SOURCES SOUGHT ADD signed.pdf

To: Sources Sought (Attachment B)– Small Business Only Reference Number: SS-SB-7200AA-24-ADD Release Date: March 28, 2024 Response Date: April 11, 2024, 12 PM EST

Subject: Sources Sought- Small Business Only - Advancing Digital Democracy (ADD) Mechanism

PURPOSE:

Referring to FAR Part 10, FAR 15.201(e) the United States Government, represented by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), is publishing the subject Sources Sought notice for the Advancing Digital Democracy (ADD) Mechanism. The estimated range for this activity is 85-95 million dollars over a 5-year period.

As permitted by FAR Part 10, this is a market research tool being utilized for informational and planning purposes. Your responses will assist the Government in the development of its acquisition strategy for a possible Request for Proposal (RFP), to be issued at a later date, and in determining whether any type of small business set-aside is possible for this procurement or whether full and open or other competitive procedures should be utilized. If full and open or other competition is ultimately pursued, responses to this synopsis will be used to aid in establishing small business subcontracting goals.

USAID is conducting this Sources Sought to identify small business contractors who possess the capabilities to provide services as specified in the Attachment A: DRAFT SECTION C - DESCRIPTION/SPECIFICATIONS/STATEMENT OF WORK and to determine their availability, capability, and adequacy. If your firm may be interested in this requirement, is a qualified small business for the NAICS code 541990 (Size Standard in Millions of Dollars is $17.0 according to SBA Table of Small Business Size), and has performed similar projects, we request the information specified in the Attachment B: Sources Sought Information. An organization that is not considered a small business under the applicable NAICS code should not submit a response to the Attachment B of this notice. NOTE: We are not interested in knowing capabilities that could be gained through partnerships; we're interested in understanding the small business’ own capabilities, specifically one it has in-housed. Thus, when responding, please focus on providing information concerning the concerned small business' capabilities, capacities, expertise etc.

SUBMISSION INFORMATION:

Please submit your response to requested information in the Attachment B electronically to Michael Kwaw at: drg-add@usaid.gov no later than April 11, 2022, 12 PM EST. Please indicate Sources Sought reference number provided above in the subject of the email. You will receive only an electronic confirmation acknowledging receipt of your response. No individualized feedback or suggestions will be provided to respondents. Your responses may contribute to upcoming activity design(s). However, this

Sources Sought notice will not be construed as a commitment by the U.S. Government (USG) to issue any solicitation or pay for any information submitted in response to this request. Respondents are responsible for adequately marking proprietary or restricted information contained in their responses. No basis for claims against the U.S. Government shall arise because of a response to this Sources Sought notice or from the USG’s use of such information. Specific questions about this Sources Sought notice should be directed only to the email addresses identified above. This office will not respond to any telephonic or other inquiries regarding this notice.

Please note USAID is not seeking technical or cost proposals currently. Do not submit any proposal in response to this Sources Sought notice. Only the information as requested in Attachment B as applicable will be considered.

CONTENT:

Attachment A – DRAFT SECTION C - DESCRIPTION/SPECIFICATIONS/STATEMENT OF WORK Attachment B – Sources Sought Information

Sincerely, Mir Ershadullah, Contracting Officer

ATTACHMENT A: DRAFT SECTION C - DESCRIPTION/SPECIFICATIONS/STATEMENT

OF WORK

SECTION C: STATEMENT OFWORK

TITLE

Advancing Digital Democracy Field Support Mechanism (ADD)

INTRODUCTION

USAID seeks proposals to advance the Agency’s key digital democracy objectives. The services or supplies acquired and directed under the resulting contract will enable the Bureau for Democracy, Human Rights, and Governance (DRG) to support a variety of stakeholders, including governments, private sector, professional associations, research institutions, academia, civil society organizations, consumer organizations/associations, and regional and multilateral organizations to build and/or strengthen democratic values and human rights across digital ecosystems.

BACKGROUND

Over the past 30 years, digital technologies have fostered tremendous economic growth, increased commerce, accelerated the development of new industries, and connected and amplified the voices of activists and marginalized communities. These technologies have facilitated the flow of information, created jobs and entire industries, enabled citizen education and political participation, enhanced the efficiency, effectiveness, transparency, and accountability of government systems and service delivery, and assisted with organizing and advocacy, all of which has helped to strengthen democratic institutions, processes, and values. Yet all these benefits have failed to outweigh a persistent fact: technological innovation has steadily outpaced our ability to identify, avoid and/or mitigate potential harms.

