1 / 21

TENDER FILE / TERMS OF REFERENCE

(Restricted consultation procedure / One-off contract)

Purchase of consultancy services for the Evaluation of the Council of Europe support to the protection and promotion of freedom of expression

Contract N° 2018/2

The Directorate of Internal Oversight of the Council of Europe will implement in 2018 an evaluation of the Council of Europe support to the protection and promotion of freedom of expression. In that context, it is looking for a Provider for the provision of consultancy services (See Terms of Reference (TOR) in Annex 1).

  1. TENDER RULES

This tender procedure is a restricted consultation procedure. In accordance with Rule 1333 of the Secretary General of the Council of Europe on the procurement procedures of the Council of Europe[1], the Organisation shall invite to tender at least three potential providers for any purchase between €2,000 (or €5,000 for intellectual services) and €55,000 tax exclusive.

This specific tender procedure aims at concluding a one-off contract for the provision of deliverables described in the Act of Engagement (See Annex 2). A tender is considered valid for 120 calendar days as from the closing date for submission. The selection of tenderers will be made in the light of the criteria indicated below. All tenderers will be informed in writing of the outcome of the procedure.

The tenderer must be either a natural person, or a legal person except consortia.

Tenders shall be submitted by email only (with attachments) to the email address indicated in the table below, with the following reference in subject: DIO evaluation – Freedom of expression. Tenders addressed to another email address will be rejected.

The general information and contact details for this procedure are indicated on this page. You are invited to use the CoE Contact details indicated below for any question you may have. All questions shall be submitted at least 5 (five) working days before the deadline for submission of the tenders and shall be exclusively addressed to the email address indicated below with the following reference in subject: Question - DIO evaluation – Freedom of expression

Type of contract► / One-off contract
Duration► / Until complete execution of the obligations of the parties (See Article 2 of the Legal conditions as reproduced in the Act of Engagement)
Deadline for submission of tenders/offers► / 19 March 2018 /
Email for submission of tenders/offers► / /
Email for questions ► / /
Expected starting date of execution► / 02 April 2018 /

1 / 21

  1. EXPECTED DELIVERABLES

Theexpected deliverables are described in Section A of the Act of Engagement (See Annex 2).

  1. FEES

All tenderers are invited to fill in the table of fees as reproduced in Section A of the Act of Engagement.

Tendererssubject to VATshall also send a quote (Pro Forma invoice)on their letterhead including:

-the Service Provider’s name and address;

-its VAT number;

-the full list of services;

-the fee per type of deliverables (in the currency indicated on the Act of Engagement, tax exclusive);

-the total amount per type of deliverables (in the currency indicated on the Act of Engagement, tax exclusive);

-the total amount (in the currency indicated on the Act of Engagement), tax exclusive, the applicable VAT rate, the amount of VAT and the amount VAT inclusive .

  1. ASSESSMENT

Exclusion criteria and absence of conflict of interests

(by signing the Act of Engagement,[2] you declare on your honour not being in any of the below situations)

Tenderers shall be excluded from participating in the tender procedure if they:

  • have been sentenced by final judgment on one or more of the following charges: participation in a criminal organisation, corruption, fraud, money laundering;
  • are in a situation of bankruptcy, liquidation, termination of activity, insolvency or arrangement with creditors or any like situation arising from a procedure of the same kind, or are subject to a procedure of the same kind;
  • have received a judgment with res judicata force, finding an offence that affects their professional integrity or serious professional misconduct;
  • do not comply with their obligations as regards payment of social security contributions, taxes and dues, according to the statutory provisions of their country of incorporation, establishment or residence;
  • are or are likely to be in a situation of conflict of interests.

