ANNEX I - TERMS OF REFERENCE Review and Development of End User Monitoring (EUM) Standards and tools for Ready to Use Therapeutic Foods (RUTF) Supply Chain 1.0 Background The 2016 joint child malnutrition estimates indicate that 16.5 million children 6-59 months are affected by severe wasting globally and close to a million child deaths occur annually due to severe acute malnutrition. It is estimated that in Sub-Saharan Africa, 4.2 million children between 6-59 months old are suffering from severe wasting. East and Southern Africa (ESA) region accounts for 1.4 million severely wasted children and West and Central Africa (WCA) region for 2.8 million. [1] The UNICEF Nutrition program has a central focus of improving the availability of nutritional commodities at the last mile for use in treatment of Severe Acute Malnutrition (SAM), and for prevention of excess mortality and contributing to stunting reduction in young children. Improving accessibility to RUTF and visibility of information is critical to ensuring that quality nutritional commodities are available at the beneficiary level and the nutritional supply chain is better functioning. End user monitoring has proven to be an effective strategy that provides robust real-time data on the availability and usage of nutritional commodities. Due to the lack of agreed indicators for end user monitoring, it is not very clear how this valuable information is being used across countries to improve supply chain efficiency and ensure the targeted beneficiaries access the commodities. Indeed, many nutrition supply chains in countries are fragmented, parallel and often on a push system of distribution. The common practice is for each player, or implementing partner to formulate, monitor and report on commodity visibility to a pre-defined level, mostly the lowest level of health care delivery. In the last few years, several global discussions have been held and commitments made as part of the Scaling Up Nutrition (SUN) Movement, the Framework for Action (International Conference on Nutrition, 2014), UN Decade of Action, the Paris Declaration and the Accra Declaration on Aid Effectiveness, and related emphasis made on resilience, and sustainability national supply chains as a positive indicator for the broader Health Systems Strengthening (HSS). It is now a globally recognized fact that an effective supply chain for nutrition can only be the one in which commodities are not only visible along the chain, but also that where the same commodities can be tracked and traced to the children who consume them.[2] UNICEF in June 2016, hosted the first Nutrition Supply Chain Practitioners Forum at Supply Division; Copenhagen with representation from 10 African countries both in ESAR and WCAR, Afghanistan, Central medical Stores CEOs and Ministry of Health participants. There was also very strong representation from donors and other partners who are actively involved in nutrition Supply Chain Management (SCM) space. The forum came up with nine key recommendations to drive the nutrition supply agenda forward, key among them being the development of common norms and standards for end-user 1 P a g e
monitoring for RUTF, with defined responsibilities and accountabilities among the stakeholders. [3] The advocacy here is to ensure that the RUTF commodities reach the intended beneficiaries with minimum wastage if the desired health outcomes are to be realized. It also established that national supply chain systems and processes should be reviewed to establish common guidance on monitoring content in line with best practices as well as process of ensuring appropriate accountability standards. 2.0 Purpose To conduct a comprehensive review of EUM existing practices(including RUTF loss mitigation measures) among nutrition program implementers, governments and other stakeholders, and to provide recommendations on the appropriate minimum requirements, methodologies, tools and standards applicable to different country profiles. The recommendations from this review will provide the foundation for an implementation roadmap to establish global standard practices, tools and systems, hence an opportunity to strengthen end to end visibility and accountability for Ready to use therapeutic foods. In the long term, it is expected that the adopted end user monitoring practices and standards will enable smooth adaptability and consistency across different countries Nutrition supply chains, and promote sustainability. An assessment of the independency of the existing in-country monitoring and supportive supervision mechanisms/systems and how they could potentially be linked or tasked to undertake end user monitoring as part of their routine activities would be ideal as this will contribute towards a systemic approach for integration and enhancing national or government ownership. This assignment would entail intensive consultations with UNICEF, implementing partners, governments/countries and donors with varied nutrition supply chain contexts. 3.0 Objectives The objective of this RFP is to seek for (a) qualify service provider(s) to; Identify, review and document existing EUM systems, (and RUTF risk mitigation measures), practices and tools for monitoring RUTF in use by different players. Make recommendations on the most effective and efficient practices, standards or tools for EUM (and including RUTF risk mitigation measures) that could potentially be adopted globally. To profile appropriate tools, and models for different country supply chain contexts, considering the different levels of integration of Ready to Use Therapeutic Foods in government supply chains. Identify and document potential enablers and bottlenecks for the implementation of common standards and practices for EUM and recommend ways to mitigate. 2 P a g e