Indeed, the global economic and political landscape has radically changed over the past 20 years due to new forms of digital innovation, including the steady integration of social media platforms, big data, cloud computing, 5G technology, the internet of things, biometrics (including facial recognition technologies), digital identification, spyware, digital surveillance tools, artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning into our lives and governments. The expanded de facto role of technology companies across all facets of daily life, combined with the fact that some governments misuse technology and data to control and repress their populations, has intensified and accelerated global democratic decline, given rise to new forms of violence - including technology-facilitated gender-based violence (TFGBV ) - and1 eroded respect for human rights . Governments across the ideological spectrum have weaponized2 technology and data in what some experts refer to as "digital repression," or the intentional use of digital tools and technology to suppress or violate human rights . For more in-depth discussion of the tactics of3 digital repression see Attachment 2.

3 https://www.usaid.gov/digital-development/digital-ecosystem-framework; See also: USAID Digitized Autocracy Literature Review, 2021 and The Rise of Digital Repression, 2021.

2 C.f.. Autocratization Turns Viral

1 TFGBV is a subset of gender-based violence that describes any act that is committed, assisted, aggravated, or amplified by the use of information communication technologies or other digital tools, that results in or is likely to result in harm, or other infringements of rights and freedoms.

https://global.oup.com/academic/product/the-rise-of-digital-repression-9780190057497 https://www.v-dem.net/files/25/DR%202021.pdf https://www.state.gov/2023-roadmap-for-the-global-partnership-for-action-on-gender-based-online-harassment-and-abuse/ https://www.state.gov/2023-roadmap-for-the-global-partnership-for-action-on-gender-based-online-harassment-and-abuse/ https://www.state.gov/2023-roadmap-for-the-global-partnership-for-action-on-gender-based-online-harassment-and-abuse/

A “digital democracy” is a context where stakeholders design, develop, deploy, govern, and use digital technologies in line with democratic values and respect for human rights, including women’s human rights. The parameters that define a digital democracy are quickly evolving. Following the Summit for Democracy in December 2021, and the launch of a number of other technology and democracy-related initiatives, like-minded democratic nations have launched several additional efforts to articulate human rights-based approaches to digital technologies, including the Copenhagen Pledge for Democracy and Technology, the Declaration for the Future of the Internet, the Guiding Principles on Government use of Surveillance Technologies, The Global Partnership for Action on Gender-Based Online Harassment and Abuse, Hiroshima Process International Guiding Principles for Organizations Developing Advanced AI Systems, and the Bletchley Declaration. Notable frameworks developed domestically that apply within the U.S. include the National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST) AI Risk Management Framework, the Blueprint for an AI Bill of Rights and the Executive Order on the Safe, Secure and Trustworthy Development and Use of Artificial Intelligence. Still more principles, guidelines, standards, and multilateral treaties continue to be developed globally, particularly for artificial intelligence. While these frameworks continue to evolve, governments, civil society, private sector companies, academics, and others have been working to ensure international human rights principles are respected and protected across the digital ecosystem.

In addition to multilateral and international developments, industry, independent technologists, and data scientists continue to develop, test, and deploy new technologies that can help safeguard democracies.

International stakeholders across sectors are pushing for more robust safeguards and better resources for applying the UN Guiding Principles for Business and Human Rights in digital contexts. As reflected in the Donor Principles for Human Rights in the Digital Age, donor governments have also been calling for increased donor accountability to incorporate safeguarding processes in international digital development support. Additional investment is needed to spur innovation in the practical guidance, legal frameworks, built technologies and business models that will ensure that human rights risks are adequately identified, avoided, mitigated and redressed.

Expectations remain high that these frameworks, principles, guidance, and standards be debated, negotiated, and drafted through evidence-driven, gender transformative, inclusive, transparent, multi-stakeholder processes that include voices from government, private sector, civil society, academia, technologists, consumer rights advocates and investors. The role of development actors supporting global digital policymaking is critical; to support local governments and civil society actors from across the global majority to meaningfully influence the development, implementation, and oversight of these frameworks so they are both locally relevant and align with international standards.

PROBLEM STATEMENT

ADD programming will help to stem the global increase in digital repression by supporting more robust global and local enabling environments for digital democracy. Attachment 2 provides an in-depth analysis of the tactics of digital repression and the related impacts on democratic institutions, systems, values, and respect for and protection of human rights. The enabling environment for digital democracy can be strengthened by addressing the following issues and challenges:

Governments: Legal and Regulatory Frameworks, Implementation and Oversight https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftechfordemocracy.dk%2Fjoin-the-initiative%2F&data=05%7C01%7CPetersAL%40state.gov%7Cd5acf1a3971947e8f11d08dad15af627%7C66cf50745afe48d1a691a12b2121f44b%7C0%7C1%7C638052485851798976%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=bWmJ4k38a0nARs%2FaQsxALlJHW%2BqXnJKetqHboBsuf8A%3D&reserved=0 https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftechfordemocracy.dk%2Fjoin-the-initiative%2F&data=05%7C01%7CPetersAL%40state.gov%7Cd5acf1a3971947e8f11d08dad15af627%7C66cf50745afe48d1a691a12b2121f44b%7C0%7C1%7C638052485851798976%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=bWmJ4k38a0nARs%2FaQsxALlJHW%2BqXnJKetqHboBsuf8A%3D&reserved=0 https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.whitehouse.gov%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2022%2F04%2FDeclaration-for-the-Future-for-the-Internet_Launch-Event-Signing-Version_FINAL.pdf&data=05%7C01%7CPetersAL%40state.gov%7Cd5acf1a3971947e8f11d08dad15af627%7C66cf50745afe48d1a691a12b2121f44b%7C0%7C1%7C638052485851798976%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=gEKk%2BjxkrGzNVzT%2Fv8SllwE4ZCsQgjzD18wvAgMu2zA%3D&reserved=0 https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/Guiding-Principles-on-Government-Use-of-Surveillance-Technologies.pdf https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/Guiding-Principles-on-Government-Use-of-Surveillance-Technologies.pdf https://www.state.gov/2023-roadmap-for-the-global-partnership-for-action-on-gender-based-online-harassment-and-abuse/ https://www.state.gov/2023-roadmap-for-the-global-partnership-for-action-on-gender-based-online-harassment-and-abuse/ https://www.mofa.go.jp/files/100573471.pdf https://www.mofa.go.jp/files/100573471.pdf https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/ai-safety-summit-2023-the-bletchley-declaration/the-bletchley-declaration-by-countries-attending-the-ai-safety-summit-1-2-november-2023 https://www.nist.gov/itl/ai-risk-management-framework https://www.nist.gov/itl/ai-risk-management-framework https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.whitehouse.gov%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2022%2F10%2FBlueprint-for-an-AI-Bill-of-Rights.pdf&data=05%7C01%7CPetersAL%40state.gov%7Cd5acf1a3971947e8f11d08dad15af627%7C66cf50745afe48d1a691a12b2121f44b%7C0%7C1%7C638052485851798976%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=Vh%2BkcFP%2BSphK89ciCkq2cWqThUNUeUQACKj3PIwJWOY%3D&reserved=0 https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2023/10/30/executive-order-on-the-safe-secure-and-trustworthy-development-and-use-of-artificial-intelligence/ https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2023/10/30/executive-order-on-the-safe-secure-and-trustworthy-development-and-use-of-artificial-intelligence/ https://freedomonlinecoalition.com/donor-principles-for-human-rights-in-the-digital-age/

Policymakers, legislators, judges and oversight bodies frequently lack the technical skills, budgets and the capacity necessary to safely govern, deploy, use and perform oversight on technology and data.

Governments, technology companies, data brokers, and other non-state actors also instrumentalize technology and data in ways that undermine, sometimes inadvertently, democracy and respect for human rights as set out in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), and regional or national human rights commitments. For instance, peoples’ personal digital data is routinely collected, amalgamated, and leveraged through processes that, while legal, are often opaque and provide few opportunities for public consent or oversight. Personal data extracted through spyware or through mining of public media can be used to intimidate, harass, and publicly smear the targets’ reputations . LGBTQI+ persons and ethnic minorities whose very existence is4 criminalized under authoritarian regimes are particularly vulnerable. For women such practices frequently have detrimental effects on psychological, physical, and social well being. Governments need to establish and/or strengthen, implement, and create oversight mechanisms for legal and regulatory frameworks for governing digital technologies that align with their commitments to human rights, such as those in the ICCPR.

Private Sector, Education and Innovation

In the absence of economic incentives, regulatory mandates, cross-disciplinary education, and capacity building for the private sector to reform their business practices, technologists can struggle to embed democratic values and respect for human rights in the development and design of hardware, algorithms, machine learning models, and software systems. Developing technology products and services that are rights-respecting by design and default requires buy-in from corporate leadership and investors. It also requires technical expertise from an informed, diverse workforce that understands how to incorporate human rights and equity concerns into coding decisions in order to address digital repression and digital discrimination. Companies are still lacking comprehensive approaches for incorporating the findings of human rights impact assessments and other due diligence tools into the corporate governance and workflow in the design and development of digital technology and data management. Business leaders in emerging and more established markets must be incentivized to fully adopt what is needed for transformational outcomes in the technology sector, including by aligning development and design choices with the principles outlined in the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights.

Universities must also be incentivized to produce a rights-respecting technology workforce by building curricula that draw on both social and computer sciences. At the local and the global levels there are too few fora in which regulators, investors, corporate executives and human rights experts can engage in open dialogue and collaboration with software engineers, product design staff, and policy staff, in a way that increases the integration of rights-respecting approaches into product design processes.