Eligibility criteria

Eligible consultant(s) will have the following qualifications:

  • Extensive knowledge of evaluation principles, methodology and best practices, including qualitative and quantitative methods;
  • Proven record of at least 15 years’ experience in designing, managing and leading evaluations in the context of international cooperation;
  • Professional fluency in oral and written English;

Award criteria

Quality of the technical offer (80%), which should include the following items:

  1. Proposed methodology

This chapter should be structured in the following manner:

1.1Approach and methodology

  • Any comments on the Terms of Reference that are important for the successful execution of the contract, thus demonstrating the degree of understanding of the assignment. An opinion on the key issues related to the achievement of the contract objectives and the approach to be taken. Proposed methodology, for example, in form of an evaluation matrix.
  • An explanation of the risks and assumptions affecting the execution of the contract.
  • A description of any support that the consultant would need from the contractor during the execution of the contract.

1.2Timetable of activities

  • The schedule, sequence and duration of proposed activities including the timing of major milestones in the execution of the contract, demonstrating the ability of consultants to carry out assignments within deadlines indicated in the terms or reference.
  • The expected number of working days required for each activity.
  1. Qualifications of the consultant(s)

2.1CV(s)

  • Consultant(s) must demonstrate qualifications in line with the TOR.
  1. Work samples
  2. Consultants are encouraged to include two final reports of (comparable) assignments they possibly carried out.

2.3References

  • The proposals should contain the contact details of a minimum of three references.

2.4Declaration of honour

  • Applicants should sign a declaration of honour with respect to exclusion criteria and the absence of a conflict of interest (Annex 2).

Financial offer (20%):

All tenderers are invited to fill in the table of fees as reproduced in Section A of the Act of Engagement.

The Council reserves the right to hold interviews with eligible tenderers.

Multiple tendering is not authorised.

  1. DOCUMENTS TO BE PROVIDED

Tenderers are invited to submit:

  • A technical and financial project proposal based on the Terms of Reference (see Annex 1) as described under D.
  • A completed and signed copy of the Act of Engagement[3] (See Annex 2)
  • For tenderers subject to VAT only:a quote, describing their financial offer, in line with the requirements of section C of the Tender File (see above);
  • Registration documents of legal entity, for legal persons only

All documents shall be submitted in English, failure to do so will result in the exclusion of the tender.

If any of the documents listed above are missing, the tender will not be considered.

The Council reserves the right to reject a tender if the scanned documents are of such a quality that the documents cannot be read once printed.

* * *

Annex 1. Terms of reference

Evaluation of the CoE Support to the protection and promotion of Freedom of Expression

Introduction

These Terms of Reference (ToR) set out the concept and approach of this evaluation. They outline the evaluation’s rationale, purpose and evaluation questions, scope, draft methodology and work plan. They highlight the expectations towards the evaluation team and in particular the external consultant(s) who will be engaged to contribute to the evaluation.

The primary users of the findings will be the Information Society and Action against Crime Directorate, which supports the standard-setting and cooperation activities that aim at protecting and promoting freedom of expression, and the Directorate of Policy Planning, which is in charge of the Platform to promote the protection of journalism and safety of journalists. Furthermore, additional entities, which cover the topic of freedom of expression in a transversal manner, will also benefit from the evaluation findings.The evaluation will provide these stakeholders with evidence based information on the effectiveness, efficiency, sustainability and added value of their activities, identify obstacles and areas of improvement and determine internal and external best practices that could be replicated.

Rationale

In recent years freedom of expression has been declining in Europe. It has been among the Secretary General’s key concerns described in particular in the 2016 and 2017 reports on the State of Democracy, Human Rights and the Rule of Law[4]. An evaluation of the Council of Europe’s (CoE) support to states in this field is of strategic importance in that it can help to optimize the organization’s intervention strategy.

Purpose and Evaluation Questions

The purpose of the evaluation will be to assess the Council of Europe’s support to states in the field of freedom of expression with a view to identify lessons from past experience and make recommendations on how the effectiveness, efficiency, sustainability and added value of the support can be improved.

