REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
Implemented by:
Program: mSTAR, Subcontract to Develop Adaptive Programming Conceptual Framework
Solicitation: 101023020001009-SystemsThinkingCF-01
Authority: USAID Award No. AID-OAA-A-12-00073
Date of Issuance: Tuesday, October 6, 2015
Due Date for Questions: 5:00 PM US EST Monday, October 12, 2015
Response to Questions: Thursday, October 1529, 2015
Closing Date: 5:00 PM US EST Friday, November 620, 2015
Estimated Award Date: December 2015
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS 2
1 PURPOSE STATEMENT 3
2 OBJECTIVE & PROGRAM DESCRIPTION 4
3 INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS 9
4.1 Offerors Eligibility 9
4.2 Funding and estimated period of performance 10
4.3 Proposal Submission Deadline 10
4.4 Submission Method for Questions and Proposals 10
4.5 Review Process 10
4.6 Proposal Contents 10
4.7 Evaluation Criteria 13
5 TERMS AND CONDITIONS 14
5.1 Source of Funding and Geographic Code 14
5.2 Withdrawal of proposals 14
5.3 Right to Select/Reject 14
5.4 Disclaimer 14
5.5 Offer Verification 15
5.6 False Statements in Offer 15
5.7 Conflict of Interest 15
5.8 Reserved Rights 15
5.9 Governing Law and Language 16
5.10 Certification of Independent Price Determination 16
5.11 Award and Notification of Selected Proposals 16
6 ATTACHMENTS 18
1 PURPOSE STATEMENT
The purpose of this Request for Proposals (RFP) is to solicit proposals for funding from prospective subcontractors to support FHI 360’s implementation of the Mobile Solutions Technical Assistance and Research Program (mSTAR), funded by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), Award No. AID-OAA-A-12-00073. mSTAR is a strategic investment by USAID to advance mobile solutions and close the gaps that hold back access and uptake of mobile technology. The project supports broad-based coordinated action by a range of market stakeholders — including governments, donors, mobile service providers, and their customers.
FHI 360’s mSTAR project is issuing this request for proposals to academic institutions to assist with the following:
USAID’s Global Development Lab (Lab) is launching an initiative to conceive, design, and test how real-time data[1] systems underpinned by mobile technology can enable a more adaptive and participatory approach to development in complex settings. This initiative is concerned with how to most appropriately integrate flow data from multiple agents across the information supply chain, including community members, frontline workers, and government decision makers to facilitate rapid operational assessments, adaptive and iterative learning, and summative evaluations. In support of this initiative FHI 360 seeks an organization to develop of a real-time data (RTD) Conceptual Framework.
The intent is to mainstream the learnings from this initiative throughout USAID’s programmatic and policy reforms and also to inform a larger global development reform agenda across international development organizations. As a result, this effort implicates a wide-range of actors from the fields of complexity science, innovation studies, participatory action research, adaptive knowledge management, behavioral economics, political economy, and digital technology.
This scope of work (SOW) outlines the pieces required for the RTD Conceptual Framework, which will inform the shape of the Adaptive Programming initiative and directly inform an applied toolkit.
Background
The overall RTD Adaptive Programming initiative involves four main phases:
1. RTD Adaptive Programming Workshop: This workshop will bring together leading thinkers and practitioners from the aforementioned disciplines to discuss how RTD systems can facilitate adaptive programming and aid decision-making. The workshop will synthesize different perspectives of this work to form a set of research questions that will feed into the Conceptual Framework in the next phase. Select participants from the workshop will go on to form an External Advisory Group, which will informally advise on the development of the Conceptual Framework.
2. Develop Conceptual Framework: The Conceptual Framework will describe the theoretical and practical foundations for RTD learning systems to develop an understanding and systematic methodology for how these systems can be designed and implemented across development practice. This will include a literature review of the theoretical foundations of RTD and adaptive programming, a synthesis of the practical foundations relating to service delivery, and exploratory research through comparative case studies and information mapping. The Conceptual Framework will also incorporate primary research on the incentives and limitations of service operators and implementing partners. Examples of other Conceptual Frameworks include T. Tanahashi’s framework for evaluating health systems, David Snowden’s Cynefin Framework for decision-making from a complexity perspective, and C.S. Holling’s Panarchy framework for systems change and resilience.
