 GB- Glasgow: Financial management consultancy services.

Section I
 I.1) Name, Addresses and Contact Point(s) Dept for International
Development
Abercrombie House, Eaglesham Road, East Kilbride
Glasgow
G75 8EA
United Kingdom
Tel 01355 843426
Fax: 01355 84 3183
Email: p-gaffney@dfid.gov.uk
www.dfid.gov.uk
www.dfid.gov.uk
Paul Gaffney Paul Gaffney
 Further information can be obtained at:
o As in above-mentioned contact point(s)
 Specifications and additional documents (including documents for competitive
dialogue and a dynamic purchasing system)can be obtained at:
o As in above-mentioned contact point(s)
 Tenders or requests to participate must be sent to:
o As in above-mentioned contact point(s)

I.2) Type of contracting authority and main activity or activities

o Other: Central Level

o General Public Services

 The contracting authority is purchasing on behalf of other contracting

authorities: No

Section II: Object of the Contract: SERVICES

 II.1) Description
o II.1.1) Title attributed to the contract by the contracting authority: Civil
Society Governance Fund-Malawi
o II.1.2) Type of contract and location of works, place of delivery or of
performance: SERVICES
 Service Category 11
o II.1.3) The notice involves: A public contract
o II.1.5) Short description of the contract or purchase(s):

Financial management consultancy services. The Civil Society

Governance Fund (CSGF) is intended to support work by civil society
with the goal of making Malawi’s governance more accountable,
inclusive and responsive to citizens. DFID wishes to appoint a Service
Provider (SP) to manage a multi-donor pooled fund to implement the
CSGF as well as undertake work to help improve civil society’s
 capacity to operate and identify strategic opportunities to facilitate
citizens coming together to achieve common objectives. The CSGF
will be a results-focused fund that will provide grants to civil society
organisations that can demonstrate a credible plan to implement a
range of activities that will achieve outputs in 3 main programme
areas. These outputs should all contribute towards the outcome of
empowered citizens able to promote social inclusion, political rights
and accountability for basic services. The three programme areas are
outlined in the ToRs and background documents. The donors involved
in the CSGF at this point are DFID, the European Union and Irish Aid.
The pooled fund will be in the region of £7.2 million with the
possibility of additional funders coming on board. Exact levels of
funding are still to be agreed. The contract will be for 3.5 years, with
extension options for a further 3 subject to performance, continued
need and availability of funding. The contract will begin with a 6
month inception period which if satisfactory to DFID and its partners
will be followed by full implementation.

o II.1.6) Common procurement vocabulary(CPV):

 79412000 - Financial management consultancy services.
o II.1.7) Contract covered by the Government Procurement
Agreement(GPA): Yes
o II.1.8) Division into lots (for information about lots, use Annex B as
many times as there are lots): No
o II.1.9) Variants will be accepted: Yes

 II.2) Quantity or Scope of the Contract

o II.2.1) Total quantity or scope (including all lots and options, if
applicable):
 Not Provided
o II.2.2) Options (if applicable): Not Provided
 II.3) Duration of the Contract or Time-limit For Completion
o Duration in months: 42 (from the award of the contract)

Section III: Legal, economic, financial and technical

information
 III.1) Conditions relating to the Contract
o III.1.1) Deposits and guarantees required (if applicable): Not Provided
o III.1.2) Main financing conditions and payment arrangements and/or
reference to the relevant provisions regulating them:

The contract will be governed by English Law. Prices are not required
at PQQ stage, however, when required must be quoted in GBP and all
payments under the contract will be made in GBP. DFID reserves the
right to annul the process and not award the contract. DFID does not
provide advance funding, therefore, SP will be required to pre-finance
all programme activities, before claiming reimbursement from DFID in
arrears.
 o III.1.3) Legal form to be taken by the grouping of economic operators
to whom the contract is to be awarded (if applicable):

Joint and Several liability.

o III.1.4) Other particular conditions to which the performance of the

contract is subject (if applicable) : Not Provided
 III.2) Conditions For Participation
o III.2.1) Personal situation of economic operators, including
requirements relating to enrolment on professional or trade registers :
 Not Provided
o III.2.2) Economic and financial capacity
 Not Provided
o III.2.3) Technical capacity
 Not Provided
 III.2.4) Reserved contracts (if applicable):
o Not Provided

 III.3) Conditions Specific to Service Contracts

 III.3.1) Execution of service is reserved to particular profession:

o Not Provided
 III.3.2) Legal person should indicate the names and professional qualifications
of the staff responsible for execution of the service: Yes

Section IV: Procedure

 IV.1) Type of Procedure
o IV.1.1) Type of procedure: Restricted
o IV.1.2) Limitations on the number of operators who will be invited to
tender or to participate
 Envisaged minimum number : 5 and maximum number: 8
 Objective Criteria for choosing the limited number of
candidates:

As stated in the Pre-Qualification Questionnaire

 IV.2) Award Criteria

o IV.2.1) Award criteria (please tick the relevant box(es))
 or the most economically advantageous tender in terms of
 the criteria stated below (the award criteria should be
given with their weighting or in descending order of
importance where weighting is not possible for
demonstrable reasons)
 Criteria - Weighting
 Quality of Personnel - 25
 Evidence of capacity to undertake work and quality
assurance - 25
 Methodology - 25
  Commercial - 25
o IV.2.2) An electronic auction will be used: No

 IV.3) Administrative Information

o IV.3.1) File reference number attributed by the contracting authority (if
applicable): PO5414
o IV.3.2) Previous publication(s) concerning the same contract: Not
Provided
o IV.3.3) Conditions for obtaining specifications and additional
documents (except for a DPS ) or descriptive document (in the case of
a competitive dialogue):
 Not Provided
o IV.3.4) Time-limit for receipt of tenders or requests to participate
 Date 18/04/2011
 Time 23:59
o IV.3.5) Date of dispatch of invitations to tender or to participate to
selected candidates (if known): 11/05/2011
o IV.3.6) Language(s) in which tenders or requests to participate may be
drawn up
 English

Section VI: Complementary Information

 VI.1) This is a recurrent procurement (if applicable): Not Provided
 VI.2) Contract related to a project and/or programme financed by Community
Funds: Not Provided
 VI.3) Additional Information (if applicable)

The contracting authority considers that this contract may be suitable for
economic operators that are small or medium enterprises (SMEs).However,
any selection of tenderers will be based solely on the criteria set out for the
procurement, and the contract will be awarded on the basis of the most
economically advantageous tender. Expressions of interest should be
submitted by e-mail, to the address at Section 1, using the PQQ application
form available from DFID's website at: http://www.dfid.gov.uk/Working-
with-DFID/Procurement/Current-contract-opportunities. Draft Terms of
Reference and other background material can also be found at this website
address. Following assessment of PQQs DFID will invite short-listed
applicants to submit full technical and commercial proposals. Prices are not
required at the PQQ stage. When required, pricing must be in Sterling and
payments under the contract will be made in Sterling. The contract is expected
to last 42 months with a possible extension of up to 36 months. The contract
will be covered by English law. DFID reserves the right to annul the tendering
process and not award a contract. From 01/04/2001, all UK development
assistance has been fully untied which allows suppliers from anywhere in the
world to bid for DFID contracts. Where circumstances require further
extensions beyond the original contract duration/agreed extensions, DFID will
consider doing so, by means of the Negotiated Procedure, where necessary
conditions can be met.
  VI.4) Procedures For Appeal
o VI.4.1) Body responsible for appeal procedures :

Dept for International Development, GB-

Email: L-Ferguson@dfid.gov.uk. Tel: 01355 843313.

o VI.4.2) Lodging of appeals (please fill heading VI.4.2 or if need be,

heading VI.4.3): Not Provided
o VI.4.3) Service from which information about the lodging of appeals
may be obtained:

Not Provided

 VI.5) Date of dispatch of this notice: 09/03/2011

Annex A (Additional Addresses And Contact Points)

