH.

PART IV – REPRESENTATIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS

OFFER (Must be fully completed by offeror)

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 60 calendar days 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

(See Section I, Clause No. 52.232-8)

14. ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF AMENDMENTS (The offeror acknowledges receipt of amendments to the SOLICITATION for offerors and related documents numbered and dated:

15A. NAME AND

ADDRESS

OF OFFEROR

CODE

FACILITY

16. NAME AND TITLE OF PERSON AUTHORIZED TO SIGN OFFER (Type or print)

IS DIFFERENT FROM ABOVE – ENTER

SUCH ADDRESS IN SCHEDULE.

AWARD

USAID/Malawi, Lilongwe 2280 Lilongwe Place, Dulles VA 20521-2280

Craig Riegler, Supervisory Contracting Officer

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

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

AUTHORIZED FOR LOCAL REPRODUCTION

Previous edition not usable.

Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.214(c)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PART I - THE SCHEDULE

SECTION B - SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICE/COSTS

B.1 SERVICES

The Contractor must provide and perform impact evaluation services to determine the validity of USAID/Malawi’s CDCS development hypothesis as provided in the work described in Section C.

B.2 CONTRACT TYPE

This is a Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee (CPFF) completion-type contract consistent with Federal Acquisition Regulation 16.306(d)(1). For the consideration set forth in this Section B, the Contractor must provide the outputs as described in Section C and the deliverables as described in Section F in accordance with the performance standards specified in Section F.

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

(a) The estimated cost for the performance of 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]. Cost must be limited to reasonable, allocable, and allowable costs determined in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 52.216-7.

(b) Fixed Fee Payment: At the time of each payment of allowable costs to the Contractor, the USAID paying office ordinarily pays the Contractor a percentage of the fixed fee that directly corresponds to the percentage of allowable costs being paid. Two exceptions to paying fixed fee in this manner apply:

(1) If the Contracting Officer determines that this method results in paying a disproportionately higher ratio of fixed fee than the percentage of work the Contractor has completed, then the Contracting Officer may suspend further payment of any fixed fee until the Contractor has made sufficient progress to justify further payment, up to the agreed percentage.

(2) Because the clauses entitled "Allowable Cost and Payment" (FAR 52.216-7) and "Fixed Fee" (FAR 52.216-8) are incorporated into this contract, the terms and conditions of these clauses apply after total payments of fixed fee reach eighty five percent (85%) of the total fixed fee.

(c) 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), is $TBD. The Contractor will not exceed the aforesaid obligated amount.

B.4 BUDGET

CLIN No.

CLIN Description

Estimated Cost

Indirect Cost

Fixed Fee

Provide Complete Impact Evaluation of CDCS for Year 3

TOTAL ESTIMATED COST PLUS FIXED FEE

(Section B4 to be completed at time of award).

B.5 INDIRECT COSTS

Pending the establishment of a revised provisional or final indirect cost rates, allowable indirect costs must be reimbursed on the basis of the following negotiated provisional or predetermined rates and the appropriate bases:

Description* Rate Base Type Period

[This part will be completed upon contract award]

B.6 COST REIMBURSABLE

The U.S. dollar costs allowable must be limited to reasonable, allocable and necessary costs determined in accordance with FAR 52.216-7, Allowable Cost and Payment, FAR 52.216-8, Fixed Fee, if applicable, and AIDAR 752.7003, Documentation for Payment.”

B.7 PAYMENT OF FIXED FEE

The Contractor’s fixed fee is tied to the accomplishment of the deliverables outlined in Section F.3. Upon successful achievement of the deliverable, the Contractor must provide evidence of the achievement to the Contracting Officer’s Representative and the Contracting Officer. Upon acceptance by USAID and receipt of approval from the Contracting Officer, the Contractor must submit an invoice for the amount of the fee associated with the deliverable.

B.8 MULTI-YEAR CONTRACT

CLIN Numbers 1-5 in Section B.4 are considered non-severable. This is therefore considered a multi-year contract as defined in FAR 17.103 and is subject to the requirements of FAR 17.106.