3. Create applied toolkit: The Conceptual Framework will be used to design an applied toolkit that will be mapped onto USAID’s Program Cycle, the series of policies and strategies that frame the Agency’s programs. The Toolkit will help USAID Missions and implementing partners design, implement and adapt RTD systems. The design of the toolkit will include field-testing amongst various Missions and implementing partners (IPs).
4. Socialize and promote lessons learned: Once the initial testing and refining process is completed, a strategy for promoting the adoption and adaptation of the framework and toolkit will be developed. The process will include dissemination of information and guidance around the framework and toolkit, training of Pillar Bureaus and Missions, and development of other resources to support the application of the toolkit.
This RFP is issued as a public notice to ensure that all interested, qualified, and eligible organizations have a fair opportunity to submit proposals for funding.
2 OBJECTIVE & PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
This SOW is for an organizational contractor to develop the Conceptual Framework and Phase 2. This will involve the following components:
● RTD Adaptive Programming Workshop: In support of this overall activity, USAID and FHI 360 (as a part of its mSTAR project) will be convening a group of experts October 27-28, 2015 for a workshop in London (logistical details will be provided to the organization selected to develop the Conceptual Framework). Notes from the October 27-28th workshop will be provided, along with consultation with the facilitator of the workshop, to the selected organization to utilize the key insights which emerged from the workshop for the development of the Conceptual Framework.
● Literature Review: A review of different disciplinary literatures linking adaptive programming with real-time data — including complex adaptive systems, participatory action research, behavioral psychology, organizational learning, political economy and more — will be conducted. The array of literature sources, both peer-reviewed and grey literature, will be determined through the RTD Adaptive Programming Workshop report, as well as by recommendations of the External Advisory Group and by the contractor through the literature review itself. As there are numerous literatures that bear on adaptive programming using real-time data, the literature review should include a meta-analysis that compares and contrasts existing approaches and theories amongst the various fields and relate them to the potential integration of digital technologies. A gap-analysis about adaptive programming using real-time data should also be conducted, which will identify areas of inquiry that have not been studied. This gap-analysis will help determine research questions that will feed into the larger Conceptual Framework documents, as well as the comparative case study. The literature review should also interpret, synthesize, and evaluate the various sources and analyses above to identify common themes and integrate the various disciplines to form a larger macro-level understanding of adaptive programming using digital technologies for better development outcomes.
● Guiding principles for RTD implementation: In conjunction with the Conceptual Framework, the contractor will produce a decision support framework for thinking through where adaptive programming using RTD systems and digital technologies is appropriate. The framework should include formative analyses (i.e., contextual, cost/benefit, risk, feasibility, etc.) and other considerations that can help implementers determine whether to implement an RTD system to support a development intervention. The actual analysis (e.g. decision tree) will be determined in consultation with FHI 360.
● Academic paper: The contractor will develop a peer-reviewed journal paper that will present and detail the Conceptual Framework, as well as the guiding principles for RTD implementation. This paper will integrate the Literature Review — including the synthesis, gap analysis, and meta analysis — with parts of the mixed methods research of the Comparative Case Study to develop a Conceptual Framework that will provide the theoretical and practical foundations for adaptive programming using real-time data via digital technologies.
● USAID policy publication: As the academic paper will be a more technical output for a specific research-oriented audience, the USAID policy publication will be a more public-facing document. The policy publication should incorporate similar elements as the academic paper and will present the Conceptual Framework and RTD guiding principles, but at a higher level and for a broader audience in international development.
● Graphical representation: The contractor will provide input into the design of a graphical representation of the Conceptual Framework and how to understand adaptive programming using digital technologies. FHI 360’s Design Lab will be responsible for the deliverable but the contractor will provide input.
In addition to the Conceptual Framework, the contractor will be responsible for the following items:
● Case study research: The case study research will focus on the applied work of practitioners that are engaging in adaptive programming using digital technologies. The contractor will produce a single comparative case study in the form of a report, which focuses on a single and specific development sector and geography. The initial part of the research will be exploratory, identifying an appropriate sector and geography where digital tools are used for adaptive programming. The contractor will then select between 3-5 programs within the identified sector and geography that are implementing these adaptive programming measures and compare/contrast the programs to provide an understanding of how they are implementing adaptive programming measures, which programs are effective towards development outcomes and why are they effective. The selection of the programs is open, and they do not have to be USAID-funded. Along with the use of various mixed-methods, the case study should also include ethnographic research and decision-making analysis of users across the “information supply chain” — from local communities to frontline workers to government decision makers — to gain an understanding of behaviors, incentives, capacities, and constraints around each decision-making process in the programs. Traditional case study analytical methods — i.e., pattern matching, cross-case synthesis, logic models, explanation building, etc. – should be employed. The case study research and report will happen concurrently to the development of the Conceptual Framework — both will feed into one another but not be dependent.