 Not Provided
 Civil Society Governance Fund - Malawi
Terms of Reference

1. Terms of Reference

1.1 Introduction
1.1.1 DFID on behalf of its partners, EU and Irish Aid, wish to appoint a Service
Provider to manage a multi-donor pooled fund to support governance work
conducted by Malawian civil society. The Civil Society Governance Fund
(CSGF) is approx.£7.2 million fund for disbursement and does not include
the management cost. It will run for 3.5 years from September 2011( which
includes a six month inception phase ), with the possibility of an extension
of up to 3 more years subject to performance, continued need and
availability of funding.
1.2 Objective
1.2.1 To establish and manage a grant making facility for Malawian-based CSOs
supporting projects that contribute towards the goal of increasingly
accountable, inclusive and responsive governance in Malawi.
1.3 Recipient
1.3.1 The recipient of the services is DFID (on behalf of the funding development
partners) 1 .
1.4 Scope of work
1.4.1 DFID Malawi, in partnership with the EU and Irish Aid, have developed a
programme (The Civil Society Governance Fund-CSGF) intended to help
achieve the goal of “increasingly accountable, inclusive and responsive
governance in Malawi”. The specific outcome of the CSGF is intended to be
“empowered citizens promote social inclusion, political rights and
accountability for basic services.” A Service Provider is required to manage
the CSGF, providing grants to Malawian and Malawian-based Civil Society
Organisations (CSOs) based on received project proposals to achieve
results in 3 defined areas that contribute towards these programme
objectives. DFID does not provide advance funding, therefore, service
providers will be required to pre-finance the management of the
programme, before claiming reimbursement from DFID in arrears (including
disbursement of funds)
 

                                                            
1
Wherever DFID is mentioned in these ToRs as the contractor, the ‘on behalf of’ relationship - noted here - with
the other funding development partners is implied. The evaluation committee for the procurement of the services
requested here will include representative(s) all funding partners and may include potential funding partners.

 
 
 1.4.2 The Service Provider will be required to demonstrate clear Value for Money
from the management of the CSGF-Malawi. This will include demonstrating
that administrative costs can be minimised, the management processes
designed to maximise cost effectiveness and that grants can be allocated
based on evidence of results to ensure the greatest possible impact is
achieved. A clear process for measuring value for money should be included
in the monitoring framework.

1.4.3 The three overall objectives of the CSGF are: Civil society empowers citizens
to promote increasingly accountable, capable and responsive governance;
Civil society empowers citizens to reduce social exclusion; and Civil society
enables citizens to hold service providers to account for performance on
selected MDGs

The CSGF requirement comprises three outputs:

1. Grant-making facility for CSOs established, enabling them to undertake
projects to achieve results in the three defined areas
2. Technical advice and capacity-building support provided to CSOs to
improve their ability to manage grants and achieve results
3. Research and analysis to identify strategic opportunities for
interventions undertaken, and where necessary coalition building
facilitated and small non-standard support grants provided
 1.4.4 The successful bidder will be required to manage a multi-donor pooled fund of
approximately £7.2 million over an initial 3.5 year period ( which includes a
six month inception phase ), with the possibility of an extension of up to 3
more years subject to performance, continued need and availability of funding
in order to deliver the CSGF outputs above. The provider will require a
permanent presence in Malawi.
1.4.5 A design process for the CSGF has already taken place and provided a
“model fund design” for achieving the programme objectives. This model can
be adapted by the bidders for this contract as they see fit to maximise results.
These ToRs provide some detail on this, More detail can be found in the Draft
Technical Specification included in the tender documents.
1.5 Methodology
1.5.1 The Service Provider implementing this programme on behalf of DFID will
be required to carry out a number of tasks including the following.
1.5.2 In relation to output 1, the Service Provider will be required to:

 Develop an appropriate management structure for delivering these terms of

reference and ensuring that the programme is sufficiently flexible to scale up
in response to new funding and changes in the political context

2 
 
  Draw up annual work plans and budgets which will deliver the various outputs
and help achieve the purpose

 Advise the Management Board on the performance of the funding windows,

the opportunities to pursue new thematic priorities and necessary
modifications to selection criteria and processes (to ensure outcome
achievement and promote outreach to a diversity of CSOs)

 Administer “calls for proposals” covering the three results areas at agreed
intervals

 Support and feedback to potential grantees to improve proposal quality,

particularly in terms of result management

 Provisionally approve grants under €20,000. Score and submit grants over
€20,000 to the Board

 Oversee grant implementation, including rigorous monitoring of progress and

delivery of results

 Under instruction from the Board coordinate reviews as below:

- An inception review within 6 months of award of contract;
- annual reviews thereafter;
- a full mid-term review; and
- a final evaluation at least 3 months before the end of the project

 Implement decisions and carry out additional tasks required by the Board,
including approved recommendations from the independent evaluation agent
and review meetings
1.5.3 In relation to output 2 the Service Provider will be required to take
responsibility for:

 Carrying out needs assessments of CSOs requiring assistance to access the

Fund or manage and implement projects, under criteria agreed with the
Board

 Providing tailored and generic capacity-building support to CSOs to maximise

results

 Compiling rosters of technical assistance (TA) and negotiating draw-down

contracts as required for capacity building support

 Selecting and recruiting of any required short-term consultants, trainers, local

capacity development service providers, seminar/workshop leaders,
participants and mentors, including organising their terms of reference and
assignment definition
1.5.4 In relation to output 3 the Service Provider will be required to:

3 
 
  undertake periodic research and analysis of the Malawian governance
context in relation to the results areas and overall CSGF objectives and
maintain a deep understanding of the Malawian political context

 identify strategic opportunities where specific interventions by civil society

and other stakeholders around particular issues may help achieve defined
results and the objectives of the CSGF

 facilitate people coming together from a range of organisations from both

within and outside of civil society, including government, private sector etc to
develop interventions around the strategic opportunities where they have
common objectives

 coordinate and contract a limited number of short term grants outside the
usual call for proposals to support these efforts
1.5.5 In relation to the delivery of all outputs the Service Provider will be required
to complete a six month inception phase for the programme during which
time the following tasks will be completed:

 Set up a programme office in Lilongwe, including recruitment and

procurement.

 Draft manuals and procedures for grant applications and approvals, oversight
and quality assurance, accounting and procurement, drawing on lessons
learned from other programmes.

 Develop and implement an effective knowledge management strategy and

system for the project, including a grants database.

 Develop and implement an outreach plan and communications strategy.

 Review existing good practice CSO capacity development approaches and

methods, and identify initial local consultants for capacity development.

 Develop and agree with the Board work plans and budgets (an indicative work
programme for the first two years and a detailed work programme for the first
year).

 Issue a call for expression of interest and allocate first round of grants

 Revisit and clarify programme management arrangements to ensure optimum

effectiveness and value for money.
1.5.6 At the end of the inception phase the Service Provider will prepare an
inception report (in a format agreed with DFID) and a revised results
framework. The report will set out the results and findings of all inception
activities as well as incorporate the proposed priorities and work
programmes; programme budget; management budget; any commentary
required on specific issues especially any that differ from the original
Technical Proposal. If necessary, and on negotiation with DFID, the Terms
of Reference should be updated/revised in the light of inception phase
analysis and planning.

4 
 
 Implementation Phase  

1.5.7 Subject to DFID & funding partners approval of the inception p[hase
deliverables and agreement on costs the Service Provider will progress to
full implementation of an agreed 30 month programme, subject to
satisfactory performance of the Service Provider during the inception
phase..
1.5.8 The financial capacity of the Service Provider will be reviewed in line with
those specified in para 1.6 below to ensure they continue to have the
financial capacity to deliver the programme outputs.

1.6 Reporting
1.6.1 In addition to the Inception Report, the following reports will be prepared
and copied to the Board for comments:
- Annual work plans, procurement plans and budgets. These will be approved
by the Management Board.
- Progress in delivering these plans, especially at activity and output levels,
shall be reported on a quarterly basis to the Board in an agreed format.
- At the year end additional reports will be required on lessons learned, risk
management, monitoring reports, and recommendations to improve the
CSGF’s operations.
1.6.2 Mandatory financial reports:
- Annual forecast of expenditures (the budget) disaggregated monthly – for the
financial year April to March. These should be updated at least every 6
months
- Six monthly comparison of budget with expenditure
- External audit report on the annual financial statements
1.6.3 These financial reports will present data by output as well as by type of
expenditures (such as grants, training, workshops, consultancies). The
detailed requirements will be agreed with DFID during the inception phase.
1.7 Programme Management Arrangements
1.7.1 The programme will be overseen by a Management Board. More details of
the “model” board structure, composition and responsibilities are included in
the draft technical specification. The Service Provider will report directly to the
Chairperson of the Board.
1.7.2 DFID does not provide advance funding, therefore, consultants will be
required to pre-finance the management of the programme, before claiming
reimbursement from DFID in arrears ( including disbursement of funds ).