Cancellation Dates:

Contract Year 2: 1 year from date of contract issuance Contract Year 3: 2 years from date of contract issuance Contract Year 4: 3 years from date of contract issuance Contract Year 5: 4 years from date of contract issuance

Cancellation Ceiling:

This is a cost reimbursement completion-type contract type contract where the Contractor is authorized to be reimbursed for all costs which are allowable in accordance with FAR 52.216-7, “Allowable Costs and Payment”. Therefore, the Contractor will not incur any costs which would have been amortized over the life of the contract should the contract be cancelled in accordance with FAR 52.217-2. The cancellation ceiling for each cancellation date is [negotiated amount].

[END OF SECTION B]

SECTION C - DESCRIPTION/SPECIFICATIONS/STATEMENT OF WORK

C.1. Introduction and Background

USAID/Malawi’s new Country Development Cooperation Strategy (CDCS) covers the period 2013 through 2018. The overarching strategic goal is to improve the quality of life for Malawians. This is supported through three development objectives (DOs) that include: Social Development Improved, Sustainable Livelihoods Increased and Citizen Rights and Responsibilities Exercised. Informing these DOs, a recently completed stakeholder analysis[footnoteRef:2] exemplified the supply and demand side challenges in the Malawian development context. Simply stated the GOM is unable to supply citizens with services and citizens are ill equipped to demand them from the government. USAID’s CDCS addresses this imbalance through an integrated approach that concentrates resources geographically where and when feasible. Integration will allow the Mission to experiment and determine what combination of investments has the most profound impact. Through what the Mission is calling a 3-C Approach, USAID will integrate development activities by: [2: USAID/Malawi CDCS Stakeholder Consultations Report, University of Malawi’s Centre for Educational Research and Training, February 2012.]

· Co-locating interventions to the extent that it is sensible;

· Coordinating better within USAID and with other DPs, and

· Collaborating to foster linkages among implementing partners and the DPs to improve results, and sustainability.

USAID/Malawi hypothesizes: if assistance is integrated then development results will be enhanced, more sustainable, and lead to achievement of our CDCS goal: Malawians’ quality of life improved. The USAID/Malawi 3-C Approach will be the platform for operationalizing integration and the new strategy. It will include changes in how the Mission does business (everywhere) and doing “new things” that better incorporate integrated principles. It will be used to address identified development challenges and build on current opportunities. USAID/Malawi will address interconnected development challenges with integrated solutions.

USAID/Malawi will utilize the 3-C Approach to achieve greater integration, efficiencies and synergies across sectors. USAID/Malawi will integrate multiple health services through common delivery platforms to reduce costs and increase coverage of care. Health, Education, Economic Growth, Civil Society and Local Capacity Building interventions will be coordinated with other DPs and co-located where feasible. Internally, the Mission will coordinate to leverage complementary synergies from interventions. USAID/Malawi will focus and concentrate investments geographically through a phased approach, the Mission will scale up interventions to reach maximum communities in targeted districts.

C.2. Scope/Purpose of the Impact Evaluation

The Contractor will conduct an impact evaluation (IE) to determine the validity of USAID/Malawi’s CDCS development hypothesis. This will assist USAID/Malawi in determining if an integrated methodology coupled with an emphasis on local capacity building is more cost effective, and produces more sustainable development results. As part of USAID FORWARD, USAID/Malawi is committed to strengthening local capacity, improving targeted resource decision making, increasing use of evidenced-based information and spending financial resources more wisely.

C.2.2. Target Areas and Groups

The Contractor must examine through the impact evaluation validity of the development hypothesis in targeted districts. This includes, but is not limited to the three focus districts of Lilongwe Rural, Machinga and Balaka. In these three districts, the Mission aims to integrate its assistance from all three DOs working in health, primary education, agriculture, and nutrition, resilience to climate change, and local governance and community empowerment. Further, partial geographic colocation will also occur in other districts, per Table 1 below. The Contractor must work nationally in all three regions of the country through representative sampling.

Table 1: Levels of Integration

Note: Democracy and Governance activities with district governments and community groups will take place in the three focus districts plus up to three additional districts to be named after the May 2014 elections.