Proposed evaluation questions include:

  • Effectiveness: To what extent do the interventions of the Council of Europe effectively strengthen the freedom of expression in Council of Europe beneficiary states?
  • Efficiency: To what extent are the different interventions of the Council of Europe coherent and coordinated with each other?
  • Sustainability: To what extent can the changes generated by the Council of Europe in terms of freedom of expression be expected to be sustainable?
  • Added Value: What is the added value of the Council of Europe’s interventions regarding freedom of expression and how does it compare with other actors in the field?

A detailed evaluation matrix stating evaluation questions, sub-questions, indicators, data sources, data collection and data analysis methods is to be completed during the inception phase.

Scope

The evaluation will cover activities of Council of Europe entities specialised in support of beneficiary states in the area of freedom of expression, including through standard setting, technical cooperation and the platform for the protection of journalism and safety of journalists[5].Furthermore, the evaluation will touch upon activities of entities which cover the topic of freedom of expression in a transversal manner.

Annex 1 provides a list of Council of Europe interventions in the area of freedom of expression. It is not necessarily complete and may have to be updated within the framework of the evaluation.

Concretely, there are five thematic areas[6], in which support is provided with the aim of creating an environment, in which freedom of expression can be exercised:

  • Legal guarantees for freedom of expression;
  • Safety of journalists and others performing public watchdog functions;
  • Media independence;
  • Media pluralism and diversity; and
  • Freedom of expression on the Internet.

The evaluation will focus on support provided to Council of Europe beneficiary states. The timeframe covered by the evaluation will include activities implemented between 2014 and 2018.[7]

Methodology

The evaluation will be conducted in accordance with the DIO’s Evaluation Guidelines[8]. The evaluation process will be participatory, as it will be guided by a reference group, which will provide comments on draft documents related to the evaluation and discuss the feasibility of the implementation of recommendations. The reference group will consist of representatives of the main entities concerned by the evaluation.

The evaluation will use a mixed-methods approach[9] to answer the evaluation questions and a gender sensitive evaluation methodology. The proposed evaluation methodology includes the following methods:

  • Review of documentation (e.g. reports related to standard setting, the platform for the protection of journalism and safety of journalists, technical cooperation and other documents, as relevant);
  • Completion of the mapping of Council of Europe entities which cover the topic of freedom of expression in a transversal manner (see Annex 1);
  • Construction of the theory of change to identify the intended intervention logic in the area of freedom of expression.
  • Semi-structured interviewswith Council of Europe staff and managers to assess the level of coordination among entities and the perceived achievements and lack thereof in their area of work;
  • 4 country-based case studies to assess the results achieved by different interventions as well as their sustainability in the countries where they were conducted (proposed case study locations are Georgia, Serbia, Ukraine, Tunisia); These countries were selected on the basis of the following criteria: volume of activities conducted in the countries between 2014 and 2018; geographic diversity of the sample; feasibility of data collection; consultations with stakeholders.
  • Telephone interviews with selected key stakeholders and experts in countries that are not covered through a case study;
  • Online survey among journalists in beneficiary states to understand their perception about the effectiveness of the Council of Europe’s contribution to freedom of expression in their country (if this is feasible);
  • Online research and semi-structured interviews with representatives of other international actors (e.g. OSCE, UNESCO, UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, etc.) to assess the level of cooperation between the Council of Europe and these organisations as well as in particular the added value of the Council of Europe’s interventions.

Work Plan and key deliverables

The evaluation process will include four phases:

Inception Phase:During the evaluation inception phase the evaluation team (consisting of two DIO evaluators and external consultant(s) will review documentation and hold preliminary interviews that serve to obtain an overview of the freedom of expression support provided by the Council in order to complete the mapping of entities covering the topic of freedom of expression in a transversal manner and to finalise the scoping of the evaluation. The team produces an inception report that is shared with the reference group and finalised taking into consideration its comments. The reference group will in particular discuss issues related to the scope and objectives of the evaluation and the evaluation questions, but can also provide suggestions on methodology.

Implementation Phase: During the implementation phase the evaluation team will collect data using the methods described in the methodology section of these ToR.