1.8 Timeframe

5 
 
 1.8.1 The selected Service Provider is expected to be in Malawi and beginning
operations by September 2011 (one month after contract award). The fund
is designed to be operational for an initial 3.5 years, with the possibility of an
extension of up to 3 more years subject to performance, continued need
and availability of funding. The fund will have a 6 month inception phase
in which the secretariat and procedures will be established and first call
issued.
1.8.2 As with all DFID contracts there will be routine review points. Results of
these may signal a restructuring of the timeframe, or the scale or scope of
work in a particular area.
1.8.3 The progression to implementation phase will be subject to acceptance of
deliverables, satisfactory performance of the Service Provider and
agreement to the Service Provider’s proposal including costs. This will be
assessed at the end of the 6-month inception phase.
1.8.4 If DFID and other donor partners decide not to proceed on completion of
inception phase, the contract will be terminated at no cost to DFID.
1.8.5 Bidders should note that bids will be assessed for both the inception and
implementation phases. A full and detailed budget is required for the
inception phase with an indicative budget for the implementation phase. The
budget for the implementation phase will be assessed to ensure it still
provides the most economically advantageous proposal.
1.9 DFID coordination
1.9.1 DFID coordination will be provided by the DFID Governance Team Leader
or an appointed Governance Team staff member.
2 Background
2.1 Malawi is a largely rural country and, despite impressive recent progress,
poverty rates and basic service delivery remain a challenge. 16 years since
multi-party democracy replaced 30 years of single party rule, many people are
still unused to holding Government to account for services they provide, how
they manage public money, or protection of basic rights. This leaves
communities, especially the poor, lacking the ability to address the problems
that reduce their quality of life and vulnerable to the impact of corruption.
2.2 There has been definite progress since 1994. Human rights and the space for
debate are much better than under one-party rule, although there is still scope
for improvements. An increase in women MPs between 2004 and 2009
elections (14% to 23%) suggests progress on gender equality, but it is still a
concern, and other marginalised groups have limited ‘voice’ and opportunities
to participate. Malawi is still a very rural and poor country and there remains a
strong patrimonial trend, from village level to formal political structures. There is
also a common perception of a recent reduction in the space for engagement
and for civil society to operate.
2.3 Although poor local communities are often very distant from political and
economic decision making in the capital, Malawi does have some tradition of

6 
 
2.4 This programme will aim to build on this Malawian tradition of civil engagement,
to support moves to greater public accountability and faster progress on
development outcomes. Global evidence provides many examples of how
citizen action can lead to the improvement of service delivery; can contribute to
the development of new accountability frameworks; and help poor and
marginalised groups realise political rights and democracy 2 . It also suggests
that civil society can play a major role in empowering citizens and helping them
hold public officials to account, but also to work with the state (and the
government) and actors within it to achieve common aims.
2.5 CSOs face many challenges, including institutional weaknesses such as poor
capacity and financial management. However, given that formal institutions are
playing a less robust scrutiny and oversight role, civil society will be
increasingly important in filling this gap. The CSGF will need to contribute both
to the institutional development of civil society and improving internal good
governance, as well as to strengthening the role of civil society to implement
programmes to promote more responsive and accountable government.

                                                            
2
 See for example the work of the “Citizenship, Participation and Accountability” Development Research Centre housed at 
the Institute for Development Studies. Their publication “Putting Citizens at the centre: linking state and societies for 
responsive governance” provides a good overview.  

7 
 
 CIVIL SOCIETY GOVERNANCE FUND

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION
REFERENCE DOCUMENT FOR
POTENTIAL SERVICE PROVIDERS

 
 
 Contents

Page
1 Introduction 3
2 Delivering Impact 4
Goal and Purpose 4
Output 1 4
Output 2 5
Output 3 5
3 Fund Structure & Governance 6
Governance Structure 6
Management Agent 6
Independent Impact Evaluation Agent 7
Management Board 8
4 Fund Management 11
Legal Status of Fund 11
Eligibility 12
Capacity Development 13
Audits & Reporting 13
Timing 15
Budget 15
Portfolio Management 15 
5 The Grant Making Process 16
Ensuring a Focus on Results 16
Calls for Proposals 16
Grant Types 18

Annex 1: Managing Agent Terms of 20

Reference

2 
 
1 Introduction
1.1.1 The Civil Society Governance Fund (CSGF) Malawi is a DFID, EU and Irish Aid project to
support governance work conducted by civil society. This overview provides an outline
specification for the CSGF based upon “best practice”. Many of these areas are open for
those bidding for the Service Provision contract to amend or change in their bid and
should therefore not be taken as a prescription.

1.2 Goal and Purpose

1.2.1 The fund has the following goal and purpose:

‐ Goal: Malawi’s governance is increasingly accountable, inclusive and responsive to citizens.

‐ Purpose: Empowered citizens promote social inclusion, political rights and accountability for
basic services.

1.2.2 The fund will have three outputs and these correspond to the three results areas. These
outputs will link into a draft project results framework that will be developed by the
development partners and finalised by the Service Provider in the inception phase.

Output 1: Civil society empowers citizens to promote increasingly accountable, capable

and responsive governance.

1.2.3 Theory of change: Increasing levels of engagement in policy formulation, implementation

and development by civil society will help deliver increased accountability of government.
This will lead to improved government and non-state actor responsiveness, including
more effective delivery of the services impacting MDG indicators. Accountability for
political rights and civil liberties will keep the political space for policy debate open.

1.2.4 Within this output, indicative specific results are defined below. These will be validated
and amended and subsequently finalised by the Board. Projects must fall within one
these areas which can be amended at the Board’s discretion or at Participatory Annual
Review sessions, as the political context changes.

Specific sub-results:

 Citizens are well informed about public matters and are willing and able to hold the state
accountable.

 Citizens provide input into budget processes, discussions and monitor allocation,
expenditure and results
 Citizens are aware of their rights and the roles of their representatives and are confident
to claim their rights and exercise their responsibilities.

 MPs held accountable for their policy performance.

 Political parties aggregate and articulate citizens’ interests in political programmes

3 
 
  Political and campaign financing increasingly transparent and civil society able to monitor
and act as a watchdog

 A free and balanced media informs citizens and holds government to account, and
facilitates public debate.

 Increased demand for transparency and accountability on allocation and use of

resources by government.

 Civil society organisations strengthen their internal accountability mechanisms and

become more transparent in their operations.

 More evidence-based policy-making, based on civil society input.

Output 2: Civil society empowers citizens to reduce social exclusion

1.2.5 Theory of change: Organisations representing those who are excluded from basic rights
and services, and empowerment of the people themselves, allows the excluded to
successfully claim their entitlements. Alongside this, accountability will lead those in
positions of power, at both at macro and micro levels, to ensure their governance is
inclusive. In addition awareness raising and work with the majority will lead to an
increasing societal rejection of exclusionary practices.

1.2.6 A gender and social exclusion analysis is being undertaken to support the Board in
identifying specific groups and results that will targeted. These groups and results can be
amended at the discretion of the Board.

Output 3: Civil society enables citizens to hold service providers to account for
performance on selected MDGs

1.2.7 Theory of change: Increasing amounts of people holding government and other service
providers to account for service delivery will lead them to work with and respond to
communities to deliver improved services - impacting MDG indicators. The Board will
select specific MDGs and related service delivery improvements for the fund to target.

2 CSGF Structure & Governance

2.1 Governance Structure

2.1.1 Below is a suggested structure for the CSGF’s governance that has been provided by a
team of consultants. The Service Provider should use this as a reference document in
developing the CSGF’s governance structure using its own experience and
understanding of what works and what doesn’t, especially in the specific Malawian
context.