The Contractor must interact with implementing partners, USAID staff, and local government officials including district councils, district secretariats, area development committees, village development committees, targeted communities and beneficiaries in the different districts listed above. USAID/Malawi supports a five person expanded monitoring evaluation and learning team. The Contractor must include this team in the IE process as will other TDY USAID/Agency staff who will participate at various stages of the evaluation process. By including USAID staff, the Mission seeks to build its capacity.

C.3. Objectives of the CDCS Impact Evaluation

The main objective of this activity is to measure and document the impact and validity of USAID/Malawi’s CDCS development hypothesis. As per the January 2011 USAID Policy on evaluation, evaluations have two distinct purposes: Accountability to stakeholders and Learning to improve effectiveness. Both of these elements, as discussed in the USAID Evaluation Policy are relevant to the USAID/Malawi CDCS impact evaluation.

The evaluation will serve as litmus to inform strategic implementation and assist the Mission to learn and adapt the Mission Results Framework. As USAID/Malawi learns (through the evaluation) if and how the integration is successful, the Mission will have the opportunity to adjust the CDCS and adapt throughout CDCS implementation. This will assist the Mission to realize a living CDCS that is flexible and adapts to changing circumstance learned through implementation and development hypothesis validation. Evaluation results will be made available to USAID/Malawi staff, the larger Agency, implementing partners, sub partners, government counterparts and external stakeholders. Results will also inform other USAID Missions on the validity of integration and how to strengthen the overall process of synthesizing complementary sector activities in select areas to obtain better development results.

C.3.1 Evaluation Questions

The Contractor must, at a minimum, address the following questions over the life of the evaluation and be included in the final evaluation report:

1. What impact has the integration of USAID investments through CDCS Development Objectives 1-3 had on improving the quality of life for targeted communities?

2. To what extent has integration of programs through the CDCS DOs 1-3 resulted in more cost-effective investments in development?

a. Is there a combination of programs or activities that resulted in greater impact on the quality of life of targeted communities?

3. How, and by how much, did capacity building of local institutions (government, and civil society organizations) result in improved organizational leadership, governance, financial and programmatic capacity?

4. To what extent has USAID-supported capacity building of local institutions, as per question three, resulted in improved community participation, sustainability and ownership of development interventions?

C.3.2 Tasks

The Contractor must perform the following tasks as part of this scope of work:

1. Draft Inception Report

2. Develop evaluation model

3. Develop relevant indicator(s) or index

4. Test and verify the evaluation model

5. Adapt model as necessary throughout the activity

6. Identify the specific geographic focus areas and targeted communities. The Contractor must identify a sufficient sample of communities within the targeted districts (Table 1) as well as relevant combinations of sector level activities that occur in different communities within each sampled district.

7. Deploy a field team

8. Establish a baseline

9. Draft Baseline Study Report

10. Provide quarterly oral Debriefing Meetings to USAID

11. Draft annual reports

12. Perform annual stakeholder analysis

13. Draft Initial and Annual Stakeholder Analysis Reports

14. Perform data collection, synthesis and analysis to report against CDCS development hypothesis validity and CDCS development objective level indicators. This must also include the COR approved indicator(s)/index to measure hypothesis validity.

15. Draft Midterm Project Evaluation Report

16. Perform final data collection process

17. Draft Final Report

18. Draft peer review journal article

19. Draft policy papers (two per year, 10 in total)

C.4. Results: Deliverables and Reports

The Contractor must furnish the following deliverables and reports:

1. Inception Report: The inception report must describe the conceptual framework the evaluator will use in undertaking the evaluation. It must address Tasks 1-16 setting out in detail the evaluation methodology, i.e. how each question will be answered by way of data collection methods, data sources, sampling and indicators. The Contractor must include relevant indictors taken from the CDCS as well as propose an index that could be used to measure success or failure of the CDCS development hypothesis within sampled districts. The report must also contain a work plan, which indicates the phases in the evaluation with key deliverables and milestones. The USAID/ Malawi COR in coordination with the expanded Monitoring Evaluation and Learning (ME&L) team will review this report. The Contractor must receive approval from the COR of the report before it begins implementing the evaluation plan. The inception report must clearly document and discus how gender will be integrated into the design of the evaluation.

