RFP Title:Mstar, Subcontract to Design and Testanmaccess Diagnostic for USAID Missions

RFP Title:mSTAR, Subcontract to Design and TestanmAccess Diagnostic for USAID Missions

RFP No:3569-018-2014-03

Authority:USAID Award No. AID-OAA-A-12-00073

Date of Issuance:Wednesday, April 16, 2014

Due Date for Questions:5:00 PM US EDTFriday,April 18, 2014

Response to Questions:Tuesday, April 22, 2014

Closing Date:5:00 PM US EDT,Wednesday, April 30, 2014Friday, May 16, 2014

Estimated Award Date:~June2014

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1PURPOSE STATEMENT

2OBJECTIVE

3PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

4INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

4.1Offerors Eligibility

4.2Funding and estimated period of performance

4.3Proposal Submission Deadline

4.4Submission Method for Questions and Proposals

4.5Review Process

4.6Proposal Contents

4.7Evaluation Criteria

5TERMS AND CONDITIONS

5.1Source of Funding and Geographic Code

5.2Withdrawal of proposals

5.3Right to Select/Reject

5.4Disclaimer

5.5Offer Verification

5.6False Statements in Offer

5.7Conflict of Interest

5.8Reserved Rights

5.9Governing Law and Language

5.10Certification of Independent Price Determination

5.11Award and Notification of Selected Proposals

6ATTACHMENTS

1PURPOSE STATEMENT

The purpose of this Request for Proposals (RFP) is to solicit proposals for funding from prospective subcontractorsto 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 proposalsto firms with experience in the design and testing of diagnostic tools. In this activity, the selected subcontractor will develop a Mobile Access diagnostic tool, test and refine it based on experiences in the field with two Missions, and develop anaccompanying user guide for the diagnostic tool.

This RFPis issued as a public notice to ensure that all interested,qualified, and eligible organizations have a fair opportunity to submit proposals for funding.

2OBJECTIVE

The objective of this scope of work is to help USAID to develop a diagnostic tool that can be used by USAID Missions globally to assess: 1) how to invest in and strengthen the “building blocks” of a robust mobile ecosystem where such fundamentals are not in place and 2) how to integrate mobile technology into programs as a way to strengthen or accelerate development outcomes.

3PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Background and Rationale

Maximizing the potential of mobile technology to accelerate development outcomes presupposes a certain level of access to, and effective use of, mobile devices and services. While mobile technology enjoys unprecedented global reach, access to it is not a forgone conclusion: unique mobile subscriber rates, for instance, stand at only 39% in the developing world and 300 million fewer women than men worldwide own mobile phones.

Access must mean more than an available mobile connection. It must also mean an individual’s ability to afford the services provided, value them, and have the ability to use them. Only when these “building blocks” come together, will access to mobile technology maximize its intrinsic social value and become the foundation upon which transformational mobile products and services can be built. As USAID increasingly looks to harness mobile technologies in its programming, it is critical that this broader mobile access context be understood and accounted for in strategic planning and programmatic decision-making. Organizing and analyzing the complex and interconnected components of mobile access in order to have such an understanding requires a clear framework and insights into, among other things, consumer behavior, market forces, and the policy and regulatory environment.

To that end, the mAccessteam within the Mobile Solutions (MS) Division of USAID’s Global Development Lab (the Lab) seeks to develop a diagnostic tool that will enable Missions to assess mobile access in their countries and provide them with a decision-making framework relevant to both the strategic planning stage (e.g. when developing a Country Development Cooperation Strategy [CDCS]) and the program design and implementation stage.

Methodology

Developing the mobile access diagnostic will rely upon a combination of desk research, diagnostic design and field testing to achieve the objectives of this scope of work.

For the purposes of this exercise, the subcontractors will employ USAID’s definition of mobile access, which includes factors at both the individual level and at the market/enabling environment level. More specifically, the expectation will be that the diagnostic tool be designed to capture, at a minimum, the following information:

●At the individual level:

○User demographics: age, education, occupation, gender, literacy, geographic, cost, and language

○Awareness Levels: Degree to which customers understand and value the products and services available through mobile phones

○Ability Levels: Capacity and skills necessary to operate a mobile phone

○Acceptability Levels: Cultural or social norms that influence mobile ownership

○Gender-specific Data: Perceptions and barriers to women and girls owning/using phones, including intra-household access and control of mobile usage, negative associations and risks associated with phone use and ownership

○Usage patterns: Understanding how consumers use their phones (i.e., call frequency, texting patterns, mobile internet usage, etc…)

○Attitudes and aspirations: Mobile customer’s priorities and how mobile fits into these aspirations

●At the market / enabling environment level

○Content: Presence and quality of relevant and localized livelihood-focused content available digitally

○Affordability: Handset prices, voice and data plan costs nationally and sub-nationally, market competition, and policies that influence industry cost structures (e.g. whether or not the private sector is sharing infrastructure)

○Infrastructure: Reliable or available access to a mobile network and power

○Devices and distribution: Mobile technology available for either sale or maintenance

○Policies and planning: Policies, national broadband plans that drive increase mobile access

Sample questions for capturing this information can be found in Attachment D.