2.1.2 The CSGF will be constituted of three bodies: the Secretariat , Management Board and
an Independent Impact Evaluation Agent. The Secretariat (run by the Service Provider)
and Independent Impact Evaluation Agent will be accountable to the Management Board.
The Board will have two sub-committees: the Grants Sub-Committee and Audit Sub-
Committee.

4 
 
 Management Structure

Management Board

Board Grants Sub- Board Audit Sub-

Committee Committee

Secretariat Independent Evaluation

Agent

2.2 Service Provider

2.2.1 The CSGF Secretariat will be run by the Service Provider and be responsible for the day
to day running of the fund. The structure, staffing and set-up of the Secretariat is the
responsibility of the Service Provider to create, In discussion with funding partners, but
the roles of the Secretariat (as described in the ToRs) will include:
‐ Administering calls for proposals.

‐ Support and feedback to potential grantees to improve proposal quality, particularly in terms
of result management.

‐ Provisionally approving grants under €20,000. Scoring and submitting grants over €20,000 to
the Grant Sub-Committee and Board.

‐ Management of the multi-donor pooled fund account

‐ Management of grants, including monitoring (but not evaluation).

‐ Coordination of capacity development: needs assessments, compiling roster of technical

assistance (TA), negotiation of draw down contracts with TA and management of TA.
Capacity building discussed in more detail below.

‐ Identification of strategic opportunities for reform. The Secretariat will be able to commission
pieces of research, identify key issues where coalitions of interest exist, catalyse civil society
coordination and contract a limited number of strategic short term grants, outside of the usual
call for proposals.

5 
 
‐ Reporting to contributing partners.

‐ Coordination of review meetings.

‐ Implementation of decisions made by the Board, including approved recommendations from

the independent evaluation agent and review meetings.

2.2.2 A strong link exists between the quality of the staff managing the Secretariat , particularly
the project manager, and the effectiveness of the fund. These will be key criteria for
choosing the Service Provider.

2.3 Independent Impact Evaluation Agent

2.3.1 The funding partners are committed to contracting an Independent Evaluation Agent. The
Independent Impact Evaluation Agent will be contracted separately from and a
number of months after the Service Provider specified in this tender and is to be
overseen by the Board. Responsible for evaluation of the impact of individual projects
and the portfolio as a whole, the Independent Impact Evaluation Agent will play a
knowledge management role and, along with the Board, will keep the fund, its Secretariat
and grantees focused on the delivery of results. Specific roles might include:
‐ Collection of baselines and results for projects supported by the fund, including the
coordination of pre and post intervention surveys in project areas.

‐ Analysis of portfolio composition in terms of spreads of risk, the three result areas, value for
money/cost-benefit analysis and geographical balance.

‐ The commissioning and coordination of randomised control trials for two large projects
funded during the first or second year of granting.

‐ Making annual recommendations to the Board of how the project could improve its results
focus.

2.4 Management Board

2.4.1 The details of the management board and grant approval process, amounts etc as
described below have been developed by consultants and agreed by the funding
partners in consultation with Malawian civil society and others, and as such are the
current preferred structure. However, we will take on board suggestions by bidders for a
different structure that can help increase the CSGF’s effectiveness and the contracted
Service Provider will establish the final structure in consultation with the funders.

2.4.2 Overseeing the Secretariat and Independent Impact Evaluation Agent will be the fund
Management Board. This will be composed of representatives from contributing donors
and three eminent Malawians chosen for their experience and impartiality. Each
contributing partner and eminent Malawian would have a single vote on the Board with
Chairmanship revolving between members on an annual basis.

6 
 
2.4.3 The Board will include eminent Malawians with significant experience in civil society or
elsewhere (e.g. private sector, academia) but exclude individuals currently in leadership
roles within civil society organisations likely to bid for grants. These individuals would be
recruited by the other members of the Board, utilising suggestions of civil society
representatives. Individuals will be appointed for one year periods and can be
reappointed subject to willingness of the individual and the nomination of the chairman of
the Board, who will consult with other members. The fund expects high performing Board
members and will incentivise this through the establishment of strong performance
criteria as well as ensuring competitive remuneration for Eminent Malawians.

2.4.4 While the Board is eventually likely to meet bi-annually, monthly meetings will be the
norm for at least the first year. The Board will also be able to pass resolutions by email,
given responses from a quorum of members.

2.4.5 Specific functions of the Board include:

‐ Ultimate responsibility for the performance of the fund and its impact. Receives reporting and
work planning from the Secretariat and Independent Impact Evaluation Agent, making
changes where necessary.

‐ Review of proposals for advocacy grants, administered in a timely fashion in-between calls
for proposals.

‐ Strategy setting for overall fund, ensuring the fund continues to be respond effectively to
changes in political context. This will include reviewing the results framework annually.

‐ Investing in creating political cover for the fund by publishing its work and, where appropriate,
keeping government informed of developments with the fund.

‐ Making decisions on grant eligibility guidelines and their interpretation.

‐ Commissioning annual reviews of the fund to assess the achievement of the fund at output
level, its contribution to the fund purpose and the success of management arrangements.

‐ Final sign off on grants totalling over €200,000 and a veto over all grant decisions.

2.4.6 The Grants Sub-committee (of the Board) will be comprised of two members of the
1
Board, acting on behalf of the body on a bi-annual rotating basis. The Secretariat will
present a limited range of viable options to the sub-committee. While the Board has a
2
final veto over all funding decisions, the approval process varies by grant size:
‐ Under €20,000: Approved by the Secretariat , direct to board for final approval (or veto).

‐ Totalling €20,000 - €200,000: Scored by the Secretariat , approval given by the grant sub-
committee. Final board approval (or veto).

                                                            
1
Linked to calls for proposals. With Board agreement the Sub-committee members may stay on for two calls for
proposals.
2
For each round the Board will be presented with the sets of proposals to be funded alongside those that were
not.

7 
 
‐ Totalling over €200,000: Scored by the Secretariat , provisional approval given by the grant
sub-committee. Final approval given by the Board based on more detailed engagement than
for grants under €200,000.
 

Final Approval For Grants

Total Grant Size Approval Veto

Under €20,000 Secretariat Board
€20,000 – €200,000 Grant Sub-committee Board
Over €200,000 Board Grant Sub-committee (Provisional Approval)
-
Board (Final Approval)

Grant Approval Process

Under €20,000 - Over

€20,000 €200,000 €200,000
Management Management Management
Final
Board Board Board
Approval

Provisiona Secretariat Grant Sub- Grant Sub-

l Approval Committee Committee

Sifting
and Secretariat Secretariat Secretariat
Scoring

2.4.7 The Board sub-committee model allows a limited degree of donor engagement in the
decision making process without overloading the Board. By having a forum for
engagement in the decision making process, donor partners will also be better informed
in terms of the quality of proposals and the extent to which they are focused on specific
and achievable results, allowing more substantive input as the fund develops. The Board
may change this approval structure as the fund develops, and the Service Provider will
3
be expected to provide advice.

2.4.8 The audit sub-committee will be comprised of three members of the Board appointed
annually on a rotational basis. The committee will be called on an ad-hoc basis with
authority delegated by the Board for specific tasks. These may include establishing
guidelines for audit, handling any financial mismanagement and dealing with issues
arising from annual audits of the Secretariat and Independent Impact Evaluation Agent.

                                                            
3
E.g. by abolishing the Grant Sub-committee or changing the levels at which approvals are given

8 
 
 The Board retains the authority to decide whether audit issues will be handled directly at
Board level; decisions of consequence made by the audit sub-committee must be
approved by the Board.

2.4.9 Broader accountability for progress will come in participatory reviews held on an annual
basis. These are a donor requirement, although the format is potentially flexible.

2.4.10 The reviews will bring contributing partners, grant recipients and potential grantees
(including a selection of unsuccessful grantees) together to review progress from the
perspective of a range of stakeholders. A key priority for the fund is ensuring it remains
relevant in a changing political context. Participatory reviews will provide input to the
Board, allowing it to make relevant changes.

2.4.11 Specific objectives include:

‐ By ensuring that representatives from each of the categories of civil society 4 are represented,
participatory reviews will be able to identify gaps in the fund’s work, In particular they will
identify whether the accountability efforts of local CBOs are being supported effectively by
the fund.