Civic Engagement and Digital Repression

Civil society, oversight bodies, consumer advocacy organizations and the broader public have an essential role to play in holding governments, developers and the private sector accountable for respecting human

4 Frontline Defenders - Unsafe anywhere: women human rights defenders speak out about Pegasus attacks https://www.frontlinedefenders.org/sites/default/files/unsafe-anywhere_-women-human-rights-defenders-speak-out-about-pegasus-attacks_en.pdf rights and democratic values in a rapidly digitizing age. Many strong civil society actors are working on these issues already, particularly at the global and regional levels. However, current efforts are insufficient to meet the rapid proliferation of challenges technology presents to individual human rights and democracy. With additional knowledge, support, and resources, civil society organizations, civic groups, and the public could more effectively influence governments and the technology sector to adopt rights-respecting approaches. Encouraging dialogue and building and strengthening coalitions between civic actors, technologists, private sector, investors, academics, and government stakeholders could increase understanding of the incentives, politico-economic considerations, and shared goals of different actors vis-a-vis technology, leading to more effective advocacy and oversight.

Civic actors face a few key challenges in effectively engaging on issues of democracy and technology.

One major challenge is the fundamental imbalance of money, power, and influence in the relationship between governments, companies and investors, civic actors, academics, and consumers that must be rectified for substantial progress to be made. Governments and global companies often drive decision-making on technology issues, and the concerns of civil society groups, including consumer advocacy groups and the broader public, are often sidelined or ignored. One persistent gap is the relatively low level of effective participation by civic actors in multilateral and industry fora where technical standards that guide technological development are set, and where major decisions about technology's global governance are made. To be able to engage in these important norms-shaping spaces, civic actors must be resourced with tools and long-term technical training, including information about industry protocols, procedures, and discourse, human rights due diligence processes, and algorithmic and product development.

Finally, activists, journalists, and other civil society actors are disproportionately targeted, harassed, surveilled, hacked, imprisoned, and/or killed by governments, as detailed in Attachment 2, which outlines tactics of digital repression. In addition to persecuting populations, this misuse of technology and data has a chilling effect on the exercise of human rights such as expression, assembly and association. Female and gender nonconforming civic actors are particularly vulnerable to such technology-enabled repression, and are more likely to experience violence than their male counterparts.

Technology's Global Governance No single, overarching structure currently exists through which governments, technologists, technology company executives, private sector companies, investors, civic actors, and academics can discuss and collectively determine the “rules of the road” for digital democracy. Recent advances in European regulation and voluntary standards (as outlined above) have started to shape global norms in ways that strengthen universal human rights standards. In 2023, thirty-eight governments from around the world endorsed the Donor Principles for Human Rights in the Digital Age, which USAID and Canada's International Development Research Centre (IDRC) launched to strengthen rights-respecting approaches to digital development globally. However, these developments have occurred alongside increasing internet fragmentation, the growing use of digital repression by governments across the democratic spectrum, and continued private sector exploitation of technology users in order to monetize their data, including the concerning growth of third-party data broker industries in under-resourced corners of the globe.

Lacking comprehensive, fit-for-purpose, mandatory policies and safeguards, companies have been building their own independent regulatory frameworks. This siloed approach results in duplication, inconsistency, confusion, and distrust. Multinational companies have thus joined civil society activists and democratic leaders in calling for consistent global norms, criteria, or standards to help guard against both unintended human rights violations and potential liability. In response, a coalition of democratic actors, the private sector, civil society and activists have an opportunity to better articulate a shared global vision and action plan for how technology should be built, designed, used, and governed, and how the individual rights of all people, including women, gender nonconforming individuals, and marginalized groups, should be protected in a democratic, digitized world.

WORK REQUIREMENTS

The goal of the Program is to foster and strengthen "digital democracies" by promoting open, secure, safe and inclusive digital ecosystems in which data-driven technologies advance, rather than undermine, democratic values and respect for human rights, including the rights of women, LGBTQI+ and other marginalized populations. The Program will support USAID partners in addressing and/or building resilience to digital repression, and supporting rights-respecting digital transformation and growth of the digital economy. This approach is consistent with, and outlined in, the USAID Digital Strategy. Program activities must support local actors in addressing current challenges while enabling them to future-proof their societies so that digital systems built today do not drive democratic decline and human rights abuses tomorrow. Given that digitalization cuts across all sectors, the Program aims to achieve its goals by offering to support and strengthen country-level and global multistakeholder coalitions or platforms that can identify opportunities for networking and constructive engagement, leverage incentive structures, and establish common priorities for expanding rights-respecting and inclusive digital access, economy and policy.