The Inception Report must at least contain the following:

· The evaluation model must pass scientific rigor and be characterized by a quasi-experimental design (mixed methods or other), include appropriate counterfactuals (comparison groups) and appropriate sample sizes required to ensure scientific rigor. The model should describe and document the methodological approach used as well as all analytical aspects. The model must be compatible with ongoing impact evaluations, data collection processes and systems. The methodology must not interrupt current IE efforts, or duplicate data collection. The approach must clearly and succinctly demonstrate how the IE will complement, draw relevant data from, and use analysis from ongoing IEs to reduce primary data collection needs based on these key secondary data sources (ongoing IEs).

· The model must be developed and documented so that the final report can be submitted to a ‘peer reviewed’ journal for publication.

· Complete set of evaluation questions and elaborate on them as necessary. Any questions added must be clearly indicated and any deleted questions must be mentioned with a reason as to their exclusion.

· Discussion of the overall approach of the evaluation, highlighting the conceptual model(s) adopted. This must incorporate an analysis of the intervention logic of the CDCS.

· Discussion of risks and limitations that may undermine the reliability and validity of the evaluation results.

· Specification of indicator, index, or indicators that must be used as a guide in answering each question. It must also discuss, demonstrate, and outline how the indicators relate to the CDCS DO level indicators being monitored annually by USAID development objective teams and how it complements ongoing impact evaluation data collection and indicators to avoid duplication.

· The indicator(s) or index must be used to track and monitor if the quality of life, increased capacity, and sustainability are the result of USAID/Malawi’s integrated approach. This indicator(s)/index must be appropriate to measure the degree to which the holistic development approach is successful or not successful. This index must permit the Mission to track progress and be used to analyze as a variable in relation to desired outcomes related to livelihoods and DO level indicators being tracked through the CDCS.

· Discussion of the data collection and data analysis methods that will be used for each question. State the limitations for each method. Include the level of precision required for quantitative and qualitative methods and value scales or coding used for qualitative methods. Standard data collection methods for USAID evaluations are: surveys, questionnaires, interviews, focus groups, document review and observations.

· Detail key data sources that will be selected to answer each evaluation question.

· Explanation of how existing data will be incorporated and used to answer the evaluation questions.

· Discussion of the sampling methods and details. Include area and population to be represented, rationale for selection, mechanics of selection, sample size (for each unit of analysis in both treatment and control units), sample precision and confidence and limitations.

· Summarized evaluation methodology in an evaluation planning matrix that must contain the following column headings: evaluation question, measure(s) or indicator(s), data collection method(s), data source, design strategy / framework for each question, sampling methodology, data collection instrument(s) for each question and data analysis methodology on each evaluation question.

· Timeline showing the evaluation phases (data collection, data analysis and reporting) with their key deliverables and milestones.

· Specific responsibility for each evaluation phase. Include any changes in the evaluation team.

· Discussion of logistics of carrying out the evaluation. Include specific assistance that must be required from USAID such as providing arrangements for key contacts within the Mission or Government.

· Appended draft instruments for data collection specific to questions and indicators in the evaluation.

· Discussion on the use of spatial data collection methods and formats to ensure locations of sampling, interviewed households, communities, etc. are captured (for each report) for integration into the Mission’s geographic information system and to permit spatial analysis of impact evaluation data at the household and community level.

· Standard USAID work plan outlying timeframes, etc. for implementation.

2. Baseline Study Report: The baseline report must include a background detailing the context and history of the USAID/ Malawi CDCS strategic approach, purpose of the baseline study, core indicators covered in the baseline study, a detailed methodology used in conducting the baseline study and relevant limitations. The report must also include findings of the study, highlighting status of the indicators in the study. Instruments used in the study must be annexed to the report. The Contractor must provide electronic primary data sets to the USAID/Malawi COR. All locations where implementation is occurring must be geo-referenced (villages and households). At a minimum, data must be provided in an MS Excel sheet with latitude and longitude locations in decimal degree format and include District, TA/SC and Extension Planning Area location names and other attribute data that will be agreed upon in coordination with the COR in consultation with the core ME&L team and the Contractor during the inception report phase. The Contractor must build in timelines for debriefing on the progress in conducting the baseline study to USAID/ Malawi. The COR will review the draft report of the baseline report; the Contractor must incorporate COR comments into the report before the report is approved by the COR.