‐ Review of fund objectives and strategy – identification of high and low performing areas and
any gaps between articulation of fund objectives and implementation. This will also be an
opportunity for re-articulation of the fund’s focus on results to grantees.

‐ Identification of opportunities for political engagement and further research that have
emerged.

3 Fund Management
3.1 Eligibility

3.1.1 Eligibility criteria have been agreed by funders after consolation. However, we are open
to bidders suggesting additional or changes to the criteria based on a understanding of
the Malawi legal and political context.

3.1.2 The following eligibility criteria apply to all grantees.

‐ Registration with either central government or district assemblies (legal registration, or
through CONGOMA (registration for operational purposes).

‐ Audited accounts for at least a year 5 or at least 4 years for top tier results grants.

‐ Only three grants may be administered concurrently by CSOs.

                                                            
4
Civil society organisations, community based organisations, faith based organisation and international NGOs As
identified in the state of Civil Society Analysis
5
This requirement will prevent many CBOs from accessing the fund, the implementing agent will work with
contributing partners to agree whether this requirement be waived for small grants if other financial systems are
in place.

9 
 
‐ Both national and international NGOs may apply to implement projects under the fund. The
portfolio will be managed in order that support to I-NGOs does not exclude suitable local
NGOs from implementing projects. 6

‐ Individuals linked to CSOs receiving grants must demonstrate conscious consent to take part
in projects, in full knowledge of the risks to their person and families.

3.1.3 The fund will welcome and encourage applications from partnerships, coalitions and
consortium of CSOs, and those intending to sub-grant.

3.1.4 There will be no formal restrictions on levels of funding imposed on CSOs. This will be
left to the discretion of the Service provider who can make informed decisions on the
capacity of organisations to administer further grants, as and when they are applied for.

3.2 Capacity Development

3.2.1 Ensuring the organisations the fund works with are running effectively will have a
significant impact on results delivered by the fund and so capacity development will be a
key responsibility of the Service Provider. Capacity development will be approached not
as an end in itself but as a means of delivering increased impact. It is suggested that
short capacity assessments will be conducted jointly by the CSO and Secretariat, in order
7
that a shared understanding of organisational weakness is achieved. By taking this
approach support will be demand led and tailored to the specifics of organisations. This
means the Secretariat will only conduct ‘one size fits all’ training sessions to large
numbers of partners in exceptional circumstances and where there is a strong value for
money case Areas of support include:
‐ Project management

‐ Financial management

‐ Monitoring and evaluation

‐ Internal governance

3.2.2 Capacity development should be closely aligned to the granting process in order that
8
they are mutually reinforcing. To this end, the Secretariat will be directly responsible for
capacity development and is advised to use a small roster of local consultants on a draw
down basis. This means the Secretariat does not need to keep a large staff in place to
cover all potential capacity development needs. Specifics of this arrangement include:
 

‐ The Secretariat will develop a roster of technical assistance using an open application
process. The consultation with I-NGOs demonstrated that only limited numbers of high
quality consultants are available in Malawi and so the open application process will also be
                                                            
6
Given the size of the fund, this is not a significant risk.
7
The organisational assessments conducted as part of the grant making process will also feed into these
capacity assessments.
8
Capacity development coming out of needs identified during the granting process and experience/ information
from the capacity development process creating a more intelligent grant making partnership and maximise
potential synergies that could be lost through two contracts being made.

10 
 
 complimented with proactive head hunting of high quality individuals, using recommendations
from other programmes.

‐ Reusing the same individuals, subject to performance, is an important method used by I-

NGOs to incentivise TA delivery that the Secretariat should use. By building a strong
relationship between TA and Secretariat, follow up with partners is also substantially
improved.

‐ Consultants will be contracted through framework agreements with the Secretariat in order to
ensure value for money and establishment of a strong working relationship, and information
flows, between TA and the Secretariat.
 

3.3 Audits & Reporting

3.3.1 The Service Provider will be responsible for developing a joint monitoring arrangement,
including joint reporting formats, in line with the requirements of contributing partners.

3.3.2 The Secretariat and the multi-donor pooled fund account will be audited annually in line
with basic requirements for all contributing partners. For ease of administration, auditors
will be contracted and paid for by DFID who may subtract the cost of the audits from its
contribution to the fund.

3.3.3 The audit sub-committee will be responsible for developing a realistic strategy for
auditing grantees, which will then be approved by the Board. The Secretariat will compile
a fraud register containing cases of fraud and suspected fraud, recording both the NGOs
and individuals involved and governed by a clear set of guidelines regulating inclusion on
the register.

3.4 Timing

3.4.1 The fund is designed to run for four years from the mobilisation of the chosen Service
Provider. This is scheduled to be September 2011 to August 2015. Contributing partners
retain the option to extend the fund by up to three years if it is working successfully. The
fund will have a 6 month inception phase in which the Secretariat and procedures will be
established.

3.5 Budget

3.5.1 Projected contributions to the multi-donor pooled fund and the schedule of funding by the
contributors- DFID, EU and Ireland- is under negotiation. The total available funding for
the pooled fund- money available for grants- is around £6,200,000. Other partners may
also contribute to the fund at a later stage.

3.6 Portfolio Management

3.6.1 It is suggested that the fund will have three levels of grants: those above €200,000, those
between €200,000 and €20,000 and those below €20,000. The Secretariat will take a
proactive approach to portfolio management ensuring that balance is achieved in the

11 
 
3.6.2 The fund will balance large and small grants with 50% of the fund invested in large grants
totalling over €200,000 and 50% in small (under €20,000) and medium (totalling €20,000
to €200,000) grants. In addition to this, small grants will be capped at a maximum of 15%
of the total fund value, out of recognition of the higher transaction costs associated with
these grants. The Board will have the power to amend these ratios as the fund is
implemented and they will be reviewed annually.

3.6.3 The Secretariat will balance the levels of outcome risk within the portfolio, without
compromising on financial risk. Up to 20% of the value of the middle and lower tier
funding (totalling 10% of the total portfolio) will be invested in innovative yet higher
9
outcome risk projects and in line with projects elsewhere, a failure rate of approximately
10 11
20% is to be expected with an expected 20 - 30% of these grants achieving above
12
average impact. The calls for proposals will specifically welcome innovative (higher
outcome risk) projects. The Secretariat will be required to assess the risks associated
with each proposal, categorising them into ‘innovation’ and ‘project’ grant categories as a
method for balancing risk across the portfolio. This will allow the fund to have an appetite
for high risk, high impact projects without becoming over-exposed.

4 The Grant Making Process

4.1.1 The grant-making process described below has been develop by consultants and
represents a suggested best practice methodology for ensuring a grant making process
that will achieve results. The funding partners remain open to suggestions by bidders to
changes and amendments to this process. The final grant-making process will be agreed
between the contracted Service Provider and the funding partners.

4.2 Ensuring a Focus on Results

4.2.1 The quality of many proposals received by the fund is likely to be low, particularly in
terms of specifying clear and achievable results. The Service Provider is likely to have to
work alongside civil society to refine proposals, in order that objectives and monitoring
arrangements can be refined. This challenge will be dealt with in two ways - both
upstream before proposals are submitted, and downstream, after they have been
received.

4.2.2 The Service Provider will focus upstream by holding regional information sessions
outlining fund objectives and offering guidance on making proposals focused on results.
This approach is based on the assumption that investing up front will save staff time later
when proposals have been submitted. Sessions will be run by the Secretariat with any
assistance brought in to support, rather than substitute, staff.

                                                            
9
Only partially meeting the objective
10
2% of total fund portfolio
11
2-3% of total fund portfolio
12
These ratios were developed in relation to centrally funded DFID projects. Further investment in assessing
indicative rates of return will be necessary. These can then be adjusted using figures prepared by the
independent evaluation agent as the project is implemented.

12 
 
4.2.3 Focusing Malawian civil society on the identification and measurement of results should
be seen as a process and not a single event. The management agent will provide a
single ‘point person’ within the Secretariat for whom being contacted for advice is a core
part of their role.

4.2.4 The weakness of civil society means that a challenge fund approach, where proposals
are accepted or rejected with very little management agent input, is inappropriate for the
Malawi. Downstream, once proposals have been submitted, the fund will engage with
potential grantees to advise them on how to increase their quality and focus on results.