Scope of Work

Staff from USAID/the Lab/Mobile Solutions will work closely with the selected subcontractor, and will supervise drafting the various deliverables. The subcontractor should plan for a subset of their proposed team to meet with USAID/the Lab/MS and/or an mSTAR representative for at least 1 hour each week for the duration of the engagement in order to review progress and provide substantive technical inputs into the direction of the process and the development of the deliverables.

Other stakeholders—particularly representatives from other USAID offices—may provide substantive feedback on periodic drafts of the deliverables as coordinated by the Lab/MS.

The contractor will be responsible forimplementing three main activities, as follows:

1)Develop a diagnostic tool for USAID missions that includes both a mechanism (e.g. survey) for collection and aggregation of both quantitative and qualitative mobile access data at the national and, where possible, sub-national level; and a decision-making framework to inform Missions’ strategy and mobile programming. This activity will include the following tasks:

Validate the scope of Access data to be collected through desk research and consultation with relevant USAID staff (list to be provided by the Lab/MS)
Survey what diagnostic tools (i.e., mWomen Research Toolkit, Mobile Money, etc.) are available and assess what can be integrated into the design of the diagnostic
Compile a list of existing data sources (i.e., websites, databases) that track mobile-access related data. Links to each of these should be included in the diagnostic user-guide (as noted below under activity 3)
Design data collection and aggregation mechanism based upon Points “a” and “b” above. The expectation will be that this mechanism be comprehensive enough to capture detailed mobile access data, including information that will require some primary research, such as consumer awareness of and perception of mobile products and services. At the same time, however, the diagnostic should be sufficiently streamlined that Mission staff would be able to use it on their own or contract out the work. Ultimately, the right balance will be determined through testing the diagnostic with a small set of USAID Missions but, in terms of estimating the scope of this piece of the diagnostic, it is reasonable to assume that each category of the access framework above would have approximately 5-10 questions/indicators/etc. resulting in a tool that captures roughly 75-100 data points. This mechanism should be designed in such a way that there would be the option to deploy it through mobile channels.
Produce a decision-making framework that provides Missions with practical guidance on strategy and program design. Options may include but are not limited to: a decision tree, composite scoring or indexing, or impact pathways, etc. This should be designed in such a ways as to be relevant to Mission staff at the strategic planning stage (e.g. CDCS) and to staff at the program design or implementation stage. This should also guide Mission staff along two distinct pathways for making decisions: 1) how to invest in and strengthen the “building blocks” of a robust mobile ecosystem where such fundamentals are not in place and 2) how to integrate mobile technology into programs as a way to strengthen or accelerate development outcomes.
Review the diagnostic structure with a targeted group of USAID M4D staff (the Lab/MS will provide brief list of DC and Mission staff) and incorporate their feedback into a second version.

2)Test and refine the diagnostic in close collaboration with USAID/the Lab/MS and two Missions. Specific tasks under this activity include:

Select countries: Work with the Lab/MS team to reach out to a small group of Missions to test diagnostic. Mission selection will include various factors including but not limited to Mission demand and alignment with other efforts of the Lab/MS team. [Note: For the purposes of budget estimates, please plan on testing to take place in 2 Missions, one in Africa and one in Asia. Mozambique and Indonesia can be used as good illustrative examples for proposed budgets, but they may not necessarily be the final Missions with which the diagnostic will be tested.]
Test diagnostic at Mission for accuracy, relevance and thoroughness. This should be done at two-levels:
First, the diagnostic structure and purpose should be reviewed and refined with a small number of Mission staff representing a cross-section of potential groups within a Mission that may use the diagnostic (technical officers, program officers, M&E specialists, etc.)
Second, in collaboration with those Mission staff, the subcontractor will carry out a brief trial run of the tool itself. The scope of this exercise should be extensive enough to demonstrate the effectiveness of the tool in collecting and aggregating relevant data and the utility of the decision-making framework. This testing may be carried out 2-3 times over the course of the same trip, perhaps testing with difference sectors (e.g. agriculture, health, education) and/or in different regions of the same country, with ongoing refinement of the diagnostic as needed. The purpose of this exercise is to demonstrate value of and improve upon the diagnostic, it is not intended to be an in-depth deployment of the diagnostic. If existing mobile data collection tools allow for some testing to be carried out via mobile channels, then that should be incorporated into the process. It is not within the scope of this effort to develop a new mobile data collection platform for the purposes of testing.
The testing stage should also answer questions to inform “Activity 3 – Production of a User Guide” such as:
What is the estimated timeline for carrying out the diagnostic?
What is the estimated cost for carrying out the diagnostic?
How can Mission staff tailor the tool to meet the needs of particular sectors or audiences, e.g. technical officers v. program officers?
What are some key findings on user experience and overall usability of the diagnostic?