The Program will provide comprehensive development support for partner-country stakeholders to spur rights-respecting digital innovation while addressing the potential adverse impacts of technology and data across the digital ecosystem. As such, the Program will operate primarily in open and hybrid political contexts in partnership with local government stakeholders, to the extent possible. This will necessitate differentiated, locally-led approaches and designs that are fit-for-purpose interventions at the country level. The Program is intended to engage government, civic, and private sector actors, using a gender equality and inclusive development informed political economy lens to leverage opportunities and address specific local needs. As part of this approach, the Program is focused on strengthening multi-stakeholder coalitions and platforms that will elevate diverse voices and foster relationships and networks to share learning, negotiate, and build consensus among governments, the private sector, civil society, technologists, professional associations, academia and other stakeholders.

ADD represents a major expansion of USAID’s toolkit to advance digital democracy and address digital authoritarianism and repression. In each ADD focus country, USAID will tailor programming to the unique digital context and development challenges, while maintaining the integrated approach described above. A critical priority for the ADD mechanism is to strengthen resilience to the misuse of data and technology in partnership with ADD Focus Countries. The program will also maintain flexibility to provide resources to local actors facing digital repression (as described in Attachment 2). The Agency is keenly aware that investments in the digital ecosystem will exacerbate digital divides unless and until https://www.usaid.gov/digital-development/usaid-digital-strategy access to digital technologies is universal. In response, USAID aims to facilitate digital transformation safely and equitably, without exacerbating inequities that undermine democratic societies, governance and institutions. ADD programming will foster environments in which development actors, civil society and the private sector can partner more effectively to increase digital access and bridge digital divides.

Support Supplied by the Contractor ADD will provide comprehensive development support in ADD focus countries to spur rights-respecting, inclusive digital innovation and address the existing and future adverse impacts of technology and data across the digital ecosystem. This support will be achieved through the Objectives, Sub-Objectives, results and illustrative activities outlined below.

The Contractor will provide services under the contract that supply locally-driven solutions to the challenges presented in the above Problem Statement. The Contractor will be expected to deploy technical assistance, partner with local stakeholders, issue grants under contract, and issue performance-based sub-contracts when suited.

Support Supplied Through the Global Mechanism:

At the global level, the Contractor will provide certain cross-cutting functions that advance the ADD Goal. This will include the development of an ADD research capability that will support analytical tasks such as stakeholder mapping, political economy assessments, legal and socio-technical analysis, ongoing monitoring and evaluation of ADD program performance, indicators, and impact; as well as support for Digital Ecosystem Country Assessments (DECAs), and other relevant assessments. The Global Mechanism will also support engagement of local stakeholders from ADD focus countries with multilateral and regional institutions such as the Open Government Partnership, the Freedom Online Coalition, the African Union, the Organization of American States, Global Partnership for Action on Gender-Based Online Harassment and Abuse, the Global Partnership on AI, etc. In addition, the Global Mechanism will provide ongoing support and networking opportunities for multi-stakeholder coalitions and platforms to engage with one another across ADD Focus Countries. The Global Mechanism will also respond to the evolving needs of global policymakers by providing ad hoc expertise, convening and analysis to support urgent policy priorities. This will also include conducting literature reviews or convening communities of practice, to enlist global experts to define stronger risk mitigation measures to safeguard the risks of AI and other emerging technologies.

Support Supplied in ADD Focus Countries:

The Contractor will design and manage program implementation across ADD Focus Countries in a locally-driven, cost-effective manner. To design and implement each ADD program at the country level, the Contractor will make every effort to rely on local and regional knowledge and expertise, partnering with local organizations, including women-led and women’s rights organizations, and institutions, including through grants under contract. Specific Contract activities will be determined by the Contractor and USAID, in robust consultation with local ADD partners and stakeholders, and specified in each Annual Work Plan.

ADD activities will be primarily implemented in ADD focus countries that are selected by USAID in consultation with the Contractor and other stakeholders. In 2023, nine ADD focus countries were selected. ADD focus countries will be re-evaluated on an annual basis and the number of ADD countries may increase or decrease over the life of the Contract. This will be reflected each year in the Annual Work Plan.

Every ADD Focus Country will implement a context-based set of interventions that will be prioritized based on engagement and consultation with local stakeholders across the digital ecosystem.

Country-specific activities will be outlined in the Annual Work Plan. Each ADD Focus Country program will include activities that advance each of the three Objectives, however, not all countries will implement every Sub-Objective, as they may not all align with the priorities identified by local stakeholders. At a minimum, the Contractor will provide support for the following core ADD Focus Country program activities:

● Ongoing stakeholder engagement, consultation, monitoring and evaluation, research and needs assessments. Manage grants under contract and sub-contracts.