4.3 Calls for Proposals

4.3.1 Calls for proposals will cover all result areas, although grantees will be asked to specify
which result area they are aiming to impact. This approach reduces overheads, which are
highly linked to the number of calls for proposals administered each year, while allowing
grants to provide continuous support all areas throughout the life of the fund. It is likely
that some result areas will receive less high quality proposals than others. In this
scenario a later call may exclusively focus on any neglected result area in order to
maintain a balanced portfolio.

4.3.2 Calls for proposals will be published a minimum of twice in newspapers to increase the
extent to which CBOs are reached, a limited number of radio adverts will also be used.
The Secretariat will also be responsible for compiling an email database of all applicants
13
to the fund and all NGOs currently funded by contributing partners, which the call will
also be circulated to.

4.3.3 Calls for proposals will be made twice a year. CSOs will first submit short (1-2 page)
concept notes which then either will be rejected or turned into a full proposal. The use of
concept notes as a first step in the application process was strongly advocated for by civil
society activists during the consultation as a way of lowering the failure rate of proposal
submission which puts a significant demand on limited resources. Nevertheless, CSOs
will retain the option of submitting full proposals without concept notes and the use of
concept notes will be reviewed at the first and second annual reviews.

4.3.4 Following submission of full proposals the Secretariat will either reject the proposal, ask
for the proposal to be revised or, in rare cases, directly recommend it for funding. This
more participatory approach to funding helps bridge any potential gap between weak
CSOs and a strong demand for results. The Secretariat will develop guidelines on the
“revise and resubmit” function, in particular establishing the degree to which proposals
can be amended and these will be approved by the Board.

                                                            
13
 The secretariat will be expected to take a proactive approach to engaging NGOs currently supported by
contributing partners, including directly notifying these organisations that the fund will displace the funding
provided by the donor.

13 
 
 Grant Vetting
CSO

Submission of Concept Notes reject 

accept

Submission of Proposals reject 

revise & resubmit
accept  revise & resubmit 
at next call 
Re-submission
reject 

Grant Submitted for Approval

 

4.3.5 The Service Provider will deliver high standards of service to partners and be expected
to: acknowledge receipt of proposals within a pre-agreed period of time, specifying a
timeline for a response as well as providing a basic level of feedback to unsuccessful
14
grantees . Aside from being a reputational issue for the fund, these basic service
standards increase civil society buy-in which produces a range of wider benefits such as
higher quality proposals and further political cover. By using concept notes and ensuring
feedback is given, the proposal failure rate will be likely to fall, reducing overall demands
on the Secretariat.

4.4 Grant Types

4.4.1 The fund will have three types of grants: those totalling over €200,000, those between
€200,000 and €20,000 and those below €20,000. Application requirements will vary
according to grant size. In doing so, the need for rigorous assessment of the results each
proposal will deliver will be balanced against the need for application procedures that are
sufficiently light touch to allow smaller CBOs to apply. In order to keep the application
requirements as light as possible, the Secretariat , during the 6 month inception period,
may recommend to the Board that these levels be amended. Grants will run for between
one and three years depending on the size of the grant.
 

                                                            
14
Where proposals are of good quality but fall outside the fund’s remit, this may include re-direction to alternative
sources of finance

14 
 
Grant Name Grant Maximum Target CSOs
Size Grant
Duration
Small Grants Under 1 year CBOs and locally rooted CSOs impacting a small
€20,000 number of districts or TAs
Fast Track Grants Under 1 year CSOs with a proven track record of advocacy
€20,000
Results Grants €20,000 - 3 years Wide range of CSOs implementing policy specific
(lower tier) €200,000 or geographically limited projects
Results Grants €200,000 3 years Large CSOs implementing projects at scale
(upper tier)

4.4.2 The bottom tier of grants, those below €20,000 will provide space for both small, locally
15
rooted CSOs and CBOs This category will allow CBOs to apply directly to the fund and
whilst this category of grants is likely to be most transaction heavy, it is built on
recognition of the significant governance impact had by small locally rooted
organisations. The management agent would place particular emphasis on keeping
application requirements for projects in this category as light as possible. These grants
would run for a maximum of one year. The fund will also welcome applications from
CSOs that have successfully implemented projects for the fund, or elsewhere, that
require additional funding to consolidate their work, or develop advocacy around it.

4.4.3 Also below €20,000 are fast track grants to larger organisations for strategic short term
and time limited projects. This is important as twice yearly funding rounds are not well
suited to acting quickly on time bound opportunities for reform; both because they can
take a number of months to complete and may fall outside of the time period for strategic
interventions. Up to five of these grants would be provided per year and applications
would be welcomed outside of the usual funding cycles- to be approved rapidly by the
grants sub-committee via email. By allowing applications outside of normal application
windows, there is a risk that the management agent would be swamped with proposals.
To prevent this, the management agent will be responsible for producing detailed
guidance on the conditions under which time-timed proposals would be funded which
would have to include a firm case for why proposals could not be funded through the
normal windows. These grants will not be available to NGOs already receiving core
funding from the fund.

4.4.4 The lower tier Results Grants, totalling between €20,000 and €200,000, will account for
the majority, by number, of grants within the fund. These are differentiated from higher
tier grants by the detail required in demonstrating links to outcomes and the forms of
monitoring and evaluation to be used. Application requirements for lower tier grants are
in line with the formats for proposals currently required for similar size grants by the
contributing partners- a well defined objective, clear and specific outputs, a logical link up
to outcomes and a credible results management framework. Grants will run for up to
three years with the application format varying by total grant size.

4.4.5 In contrast the higher tier applications, totalling over €200,000 would have more
extensive application requirements including a much more detailed monitoring and
evaluation plan and a well argued case for the approach and impact on higher level
objectives. Organisations implementing these grants would be required to be well
established, having four years audited accounts, strong management systems and

                                                            
15
Whose major source of funding is often the Local Development Fund which limits their ability to hold local
government accountable

15 
 
 16
implementation capacity. For grants of this size impact would be measured, as much
as it is attributable, at outcome level.

4.4.6 Large CSOs whose main work is in line with fund objectives may apply for higher tier
grants to support their core work. As with all higher tier grants, funding would be provided
against the delivery of a specific set of higher level results; CSOs would be required to
demonstrate that these results were not being achieved through other existing funding.

4.4.7 The fund will allow CSOs apply to the fund to partner with local CBOs and CSOs as a
means to target local processes of accountability. The coordinating CSO (either an NGO
or I-NGO) will be responsible for the results delivered by its partners and any capacity
building required to increase CBO performance.

4.4.8 By splitting higher tier Results Grants out as a separate category, the Secretariat will
avoid putting an unrealistic burden on smaller CSOs applying for grants in the lower tier.
Without this differentiation it is likely that the Secretariat would be unable to disperse the
donor investment effectively while guaranteeing appropriate accountability for results.
The distinction between upper and lower tier grant application formats will be reviewed at
the end of the second year, allowing them to be merged, if necessary.

                                                            
16
  While the fund will consider grants of all sizes, the stringent application requirements for the top
grant category are designed to limit the number of large applications. 

16 
 
 PRE-QUALIFICATION QUESTIONNAIRE
Civil Society Governance Fund-Malawi
March 2011

Issue No: 3
Date of Issue: 06/05/10

Page 1 of 24
THE CIVIL SOCIETY GOVERNANCE FUND PRE-QUALIFICATION QUESTIONNAIRE

CONTENTS

PART A GENERAL ................................................................................................................................... 3

1. Introduction and Background....................................................................................................... 3
2. The Requirement…..……………………………………………………………………..…………6
3. Procurement Process ................................................................................................................... 7
4. Conflicts of Interest ....................................................................................................................... 7
5. Timetable ....................................................................................................................................... 7
6. Instructions for Completion .......................................................................................................... 9
7. Consortium and sub-contracting ................................................................................................. 9
8. Queries about the procurement ................................................................................................... 9
9. Supplier contact point ................................................................................................................. 10
10. Evaluation Approach .................................................................................................................. 10
11 Confidentiality and Publication of Information .......................................................................... 11
12 Freedom of Information and Environmental Information Regulations.................................... 12
13 Publicity ....................................................................................................................................... 12
14 Reliance on Information ............................................................................................................. 12
15 Costs of the Procurement .......................................................................................................... 12
16 Collusion and Canvassing ......................................................................................................... 12
17 Change of Control or Information Provided in the PQQ.......................................................... 12
18. Pre-Qualification Questionnaire ................................................................................................ 13
PART B-ENCLOSURES ...................................................................................................................... 221

Issue No: 3
Date of Issue: 06/05/10

Page 2 of 24
PART A GENERAL

1. Introduction and Background

1.1 Definitions and abbreviations

The following is a list of the key definitions and abbreviations used throughout this document.