The Contractor must submit 10 bound copies of the approved final report to USAID/Malawi. An electronic copy must also be submitted in an appropriate medium including all instruments and data in formats suitable for reanalysis.

3. Debriefing Meetings: The Contractor must provide quarterly debriefing meetings to USAID. These meetings must include a discussion on progress to date, provide a summary of any analytical results, discuss challenges, successes and planned work over the upcoming quarter.

4. Annual Reports: Focus must be on the indicators so that performance is traceable. Drawing from the assumptions in the Results Framework, where possible, the report must include a discussion on unexpected outcomes, newly available knowledge, changes in implementation conditions, actual results, and/or other kinds of change that may have affected integration. It must attempt to build in learning processes for periodically reviewing and analyzing the implications of these changes, developing contingency plans, adapting strategic implementation as necessary. In effect, the annual results of this impact evaluation must attempt to render the CDCS a living, and evolving strategy. It must provide information on the effectiveness of the integrated portfolio as much as possible to provide feedback on the CDCS to facilitate the ability to learn and adapt over length of strategy.

The COR approved annual report and results must be shared by the Contractor and disseminated internally and externally to partners, partner government counterparts, other donors and stakeholders

The Contractor must build into the allowable time debriefing meetings with USAID/Malawi. The Contractor must submit 10 bound copies of the approved final report to USAID/Malawi. An electronic copy must also be submitted in an appropriate media including all instruments and data in formats suitable for reanalysis. The Contractor must disseminate annual report findings to USAID implementing partners, key GOM counterparts, Development Partners, and other interested stakeholders.

5. Initial and Annual Stakeholder Analysis Reports: The Contractor must perform an annual stakeholder analysis. The purpose is to provide a local learning component to the impact evaluation to gauge effectiveness of the CDCS strategy and identify sector areas that may or may not be performing as originally anticipated. Throughout the CDCS design process, stakeholder consultations were used to inform the strategic design. Local input from stakeholders provided the foundation of the current 5-five-year strategy. USAID’s new collaboration, learning and adaptation approach (CLA) will attempt to realize a living CDCS that evolves and adapts from on-the-ground learning. Annual stakeholder consultations will inform this process and help keep USAID on track and aware of how integration is realized. As such, the annual stakeholder analysis must build off of the USAID’s previous consultations. It must follow a process and methodology that demonstrates a rational follow-up to previous stakeholder consultations. This must be discussed in the inception report, agreed upon, and finalized with the expanded Mission ME&L team and approved by the COR.

By infusing local knowledge and stakeholder perceptions of the USAID integrated portfolio, the Mission hopes to strengthen strategic integration and harmonization of Mission investments. This analysis will complement the analytical results derived through the CDCS impact evaluation questions. As with the baseline report, all targeted households and communities (village locations), etc. must be geo-located for integration into the Missions’ geographic information system to ensure the same households can be visited again if necessary. The Contractor must ensure that responses are conveyed honestly without manipulation or excessive interpretation. Consultative data must be disaggregated by gender and other categories such as youths, government or NGO/CSO employees (to be agreed upon by the Contractor and the COR). The annual report will document the stakeholder consultation process and report stakeholder responses and recommendations. The Contractor must then synthesize recommendations into potential lessons learned (successes and challenges) and recommend how the Mission could synthesize this information into the larger strategic framework. The Mission envisions that this process will inform the CDCS framework by learning what works, what does not work, and adapting and evolving the strategy based on local knowledge garnered from the stakeholder process.