● Objective 1 Core Activities: Provide technical assistance to government officials and entities in the form of training, embedded advisors, ongoing mentoring to support robust legal, regulatory and safeguard enabling environments. Develop and/or adapt international standards and principles to meet local needs, context and language. Elevate local stakeholder voices in global processes to develop international standards and principles.

● Objective 2 Core Activities: Develop and/or adapt guidance for technologists and companies to build products, applications and socio-technical systems that respect and protect human rights by design and default. Provide technical assistance to local stakeholders to strengthen capacity for developing and implementing digital safeguards. Engage with global and local private sector actors to identify opportunities for public private partnerships.

● Objective 3 Core Activities: Support new or strengthen existing multistakeholder coalitions or platforms composed of government, private sector and civil society (including academia, trade associations, consumer rights entities, etc.). Support participation in ADD Academy and other training opportunities for local stakeholders. Provide networking opportunities for local coalitions or platforms across ADD Focus Countries, and link them to global digital platforms or coalitions.

These core activities will be supported by the Contractor. Additional activities will be implemented in each ADD Focus Country based on USAID priorities and priorities identified by the multistakeholder coalitions or platforms and other stakeholders across the local digital ecosystem. Such additional activities will be included in the Contractor’s Annual Work Plan. The below section outlines how core activities and illustrative additional activities advance the ADD goal, objectives and sub-objectives.

Table 1. ADD results framework.

Objective 1:

Governments implement legal and regulatory frameworks related to technology, data and information that align with and fulfill their international human rights, including women’s human

Objective 2:

Respect for human rights, including women’s human rights, and democratic values are embedded throughout digital technology development and data management processes

Objective 3:

Multi-stakeholder coalitions and platforms are established or strengthened to empower all digital stakeholders and to advance common goals

Objective I - Governments implement legal and regulatory frameworks related to technology, data and information that align with and fulfill their international human rights, including women’s human rights, and democratic commitments.

1.1 Regulations are developed, strengthened and/or implemented to foster a rights-respecting digital ecosystem: ADD will support digital stakeholders to engage in consultative processes to develop, strengthen and/or implement domestic legal and regulatory frameworks on technology and data governance that align with their international human rights commitments, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). This will include the provision of technical assistance to government officials and entities in the form of training, embedded advisors, ongoing mentoring, etc. It will also include the development and adaptation of international standards and principles to meet local needs, context and language.

ADD interventions could support executive branch institutions such as line ministries, judicial actors, or legislative bodies, including legislative committees.

Technical assistance could be provided for local actors engaged in reform of their existing laws and regulations or drafting new ones in line with international standards and principles, including the right of women to be free from gender-based violence online . Subsequent support could be provided to facilitate5 implementation across national and subnational governments. Emphasis could be placed on encouraging multi-stakeholder approaches to legal and regulatory processes and oversight or accountability functions in each branch of government–including strengthening processes for engagement with civil society actors

5 https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N23/233/65/PDF/N2323365.pdf?OpenElement rights, and democratic commitments

Sub-Objective (SO) 1.1 Regulations are developed, strengthened and/or implemented to foster a rights-respecting digital ecosystem

SO 2.1 Resources and capacity to produce rights-respecting digital products and services are increased

SO 3.1Multistakeholder approaches to advancing rights-respecting digital ecosystems are locally-owned and sustainable

SO 1.2 Governments have the capacity and resources to advance a rights-respecting digital transformation

SO 2.2 Business enabling environments are strengthened

SO 3.2 Stakeholders across the digital ecosystem have capacity and opportunity to influence digital priorities and decision-making

SO 1.3 Information ecosystems support human rights and democratic digital governance

SO 2.3 Tools, resources and capacity to manage, audit and report on digital risks are more effective and widely available

SO 3.3 Support for human rights defenders, including women’s human rights defenders (WHRD) and civic actors provided in transitioning contexts

SO 1.4 Governments have greater cybersecurity capacity and resources

SO 2.4 Private sector partnerships are leveraged to strengthen ADD results

(as more fully described under Objective 3). Efforts could also include support for independent or quasi-governmental commissions established pursuant to legislation governing data privacy and protection, cybersecurity, artificial intelligence or other sub-sectors.

National human rights institutions and other legal actors or institutions play critical roles in advancing a rights respecting digital ecosystem. Support to legal or judicial actors could include capacity building for application of universal human rights principles to cases involving technology, data or the information environment, and cross-learning from other jurisdictions also grappling with these issues. Cross-cutting support could be provided to strengthen institutional oversight mechanisms within government, including support for independent national human rights institutions (NHRIs) or ethics committees.