Term Definition
Authority This refers to the contracting body, the Department
for International Development
EU Restricted Procedure A two-stage process allowing a short-list of
interested parties to be established during a pre-
qualification stage, prior to the issue of ITT
documents.

1.2 Purpose of this document

The purpose of this document is for DFID to seek Responses from Respondents wishing to be selected to tender for the Contract.

It is envisaged that between 5 and 8 successful Respondents will be invited to participate further in the procurement process and will be invited to tender for
provision of the Services. The Contract duration will be 3.5 years, with an extension option for a further 3, subject to performance, continued need and availability of
funding.

This is a competitive procurement conducted in accordance with the Restricted Procedure, under the UK Public Contracts Regulations 2006.

1.3 Background Information

Department for International Development Structure

The UK government believes it is in all our interests to help poor people build a better life for themselves. So in 1997 it created a separate government department -
the Department for International Development (DFID) - to meet the many challenges of tackling world poverty. It is DFID’s job to make sure every pound of British
aid works its hardest to help the world’s poor.

Page 3 of 24
Our structure and staff

DFID is the part of the UK government that manages Britain's aid to poor countries and works to get rid of extreme poverty. We are led by a cabinet minister, one of
the senior ministers in the government. This in itself is a sign of how determined is the UK government to tackle poverty around the world.

We work in 150 countries and have 2,600 staff, half of whom work abroad. We have headquarters in London and East Kilbride, near Glasgow, and 64 offices
overseas.

Our work is guided by two sets of targets. First, we are working to reach the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), international targets agreed by the United
Nations (UN) to halve world poverty by 2015. Second, the government’s Public Service Agreement (PSA) sets objectives and targets by which we measure our
progress towards this aim.

We work with governments of developing countries, charities, businesses and international bodies, including the World Bank, UN agencies and the European
Commission. All our partners share our ambition to achieve the Millennium Development Goals.

In 2008/09 we spent £5.5 billion on aid to poorer countries and our budget will increase to £7.8 billion by 2010/11. By 2013, the equivalent of 0.7% of the UK’s gross
national income will be dedicated to development assistance, from 0.36% in 2007/08.

What is the legal basis for our work?

The legal basis for our work is the International Development Act 2002. The act allows the secretary of state for international development (the cabinet minister who
heads this department) to provide aid for sustainable development and welfare. But the secretary of state must make sure that the aid is likely to contribute to
reducing poverty. Under the act, British aid cannot be tied to British goods and services. (Since 1997, governments receiving UK aid have been free to use suppliers
who compete on price, quality and service alone.)

We also work within the International Development Act (Reporting and Transparency) 2006. This act requires the secretary of state to report every year on how
much we spent on aid, how effective it was in reducing poverty and how much we gave to poor countries.

The National Audit Office (NAO) keeps a watch on public spending for parliament. It audits the accounts of all government departments and agencies, including
DFID.

The NAO reports to the Parliament and the Public Accounts Committee, which analyses the value for money of DFID’s work. In parliament the International
Development Committee (IDC) scrutinises our annual report and also holds inquiries into particular areas of our work.

Page 4 of 24
Our values

Our values set out how we mean to live up to our strategic aim of halving world poverty by 2015. Over the next three years, we expect to have a more flexible and
influential workforce in a more challenging yet supportive sphere of work.

Our values include:

ambition and determination to eliminate poverty

diversity and the need to balance work and private life
ability to work effectively with others
desire to listen, learn and be creative
professionalism and knowledge.

Page 5 of 24
2.1 Overview of Requirement

The Civil Society Governance Fund (CSGF) is intended to support work by civil society with the goal of
making Malawi’s governance more accountable, inclusive and responsive to citizens. DFID wishes to
appoint a Service Provider (SP) to manage a multi-donor pooled fund to implement the CSGF as well as
undertake work to help improve civil society’s capacity to operate and identify strategic opportunities to
facilitate citizens coming together to achieve common objectives.

The CSGF will be a results-focused fund that will provide grants to civil society organisations that can
demonstrate a credible plan to implement a range of activities that will achieve outputs in 3 main
programme areas. These outputs should all contribute towards the outcome of empowered citizens able
to promote social inclusion, political rights and accountability for basic services. The three programme
areas are outlined in the ToRs and background documents.

The donors involved in the CSGF at this point are DFID, the European Union and Irish Aid. The pooled
fund will be in the region of £7.2 million, which does not include the management costs, with the
possibility of additional funders coming on board. Exact levels of funding are still to be agreed. The
contract will be for 3.5 years, with extension options for a further 3 years subject to performance,
continued need and availability of funding. The contract will begin with a 6 month inception period which if
satisfactory to DFID and its partners will be followed by full implementation.

2.2 Background to the Assignment

Malawi is a largely rural country and, despite impressive recent progress, poverty rates and basic service
delivery remain a challenge. 16 years since multi-party democracy replaced 30 years of single party rule,
many people are still unused to holding Government to account for services they provide, how they
manage public money, or the protection of basic rights. This leaves communities, especially the poor and
commonly excluded, lacking the ability to address the problems that reduce their quality of life and
vulnerable to the impact of corruption.

The Civil Society Governance Fund will address these challenges by giving people the information,
support and opportunities they need to play a greater role in their own development, and encourage more
capable, accountable and responsive governance. It will contribute towards the development of increased
democratic space and a more active civic life, and help identify opportunities where organisations and
citizens can use this space to achieve common objectives that lead to improvements in their lives.

2.3 Interface with Stakeholders

Due to the number of interfaces required in the programme the Service Provider will be expected to
develop and maintain collaborative relationships with a wide number of stakeholders. These will include
the funding partners (currently EU, DFID and Irish Aid) and other potential partners, but also might
include:

- local civil society organisations and community based organisations

- trades unions
- faith-based organisations
- professional associations
- academics in various pertinent fields and their universities
- media organisations and outlets at national and local levels
- political parties and actors
- government of Malawi officials and office holders
- parliamentarians and parliamentary officials
- members of the judiciary
- traditional authorities (chiefs, village headmen etc)
- service providers in key sectors
- the private sector and related organisations (such as chambers of commerce)
- development partners, both bilateral and multilateral

Page 6 of 24
 - diplomatic partners of Malawi
- research programmes both national, regional and international

A governance structure is outlined in the background documents that will be refined to facilitate interface
with main stakeholders. In order to improve the efficiency of the overall removals process, the Service
Provider will be expected to participate in continuous improvement initiatives

2.4 Security Requirements

Due to the nature of the information being communicated between DFID and the Service Provider, there
will be a requirement for the safe and secure storage of DFID’s records, both in a permanent location and
during their transit, in accordance with prevailing government guidelines.

2.5 Insurance Requirements

Respondents are advised that for this contract, there will be a minimum insurance requirement of:

1. Professional Indemnity Insurance £5m limit of indemnity

2. Employers Insurance £10m limit of indemnity

2.6 Prevention of Illegal Working

Respondents’ attention is drawn to the requirement to comply with the Law on Prevention of Illegal
Migrant Working as set out in Section 15 – 25 of the Immigration and Nationality Act 2006 (which came
into force on 29th February 2008 replacing the previous Section 8 of the Asylum & Immigration Act 1996).

3. Procurement Process

DFID is following the Restricted Procedure of the Public Contracts Regulations 2006.

DFID reserves the right to reject any Respondent on the grounds of the ineligibility conditions provided by
Regulation 23 of the Public Contracts Regulations 2006.

DFID reserves the right to terminate the procurement process at any time and does not undertake to
award a Contract for the Services to any Respondent. In no circumstances shall DFID be liable for any
costs incurred by a Respondent in relation to the procurement process.