3)Produce a brief user-guide to accompany the diagnostic tool

The user guide should be prepared in such a way as to be relevant for various USAID Mission audiences, including program officers, technical officers, and M&E specialists. The user guide should include but not necessarily be limited to:

A list of key terms and definitions that describe technical terminology and the mobile ecosystem
Links to existing data sources for key mobile access information that can be easily referenced by Mission staff
Step by step instructions with how to use the diagnostic (i.e. both the data collection and aggregation mechanism and the decision-making framework)
Estimated level of effort needed to complete the diagnostic
Examples/case studies of good practices, lessons learned, and common themes that emerge from using the diagnostic template
Example terms of reference for hiring external individuals or firms to carrying the diagnostic (Note that while such resources should be provided to Mission staff, the diagnostic tool should be designed in such a way that it will not be necessary for Mission staff to always contract out its use.)

The user-guide should be developed as a brief functional tool for Missions. It is envisioned that examples, case studies, or templates included in the user-guide would be developed over the course of developing and testing the diagnostic or shortly thereafter. In other words, these products are not intended to be in-depth follow on research but rather materials that allow Mission staff to readily have on hand a snapshot of specific ways to use the diagnostic.

Deliverables

Upon award, the Subcontractor will be expected to deliver:

1. Phase I:Diagnostic Tool Development

Project plan that details how the subcontractor will develop the diagnostic including a finalized timeline (in general alignment with notional timeline below)
Brief summary of research to validate scope of Access data to be include in diagnostic
List of existing data sources and diagnostic, survey tools, and data indices that will be drawn upon and inform or be integrated into the diagnostic
Completed draft diagnostic that includes:
Data collection and aggregation mechanism
Decision-making framework

2. Phase II: Testing and Refining the Diagnostic

Project plan for reviewing the diagnostic with Mission staff and testing in targeted, limited way
Summary of findings from testing for both countries
Revised, finalized diagnostic tool

3. Phase III: Developing the User Guide

A practical user-guide that lays out how to use the diagnostic tool and includes the relevant links to existing data sources, templates, examples of good usage practices
Brief recommendations on how to generate interest and usage of the diagnostic tool among Missions. [Note: These recommendations may be supplemented with recommendations on dissemination strategy for other Mission-facing tools currently being developed by the Lab/MS team. This will be coordinated as appropriate by the Lab/MS team]

Timeline

Activity / Steps / Dates
Jun / Jul / Aug / Sept / Oct / Nov
Diagnostic Tool Development / Project plan for the diagnostic
Summary of research to validate scope of diagnostic
List of available data sources and diagnostics, tools and indices to be included in diagnostic
Draft diagnostic (Collection/Aggregation Mechanism and Decision-Making Framework)
Testing and Refining the Diagnostic / Project plan for reviewing the diagnostic
Summary of findings from testing
Revised, finalized diagnostic
User guide / Brief user-guide for diagnostic
Recommendations on “roll-out” of diagnostic

A detailed timeline for consultations, submission of draft deliverables, and other project milestones will be developed once the firm is in place upon consultation with mSTAR and USAID. The entire activity is estimated to take six months. A proposed breakdown of timing is as follows:

The firm will be expected to be able to provide teams that can travel to USAID Missions within the estimated timeframes. Summary of findings from testing with each Mission should be submitted within two weeks after the conclusion of the Mission visit.

4INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

4.1OfferorsEligibility

This competition is open to any non-governmental, non-profit or for-profit entity. To be minimally eligible for funding, offerorsmust comply with the following conditions:

Organizations must be legally registered or otherwise authorized to conduct business in their country or countries of operation.
Organizations must have a DUNS number. Organizations without a DUNS number can register for one at the following website:
Organizations must submit their proposal in English.

4.2Contract Type

FHI 360 anticipates awarding a cost reimbursable price subcontract.

4.3Funding and estimated period of performance

The mechanism for funding will be a Cost Reimbursable Subcontract. FHI 360 will issue payment(s) based on submission and FHI360 acceptance of invoices and associated deliverables or measurable project milestones. Once an award is issued, it will include an invoicing schedule as well as a schedule of deliverables/milestones specified in the Scope of Work. The estimated ceiling budget for this activity is $150,000.

The subcontract is anticipated to commence inJune2014 and final deliverables are anticipated to be submitted inNovember2014.

4.4Proposal Submission Deadline

Proposals may be submitted at any time before 5:00PMEDTon the date specified on the cover page of this RFP. Submissions received after the deadline will not be considered. Additional opportunities for applying, however, may be made available in the future.

4.5Submission Method for Questions and Proposals

Submit Questions and Proposals electronically to: Sarah Torrance at with copies toJosh Woodard at 360 is not receiving paper applications for this RFP. All questions and answers will be shared with all interested offerors.

Technical proposals and attachments may be submitted in Microsoft Word or Adobe PDF. Budgets must be submitted in Microsoft Excel.

The email subject line should read “Subcontract to Design and Test mAccess Diagnostic– [Name of Organization submitting proposal]”.