Legal and regulatory priorities could also include frameworks that improve the business enabling environment such as frameworks governing responsible business conduct and fair competition across digital sectors, cross-border digital trade, digital services, digital markets, fintech, and digital innovation or entrepreneurship (as detailed in Objective 2). Additional illustrative activities could include support for interested government actors to develop or strengthen digital safeguards that prevent the misuse of technology, including impact assessments for government procurement of certain types of surveillance technology or digital infrastructure. This could include support for women’s rights and gender equality impact assessments.

As stated by one consumer protection expert, USAID also recognizes that “[c]consumer protection and privacy safeguards, which protect against unfair, deceptive, and abusive practices in the economy, can instill confidence in digital products and services in emerging markets and developing economies. By influencing the marketplace to treat people fairly, these safeguards also protect human rights. Yet in many of these countries, safeguards are weak, nonexistent, or poorly implemented.” ADD interventions may6 support consumer protection agencies, organizations and advocates in strengthening these critical safeguards, particularly in contexts where advocacy for other forms of legal and regulatory safeguards is less feasible.

ADD support could be provided at the country level or at the global level through multilateral and regional bodies including the African Union, ASEAN, the Organization of American States, the Open Government Partnership, the OECD, the Global Partnership on AI, Freedom Online Coalition, Christchurch Call, the Generation Equality Action Coalitions, etc.

Key elements of the digital ecosystem – as outlined in USAID’s Digital Ecosystem Framework – on which this Objective could focus include strengthening or developing frameworks that govern internet services and service providers, telecommunications more generally, data privacy and protection, cross-border data flows, artificial intelligence, algorithmic accountability, access to information, machine learning, cybersecurity, surveillance, gig work, social media platforms, digital transformation, digital service delivery, digital public infrastructure, information, hate speech, technology facilitated gender based violence (TFGBV), consumer rights/protections, hardware and software, etc.

6 https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/robust-consumer-protection-can-support-rights-respecting-digital-future https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/2021/06/the-future-of-emerging-markets-duttagupta-and-pazarbasioglu.htm

1.2 Governments have the capacity and resources to foster a rights-respecting digital transformation: USAID recognizes that countries around the world have varying levels of digital infrastructure. Where investments advance the ADD goal, support may be provided for digital development investments relating to digital transformation, digital government, digital public infrastructure and digital service delivery. This may include support for infrastructure, hardware and/or software as appropriate. Such investments would require a clear plan for how it will be used, maintained, replaced and how the system will be sustained over time. This could also include support for the development of ICT strategic plans that establish digital government investment priorities across types of infrastructure and sectors, including for procurement of ICT products and infrastructure. Such investments across the digital governance ecosystem may play an important role in providing more trustworthy digital infrastructure that is a fundamental component of a rights-respecting digital ecosystem.

Support will include technical assistance to safeguard digitalization processes such as digital identification systems, digital voter registration or voting systems, digital service delivery, etc.

Interventions will also include technical upskilling for government employees, in the form of training, embedded advisors, or mentorship. The ADD mechanism may also engage on matters relating to digital public infrastructure (DPI) both at the global level and at the country level.

Government procurement procedures can also be leveraged to effectively mitigate bias in digital tools and services, to promote trustworthiness of digital infrastructure, and to promote transparency and competition across the digital ecosystem. Illustrative interventions could include support to strengthen the capacity, regulations, and procedures of government stakeholders and institutions that engage in the procurement of digital infrastructure, goods and services to build gender inclusive, rights-respecting and trustworthy digital ecosystems.

1.3 Information ecosystems support human rights and democratic digital governance: General understanding of the risks of the misuse of data and technology and digital repression is low among the general public, and even among those working across digital sectors. Awareness is also low when it comes to identifying measures that individuals and organizations can take to increase their digital security and safety, from buying or using technologies and applications that enhance data privacy and safety, to promoting stronger legal and regulatory safeguards. ADD interventions may include efforts to raise awareness of human rights risks, protections and safety measures in digital contexts. Interventions can also include support to raise awareness of the many ways that technology and data can be leveraged to increase civic participation through “civic tech” and other digital modalities. Additional activities may include support for primary, secondary, or university curricula to increase digital literacy among youth and women with an eye towards building resilience to digital repression, preventing and protection from TFGBV, increasing digital workforce readiness and closing the digital divide.