Based on the analysis above; assess, and identify key programmatic, operational, supply and human resources areas that need capacity development support particularly reporting, at the last mile to ensure the proposed EUM practices and tools are successfully implanted. Consider how to adapt such minimum standards and tools in highly insecure/ in accessible areas with limited access e.g. Somalia, North Eastern Kenya where leakages of RUTF are common. 4.0 Scope of Work Under the direct supervision of the Nutrition Supply Chain Specialist (Supply Division) and Supply Chain Specialist (ESARO), the Contractor (s) will perform the following tasks: Develop an inception report to validate the scope and methodology to be used for the review Review the existing RUTF nutrition EUM practices and tools, by working closely with key stakeholders including governments and partners to ensure all relevant information is availed. Document the existing EUM practices and standards for RUTF supply chain with clear references to country landscapes /contexts e.g. insecurity and limited access. Assess the suitability and adaptability of different EUM practices, approaches and tools available in line with country profiles and make recommendations on potentially new standardized approaches and sampling protocols, while considering potential for future integration into the national system. A suitability and risk matrix analysis or other analysis approach for any tools/standard may be used. Pilot- testing of the tools and standards recommended in a selected country. Within a selected country, identify and quantify RUTF losses in the supply chain, its causes, and approaches/methodologies to and provide approach (es) to reduce the losses. Recommend an implementation approach and plan for integrating the proposed EUM standards and tools into existing government supply chains, clearly indicating the inherent risks and steps to mitigate them. Develop a training matrix with relevant supply chain topics for any training that may be required for effective implementation of the proposed EUM standards/practices. To develop a catalogue with appropriate approaches/ tools for RUTF end user monitoring. Prepare and support the facilitation of a validation workshop where the recommendations can be discussed by key stakeholders involved in the supply chain management for RUTF commodities. The assignment will therefore involve the following: Desk review of existing literature on nutrition EUM practices and tools. Conduct interviews by phone, skype, or face to face with a list of pre-agreed stakeholders as part of information gathering for this assignment. The consultant(s) is expected to document the interview questions (for telephone, face to face and skype), and questionnaires where email correspondences are used. Undertake three country visits (Mali, Sudan and Kenya) to document practical challenges and opportunities for minimum EUM standards for RUTF. 3 P a g e
Develop an inception report to validate the methodology and tools to be used for the review including interpretation of quantitative and qualitative feedbacks. Provide regular progress report, in a format that is clear, and comprehensible to the supervisor as and when required. Share a draft report with supervisor within the agreed timelines, and incorporate comments that stakeholders will make on the report. Develop a pilot test for the tools, standards or approaches recommended in a selected country. Develop a dissemination framework for the findings, and facilitate the discussions including with the Steering Committee as may be required. Share the final report incorporating all the comments of stakeholders as advised by the supervisor/s 5.0 Deliverables: Inception report detailing the methodology and approach for the review Interview questionnaire Assessment report on the Human Resources capacity in EUM, with proposals on training/any other capacity development initiatives to support the adoption, use and sustainability of proposed standards/tools. Regular progress reports based on a schedule to be agreed upon. A pilot test report in from a country to be identified. A catalogue of appropriate approaches and tools for RUTF end user monitoring. Validation workshop to present to stakeholders (Internal Unicef and external with key partners) the findings from the analysis. Final report document which shall incorporate the inputs gathered at the validation workshop stage. 6.0 Reporting and Language Requirements 6.1 All reports and deliverables shall be required in English. Drafts will be shared with the agreed upon Expert Advisory Committee with sufficient time for multiple cycles of review, feedback, and modification in order to meet the agreed upon project plan. 6.2 The Report shall be delivered electronically in WORD format along with a summary in POWERPOINT format. Presentations or summaries requested for external meetings will be provided electronically in POWERPOINT format. 7.0 Location and Duration This assignment entails both desktop reviews at vendor s location, and face to face meetings with UNICEF Regional and Country officers, partners and government representatives in 3 selected countries. The assignment is scheduled to take an estimated 90 days. (After award of contract) 4 P a g e