● Consultations on research design: The contractor will provide input into the research design used for the applied toolkit, which will be led by FHI 360. Since the contractor will have already created a research design for the case study and since FHI 360 will need to develop a similar albeit distinct research design for the applied toolkit, the contractor and FHI 360 will meet a number of times to ensure the applied research framework benefits and is informed by the research design for the comparative case study.
● Advisory group participation: Coming out of the initial workshop in October, USAID will develop an External Advisory Group of theoretical and practical experts from academia, think tanks, donors, practitioners, and other groups. This will consist of monthly calls around the development of the Conceptual Framework or other follow-up discussions from the workshop. Advisory group members will serve as thought contributors on a voluntary basis, and provide feedback and comments on the Conceptual Framework, draft publications, and tools developed resulting from this activity. FHI 360 will provide programmatic support for the working group and perform co-facilitation. The contractor is responsible for contributing to the Advisory Group and also to work with the facilitators to translate the learnings from the Advisory Group into the Conceptual Framework.
Location
The contractor can work remotely but it is expected that the contractor travel to Washington, DC for three general consultations on the work at critical moments in the work. It is further expected that the contractor make trips to specific country markets as part of the case study.
Expected deliverables and deadlines
The Conceptual Framework design will lead to a series of publications:
● Literature Review
● A peer-reviewed journal paper that describes the foundations and constructions for the Conceptual Framework.
● A USAID policy publication on the Conceptual Framework
● A comparative case study to be identified by USAID and the selected contractor that will illustrate critical aspects of the framework. This will require up to 2 trips to a single specified geography.
After the initial two weeks, the contractor will present USAID with a workplan to be agreed upon, which will include a schedule, specific methodology for the Conceptual Framework and the comparative case study report, specifics on the format, length and contents of the literature review, the USAID RTD paper, and the comparative case study report. The workplan will be adapted from the Project Description in the application.
Drafts of the literature review, USAID RTD report and the comparative case study report should be submitted to USAID in advance of any final report disseminations or submissions. USAID will review and provide feedback of each draft within 2 weeks. The contractor should then submit a final version and incorporate the feedback given by USAID.
Biweekly debrief sessions will be conducted by the contractor with USAID to go over progress on the components of the Conceptual Framework and the comparative case study report.
Deliverables
Deliverables / Est. Due Date* / Estimated LOE (days)Not-to-Exceed
1. Initial in-brief and in person meeting with USAID / 11/1/15
12/1/15 / 1
2. Workplan / 11/15/15
12/15/15 / 3
2a. Presentation of draft workplan (incl. methodology) to USAID / 1
3. Draft Literature review (draft) / 12/1/15
1/1/16 / 25
3a. Virtual presentation of draft literature review to USAID / 1
3b. Literature review (final) / 12/20/15
1/20/16 / 5
4. Virtual meeting with USAID to discuss peer-reviewed journal content and structure / 1/15/16
2/15/16 / 1
4. Peer-reviewed journal paper / 2/15/16
3/15/16 / 20
5. USAID policy publication on Conceptual Framework (draft) / 2/1/16
3/1/16 / 15
5a. Virtual presentation of policy publication at USAID / 1
5b. USAID policy publication on Conceptual Framework (final) / 2/20/16
3/20/16 / 5
6. In-person meeting with USAID on the Comparative Case Study / 4/1/16
5/1/16 / 1
6a. Comparative Case Study Report (draft) / 6/1/16
7/1/16 / 110
6b. Present in person the final Comparative Case Study Report / 6/20/16
7/20/16 / 10
7. Virtual Advisory Group participation / Multiple dates / 3
Total / 202
*These dates are estimated due dates. A timeline of due dates for deliverables will be confirmed with the approved workplan to be submitted two weeks after award of the contract.