The report should not exceed 30 pages, excluding Executive Summary, list of acronyms, and relevant Annexes, (e.g. stakeholder names and contact information lists, designs/agenda, consultation notes and photos). Annual USAID CDCS Stakeholder Analysis reports must include the following sections:

· Executive summary, concisely describing critical elements of the main report

· Introduction, describing the purpose, objectives and methodology of the Stakeholder Analysis

· Responses and Recommendations from the stakeholders for future as it pertains to their perceptions on the successfulness of integration in the targeted evaluation districts

· Conclusions and lessons learned from the analysis

The Contractor must submit an electronic version of the final report (Microsoft Word format) and 15 bound copies. The report will be released as a public document on the USAID website. The Contractor must build into the allowable time schedules for debriefing with USAID/Malawi during the evaluation of the USAID/Malawi CDCS.

6. Midterm Project Evaluation Report: During the midterm evaluation of CDCS impact evaluation, the Contractor must substantially use data collected for the evaluation as well as data and results extracted from ongoing USAID impact evaluations, stakeholder analysis, any relevant sector evaluations and secondary sources to determine validity of the CDCS development hypothesis as it pertains to the evaluation questions. The Contractor must document outcomes in the different levels of integration and geographic focus of the CDCS. Any identified secondary effects, unintended consequences, successes and challenges must be documented. Overall cost effectiveness of the different integrated districts (full vs. partial vs. limited) must be identified and presented to strengthen the Mission’s understanding of the various levels of integration.

The Contractor must use surveys, interviews and focus group discussions to triangulate possible trends from the analysis of the data collected in prior years. The Contractor may adopt an innovative methodology that draws on traditional and non-traditional evaluation methodologies. The Contractor may work with the Mission to utilize the stock taking methodology currently being tested as a learning method used to identify unintended consequences. Collected data on villages and households that are surveyed must be geo-referenced as per the discussion in the Inception report and baseline data collection. Note: secondary data sources may include but are not limited to the USAID/Malawi technical sector:

· Project Performance Management Plans

· Project quarterly reports

· Project Performance Evaluation Reports,

· Data and analysis from ongoing USAID impact evaluations and sector evaluations

· Project Mid – Term Evaluation Reports (where applicable), and

· Any other evaluations or assessments of other projects, by USAID or other Development Partners conducted in the impact area

· Results of annual stakeholder analysis

· Other related USAID research or evaluation information that can be accessed at https://dec.usaid.gov/ or provided by USAID/Malawi on integration.

· Key country relevant data can be accessed on www.nso.malawi.net/

The Contractor must build into the allowable time schedules for debriefing with USAID/Malawi during the evaluation of the USAID/Malawi CDCS. The Contractor must submit 50 hard bound copies to USAID/Malawi and an electronic copy in an appropriate media format that includes all instruments and data in formats suitable for reanalysis.

7. Final Evaluation Report: The Contractor must conduct the final evaluation of the USAID/Malawi CDCS development hypothesis during the fifth year after baseline. The Contractor must deliver an evidenced-based report that examines and provides evidence to answer evaluation questions based on CDCS interventions in the different districts where USAID Malawi is implementing its sector activities. The Contractor must ensure that Appendix I of the USAID Evaluation Policy – Criteria to Ensure the Quality of the Evaluation Report is followed. This includes:

· The evaluation report must represent a thoughtful, well-researched and well organized effort to objectively evaluate what worked in the project, what did not and why;

· Evaluation reports must address all evaluation questions included in the scope of work;

· The evaluation report should include the scope of work as an annex. All modifications to the scope of work, whether in technical requirements, evaluation questions, evaluation team composition, methodology or timeline need to be agreed upon in writing by the technical officer;

· Evaluation methodology must be explained in detail and all tools used in conducting the evaluation such as questionnaires, checklists and discussion guides will be included in an Annex in the final report;

· Evaluation findings will assess outcomes and impact on males and females;

· Limitations to the evaluation must be 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.);

· Evaluation findings must be presented as analyzed facts, evidence and data and not based on anecdotes, hearsay or the compilation of people’s opinions. Findings must be specific, concise and supported by strong quantitative or qualitative evidence;

· Sources of information must be properly identified and listed in an annex;

· Recommendations must be supported by a specific set of findings; and

· Recommendations must be action-oriented, practical and specific, with defined responsibility for the action.