As more fully described in Attachment 2, online information manipulation is among the most common tactics of digital repression. Information campaigns on social media can undermine the integrity of democratic values and institutions, while viral hate speech or polarizing content can exacerbate social divisions and lead to offline violence and atrocities. Of particular concern is the targeted effort to undermine the legitimacy of universal human rights principles that provide critical protection from and redress for the misuse of data and technology and other tactics of digital repression. The spread of gendered manipulated information is a prominent and damaging manifestation of information manipulation, leveraging harmful gender norms to manipulate political outcomes . Illustrative activities78 may include efforts to build resilience to such information manipulation, or efforts that bolster democratic values and human rights principles, or foster social cohesion. Other interventions may address issues legal and regulatory reforms to prevent weaponization of legal frameworks (such as those governing treason, slander or defamation, as well as “fake news” laws or related regulations) that can legitimize digital repression.

USAID has a longstanding commitment to protecting and promoting freedom of expression online.

Consistent with that commitment, the Contractor must take care to ensure that any proposed activities under ADD do not censor protected free speech. Accordingly, any activities that will involve social media companies and content moderation requests, including any requests for specific content to be removed, retained, posted, or promoted, must follow the social media company’s terms of use, service, or other applicable policies. The Contractor must take care to avoid conduct that may be viewed as censorship or an attempt to coerce social media companies to censor protected free speech. In all engagements with social media companies, including any discussions or events about content moderation or promoting human rights online, the Contractor must make clear that social media companies remain free to make their own choices about how to respond to information or recommendations provided. Any related activities proposed by the Offeror must comply with this guidance.

1.4 Governments have greater cybersecurity capacity and resources: A cyber secure digital ecosystem is an essential element of a robust digital democracy. Cybersecurity must be prioritized at each stage and in every sector of digital transformation. Ignoring cybersecurity puts governments, communities, individuals, and program Objectives at risk. Cybersecurity should be considered a fundamental part of support under ADD. Interventions must be designed and implemented with digital security as a requirement and as an objective, where appropriate. This could include 1) bolstering local cyber awareness and capacity where needed; 2) support to put the right protections in place in the ADD-relevant digital systems local partners create so they can drive sustainable, locally-led digital transformation; and 3) ensuring incident response and recovery plans and capabilities are in place in the event of a cyber attack. Illustrative interventions can also include cybersecurity support to build resilience to cyber attacks across government systems and for protection of critical infrastructure. While ADD resources will likely not be sufficient to achieve a fully cyber secure digital ecosystem, cost-effective measures, such as prioritizing best practices in IT governance and cyber hygiene, should be included to provide more robust support for cybersecurity. In particular, ADD support may be appropriate where cybersecurity issues are critical to achieving ADD results or where there are opportunities to leverage ADD relationships, training or other resources to advance key aspects of government cybersecurity objectives.

Objective 1 Expected Results

● Government institutions and actors have the capacity to effectively reform, implement and adjudicate laws and regulations.

8 Di Meco, Lucina, and Kristina Wilfore. 2021. “Gendered disinformation is a national security problem | Brookings.” Brookings Institution.

7 “2022 Roadmap for the Global Partnership for Action on Gender-Based Online Harassment and Abuse - United States Department of State.” 2022. U.S. Department of State.

https://www.state.gov/2022-roadmap-for-the-global-partnership-for-action-on-gender-based-online-harassment-and-abuse/.

● Government capacity strengthened to safeguard against adverse impacts of data and technology.

● Government capacity to increase cybersecurity of critical systems and infrastructure is strengthened.

Objective 2- Respect for human rights and democratic values are embedded in digital technology and data management

2.1 Resources and capacity to produce rights-respecting digital products and services increase:

Investments in locally-driven technology development that build upon local knowledge, solutions and approaches provide opportunities for local entrepreneurs to increase their competitive advantage and foster long-term, sustainable growth in the digital economy. Interventions will support increased investment in local solutions or enterprises that advance research and development in rights-respecting9 digital technology and business models by supporting local software engineers, technology companies, universities, researchers, and others from the technology community to embed respect for human rights, including women’s human rights, and democratic values into technology development and design. This will include support for actors that educate others about or adopt innovative new designs for rights-respecting technology and business models that embed human rights and democratic values into the product development life cycle and subsequent product management. In addition, ADD could provide support for the transformation of existing technologies into ones that are more rights respecting.

Examples include products developed with human rights, gender equality or privacy-by-design and human-centered design principles for software, hardware or mobile applications. This could also include support for “grand challenges” to experiment with new ideas while engaging a broad range of stakeholders from commerce and academia, as well as support for local innovation hubs and incubators.

ADD could also foster engagement with local and regional technology companies to promote uptake of rights-respecting approaches or foster collaboration or mentorship between multinational enterprises that are “getting it right” at the global level, with companies on the ground in ADD focus countries.

Other illustrative activities may include support for the development or strengthening of a local rights-respecting work force in partnership with local universities to develop or strengthen curricula for ethical and rights-respecting technology (for example, by advancing existing work in partnership with organizations like Mozilla…