Reporting Phase: During the reporting phase, the evaluation team will produce a draft evaluation report that will be submitted to the reference group for comments. The reference group will provide comments on factual errors contained in the report as well as the feasibility of the implementation of proposed recommendations. These comments will be taken into consideration for finalizing the report.

Follow-up Phase: The DIO will follow up annually on the implementation of evaluation recommendations as part of the follow-up procedure for all evaluations.

The following key deliverables are foreseen for this evaluation with the corresponding deadlines:

Deliverable / Proposed date
Inception report / 15 April 2018
Case studies 1-2 / 30 June 2018
Case studies 3-4 / 15 August 2018
Survey analysis / 30 September 2018
Draft final report / 15 October 2018
Final report / 1 December 2018

All deliverables will be in English. All deliverables will remain the intellectual property of the CoE.

Management Arrangements

The evaluation will be managed by two evaluators from the DIO under the supervision of the Head of the Evaluation Division. (An) external consultant(s) will be recruited with the following distribution of tasks.

The DIO evaluators will be in charge of managing the evaluation and assuring the quality of evaluation deliverables and will also be specifically responsible for:

  • finalisation of the Terms of Reference;
  • recruitment, contracting of consultant(s) and management of the consultant(s)’ contract;
  • facilitation of and participation in data collection, analysis and reporting (including, semi-structured interviews in Strasbourg, accompanying the consultant(s) on two of the four field missions, organisation of and participation in reference group meetings, collecting comments from stakeholders on inception and draft reports);
  • commenting on the inception and draft evaluation reports.

An external consultant or team of consultants will be in charge of:

  • Submission of an inception report based on the terms of reference outlining the theory of change, the detailed evaluation methodology and time plan;
  • Data collection for the evaluation including use of all methods listed in the methodology section;
  • Analysis of collected data;
  • Submission of a draft and final evaluation report including;

The evaluation team is expected to meet at least on four occasions:

  • inception meeting combined with scoping interviews with stakeholders (Strasbourg);
  • two joint field missions (locations to be selected during inception phase from proposed case study locations Georgia, Serbia, Ukraine, Tunisia);
  • interviews with CoE staff in headquarters (Strasbourg);
  • discussion of draft report with reference group (Strasbourg).

Qualifications of the external consultant(s)

The external consultant(s) will, individually or as a team, provide the following competencies and expertise:

  • Extensive knowledge of evaluation principles, methodology and best practices, includingqualitative and quantitative methods;
  • Proven record of at least 15 years’ experience in designing, managing and leading evaluations in the context of international cooperation;
  • Professional fluency in oral and written English;
  • Experience in and/or language skills relevant for geographical areas listed under proposed case study locations will be an asset;
  • Thematic knowledge and experience in (evaluation of) interventions in the area of freedom of expression will be an asset;
  • Knowledge and understanding of the Council of Europe, its normative instruments, its structure and its action will be an asset.

1

Annex 1: Council of Europe Interventions to Support Freedom of Expression

The following is a list of entities and types of activities of the Council of Europe that intend to provide support in the area of freedom of expression. It is not necessarily complete.

  • Standard setting:
  • Steering Committee on Media and Information Society (CDMSI)
  • Committee of experts on media pluralism and transparency of media ownership (MSI-MED)
  • Committee of experts on internet intermediaries (MSI-NET)
  • Platform to promote the protection of journalism and safety of journalists
  • Cooperation projects (see Table 1 below)
  • Entities, which cover the topic of freedom of expression in a transversal manner:
  • Committee of Ministers
  • Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe
  • Congress of Local and Regional Authorities
  • European Court of Human Rights
  • Human Rights Commissioner
  • Conference of International Non-Governmental Organisations
  • Steering Committee for Human Rights
  • Secretary General of the Council of Europe
  • Venice Commission
  • European Commission against Racism and Intolerance
  • World Forum for Democracy
  • Education Department
  • Human Rights National Implementation Division
  • Inclusion and Anti-Discrimination Programmes Division
  • North-South Centre

Table 1: Cooperation projects (the projects taking place in the proposed case study locations are highlighted in green)