8.0 Qualification requirements The Contractor is expected to have: Minimum 10 (ten) years experience in public health supply chain evaluation or similarly related field. Experience in last mile commodity visibility management, and using data collection tools, in data collection and data analysis, in report writing and presentation. Experience with international projects and multi-cultural environments. Qualified UN, or humanitarian enterprise experience in developing countries Extensive knowledge and experience in nutrition programming in both development and humanitarian contexts is an asset. Knowledge or understanding of Logistics Management Information System(LMIS) and Monitoring & Evaluation(M&E) will critical for this assignment 9.0 Project Management The Supply Chain Specialist in the UNICEF Supply Division Supply Chain Strengthening Centre in Copenhagen shall manage the contract. 10.0 Administrative Issues The award of the Contract will be done based on the results of the tender, and UNICEF reserves the right to enter into multiple contracts for the assignment. References documents: 1. Unicef Joint Malnutrition brochure 2. Consolidation review 3. Copenhagen Consensus 5 P a g e
Annex Ia Proposal Evaluation 1. Structure of Technical Proposal 1.1 Proposals must include complete and accurate information. The proposal must include, but is not limited to, the following items: 1) Corporate Profile (including Introductory Note, legal status) highlighting the bidder s qualifications and relevant experience. 2) Description of personnel planned to be allocated to this Contract, denoting the following: Name Role Years of Experience Unique value-add of this Resource 3) Describe how the Bidder will address each item described in the Description of Assignment of this Request for Proposal, including outlining the methodology, quality assurance framework, applicable tools, and standard outputs, such as intermediary and final reports. 4) List of at least 2 similar projects undertaken by the Bidder within the past 5 years, with particular emphasis on projects of similar scope and effort. It is desirable that a summary of the projects be included in the proposal. These reports or work products may be attached as an appendix to the proposal. Please include the following information: Name of Client Title of the Project Year and duration of the Project, including timelines between intermediate steps, such as time duration between RFP and proposal, proposal and project initiation, project initiation and first milestone, etc. Scope of the Project / Requirements, including health commodities Proposed solution, timeliness, and results (please include visuals, web-links, etc.) Team members of each project and their specific roles Reference / Contact person details Proposed timeline/work plan Proposed methodology for each of the phases of the assignment Team of consultants proposed to carry out the assignment (should including CVs and details of relevant qualifications and expertise in similar projects. Possible technologies used that is compatible with UNICEF if possible. Proposed management, monitoring and quality assurance processes. Innovative approaches Instructional strategies. 6 P a g e
Submission of the most recent set of audited financial statements would be welcome. 5) Share a template work plan specifying the tasks to be performed, approximate durations, on-site and off-site meetings, the key deliverables. 6) Quality assurance mechanism and risk mitigation measures within the company. 2. Evaluation Criteria Each proposal will be assessed first on its technical merits (including by reference to legal requirements) and subsequently on its price. The proposal obtaining the overall highest score after adding the scores for the technical and financial proposals is/are the proposal(s) that offers best value for money and will be recommended for the Contract. The proposals will be evaluated against the following elements: 2.1 Technical Proposal The total amount of points allocated for the technical component is 70. UNICEF evaluators will read the submission and give scores according to the table below. Only bidders that obtain 50 points and above from the technical evaluation will be considered for the stage of financial evaluation. Technical Evaluation Criteria Technical Evaluation Criteria 1. Overall Response Completeness of response and Overall concord between RFP 1.1 requirements and proposal Max. Points Obtainable 5 1.2 Overall concord between RFP requirements and proposal 5 10 2. Proposed Methodology and approach 2.1 Proposed Methodology and approach 15 2.2 Project timelines and work plan 10 3. Experience and qualifications of institution and key personnel Company profile (establishment, facilities, personnel, financial 3.1 capacity) Experience in similar projects, i.e. supply chain evaluations in 3.2 developing countries, with specific focus on public health and nutrition 25 5 15 7 P a g e
3.3 Relevance of qualifications & expertise of proposed team of consultants 15 35 TOTAL TECHNICAL SCORE 70 Minimum technical required score: 50 2.2 Financial Proposal: The total amount of points allocated for the price component is 30. The maximum number of points will be allotted to the lowest price proposal that is received and obtains the minimum threshold points in the technical evaluation. All other price proposals will receive points in inverse proportion to the lowest price; Score for price proposal X = Max score for price proposal * Price of lowest bidder Price of proposal X Financial proposal shall include the ALL-INCLUSIVE cost for the project as well as the breakdown of each cost component; e.g. cost of resources and list of daily rates, cost of travel. The rates should be fully inclusive, taking into account expected travel, communications, overhead, etc. with the understanding that the assignment is expected to take an estimated period of not more than 90 days after signing of the contract. The proposal obtaining the overall highest score after adding the scores for the technical and financial proposals is the proposal that offers best value for money. All prices/rates quoted must be exclusive of all taxes as UNICEF is a tax-exempt organization. 8 P a g e