The report must be 40-50 pages in length (excluding any annexes) and include the following sections:

· Executive Summary: This section must precisely provide the project background, including evaluation design and methodologies, key findings, main conclusions and recommendations from the evaluation.

· Background: This section must provide a brief description of the project that highlights the scope of the project, project development hypothesis, activities undertaken in the project, key impact indicators of the project and impact areas of the project. Other activities that complemented the project activities directly or indirectly in the intervention districts must also be highlighted. In addition to this, the section must detail the methodology and related research protocols undertaken in conducting the evaluation and related limitations encountered during the project implementation and evaluation.

· Findings: Empirical facts collected during the evaluation: This section must present findings from the evaluation. The evaluation findings must be presented as analyzed facts, evidence and data and not based on anecdotes, hearsay or the compilation of people’s opinions. The evaluation findings must assess key outcomes and impacts and the validity of the Development Hypothesis as structured around the organizational framework of the evaluation questions. The findings must be specific, concise and supported by strong quantitative and qualitative evidence analyzed through scientifically plausible methodologies. Sources of information used in arriving at the findings must be properly acknowledged and listed in an annex.

· Conclusions: Interpretations and judgments based on the findings: Evaluation conclusions must be presented for each key finding. The Conclusions must logically follow from the gathered data and findings. These must be explicitly justified. If and when necessary, the evaluator must state his/her assumptions, judgments and value premises so that readers can better understand and assess them.

· Recommendations (Proposed actions for management): This section must precisely and clearly present recommendations that must be drawn from specific findings. The recommendations must be stated in an action-oriented fashion, must be practical, specific, and with defined responsibility for the requisite action. The recommendations presented in this section must follow the evaluation questions as the organizational framework. This section must not be more than 5 pages. The Contractor must build into the allowable time schedules for debriefing with USAID/Malawi during the evaluation of USAID/Malawi’s development hypothesis.

The contractor must submit 15 hard bound copies to USAID/Malawi and an electronic copy in an appropriate media including all instruments and data in formats suitable for reanalysis.

8. Draft article for submission to peer review Journal: The Contractor must identify four peer review journals where two articles on the results and processes of the CDCS impact evaluation could be submitted and published. The USAID/Malawi COR will review the four identified journals to determine the most appropriate. The Contractor must then develop two draft articles, based on the Peer review journal guidelines, which could be submitted by USAID. The Contractor must write articles that precisely document evaluation efforts, results and the development hypothesis validity as it pertains to the field of development and attempts by USAID to obtain better development results through an integrated approach. Strong evidence for the use of integrated strategies vs. traditional sector approaches is lacking across the Agency. This IE provides an opportunity to build a knowledge base on integrating USAID approaches and as such can provide important lessons across the Agency for other Missions who are using or contemplating integration.

9. Development of Policy Papers: The Contractor must analyze IE data and develop a set of articles for publication internally, in Academia or in USAID’s Frontline Journal on how the CDCS is working as a design. Two articles annually must be developed. The COR in coordination with the Contractor and other key stakeholders may identify key policy questions of interest over the year for development. The articles should address identified key policy questions on integrated programming, service delivery, ME&L approach, use of geographic information services or other relevant subjects related to the evaluation and CDCS strategy. These articles can serve as a foundation for constructive dialogue on a host of subjects. They could provide language for annual performance plans to demonstrate impact, success and challenges of the CDCS approach while waiting on key mid-term and final reports. Articles should be digestible and provide opportunities for Mission staff and the larger Agency to engage in procedural understanding of how the CDCS strategic approach is evolving on the ground.

10. Presentation of Policy Paper Discussion: The Contractor must present the peer review and policy article subject material to USAID, partners and or GOM representatives.

C.5. Place of Performance

The place of performance for this Task Order is Malawi. The Contractor must include a sufficient sample of sites within targeted districts to ensure statistically viable sampling is performed. This includes, but is not limited to the three focus districts of Lilongwe Rural, Machinga and Balaka.