It is the intention that the procurement will take place in accordance with the methodology outlined in the
introduction to this PQQ. However, DFID reserves the right to change by notice the basis of the
procurement. It also reserves the right not to proceed with the proposed procurement at all. Under no
circumstances shall DFID or its staff, agents or advisors incur any liability in respect of such matters.

4. Conflicts of Interest

Respondents are responsible for ensuring that no conflicts of interest exist between Parties. In particular
this should include any conflict of interest between:
advisors appointed by the Respondent and those appointed by DFID
the Respondent and DFID or any Advisor to DFID

Any Respondent who fails to comply with this obligation could be disqualified from the procurement
process.

5. Timetable

Page 7 of 24
Responses to this Pre-Qualification Questionnaire must be received by e-mail at the address set out in
the OJEU Notice.
18 April 2011, 23:59hrs

Responses received after this date and time may be disregarded.

The outline timetable for the remainder of the procurement is as follows:

OJEU Notice and PQQs issued - 9 March 2011

PQQ final response time and date - 23:59hrs on 18 April 2011
ITT Issued - 11 May 2011
Submission of Bid - 22 June 2011
Bid Evaluations and internal Assurance - 16 July 2011
Contract Award - 30 July 2011
Mobilisation - 01 September 2011
Service Commencement - 01 September 2011

DFID intends to let a contract(s) for a period of 3.5 years with extension options of up to 3 subject to
performance, continued need and availability of funding.

Page 8 of 24
6. Instructions for Completion

Prospective Respondents should fully complete the PQQ below and return this document in its entirety
with all questions answered accurately and concisely. Where a question is not relevant to your
organisation, this should be marked N/A and an explanation given.

The format must not be altered and any supporting documents and information required by DFID as part
of the PQQ, e.g. copies of audited accounts, must be submitted as a separate attachment and be clearly
referenced commencing with the question number it relates to followed by a short and clear description of
the file content (e.g. Q1.12 Pen Portrait). All attachments must be provided in formats compatible with the
Microsoft Windows XP® operating system (*.doc,*.xls, *ppt, *.pdf etc.). No single file should be more
than 5MB in size.

All signatures should be submitted to DFID as a scanned copy of a version with an original ink signature.
An electronic/pre-scanned signature inserted into an electronic document will not be accepted by DFID as
a part of a compliant PQQ response.

Questions must be answered in English.

Responses will be evaluated in accordance with the procedures set out in Section 10. In the event that
none of the Responses are considered satisfactory, DFID reserves the right to consider alternative
procurement options or not to award a Contract. For the avoidance of doubt, DFID will not bear any costs
in respect of any abortive effort should no Contract be awarded.

Failure to furnish the required information, make a satisfactory response to any question, or supply
documentation referred to in responses, within the specified timescale, may mean that Respondents will
not be invited to participate further.

7. Consortium and sub-contracting

Where a consortium or sub-contracting approach is proposed, all information requested should be given
in respect of the proposed prime contractor or consortium leader. Relevant information should also be
provided in respect of consortium members or sub-contractors who will play a significant role in the
delivery of services or products under any ensuing contract. Responses must enable DFID to assess the
suitability of the Respondent as a whole.

Where the proposed prime contractor is a special purpose vehicle or holding company, information
should be provided of the extent to which it will call upon the resources and expertise of its members.

DFID recognises that arrangements in relation to consortia and sub-contracting may be subject to future
change. Respondents should therefore respond in the light of such arrangements as are currently
envisaged.

DFID intends seeking independent financial, legal, market and internal advice and references to validate
information declared or to assist in the evaluation. References, site visits or demonstrations and/or
presentations may be requested at this stage.

8. Queries about the procurement

DFID will not enter into detailed discussion of the Service requirements at this stage. Any questions
about the procurement should be submitted to Paul Gaffney, Strategic Sourcing and Supplier
Management at p-gaffney@dfid.gov.uk

Page 9 of 24
If DFID considers any question or request for clarification to be of material significance, both the query
and the response will be communicated, in a suitably anonymous form, to all Respondents who have
expressed an interest.

9. Supplier contact point

Respondents have been asked to include a single point of contact in their organisation for their Response
to the pre-qualification questionnaire. DFID shall not be responsible for contacting the Respondent
through any route other than the nominated contact. The Respondent must therefore undertake to notify
any changes relating to the contact promptly.

10. Evaluation Approach

The objective of the selection process is to assess the Responses to the Pre-Qualification Questionnaire
and select potential Respondents to proceed to the next stage of the procurement.

Selection criteria will be a combination of both financial and non-financial factors and will be carried out in
two stages:

Stage 1 Evaluation will be applied in respect of the following questions, all of which are subject to a
pass/ fail test:

Question Question
reference

2.10 Acceptance that any anti-competitive behaviour, canvassing, collusion, or any attempt to
distort the market in any way, could preclude your organisation from being a Supplier /
Prime Contractor.

3.1 None of the grounds set out in The Public Contracts Regulations 2006 Regulation 23 apply

7.1 Negative answer to the questions: have any contracts been terminated for poor
performance or has a court awarded any damages against the Respondent in the last five
years?

9.2 Ability to supply the details to DFID to enable security clearance of staff

13.3 Negative response to the question: In the last 3 years, has any finding of unlawful
discrimination in the employment field been made against your organisation by any court
or tribunal or in comparable proceedings in any other jurisdiction?

13.4 13.4 Negative response to the question: In the last 3 years, has your organisation
been or is in the process of being, the subject of formal investigation by the
Equality and Human Rights Commission on the grounds of alleged unlawful
discrimination in the employment field?

If a Respondent fails one of the categories noted above, the Response will be eliminated unless the
relevance and proportionality of the reason for failure is deemed by the Evaluation Panel to be
insignificant.

Page 10 of 24
Stage 2 Evaluation

This will be qualitative for the technical sections and both quantitative and qualitative for the financial
section. Weightings will be applied to each section as summarised in the table below, with 1 being the
least and 6 being the highest importance with a scoring mechanism of 0-6 being applied to each
response to the question, with 0 being the lowest and 6 being the maximum score per question. A
maximum weighted score of 336 is therefore possible to be achieved and only Respondents who achieve
a pass score of 236 will be invited to tender or a maximum of 5 suppliers with the highest score above the
required pass mark.

Section Weighting

1. Organisation Identity 1

2. Organisation Information 2

3. Compliance with EU Legislation 2

4. Financial 12

5. Insurance 3

6. Relevant experience and references 5

7. Disputes 2

8. Areas of Business 2

9. Business Capability 4

10. Professional Organisations 1

11. Quality Assurance/ Health & Safety 2

12. Information Security 3

13. Equal Opportunities 3

14. Environmental Management 2

15. Programme Specific Questions

12 Comment [a1]: GHARI had only 4 for
this. Is 6 OK?

11 Confidentiality and Publication of Information

Any information provided by DFID within this PQQ document set, or in subsequent answers to
clarification questions from Respondents, is made available on condition that it is treated as confidential
(except where it is already in the public domain). Respondents must not disclose any information
supplied as part of this procurement process to any third party, member of staff or advisor, unless such
person needs to receive the relevant information for the purposes of enabling a response to any
procurement document.

Respondents who are selected to tender will be asked to sign and return the form of Confidentiality
Agreement and DFID terms and Conditions of Service which are attached at Section 15 and 16
respectively, before they receive the ITT.

Page 11 of 24
12 Freedom of Information and Environmental Information Regulations

The Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) and the Environmental Information Regulations 2004 (EIRs)
provide statutory rights of access to information held by or on behalf of public authorities under certain
circumstances. DFID is obliged to meet its responsibilities under FOIA and under the EIRs. As a
consequence, any reports that DFID generates during the procurement process may be disclosed in
response to requests made under FOIA or under the EIRs.

If a Respondent considers that any of the information included in its Response to the PQQ is
commercially sensitive, the Respondent should identify it and detail: (i) (in broad terms) what harm may
result from disclosure if a request is received; and (ii) the time period applicable to that commercial
sensitivity. However, it should be noted that even where a Respondent has indicated that information is
commercially sensitive, DFID may still be required to disclose it under FOIA. Also, DFID shall not be
deemed to have accepted any duty of confidence by virtue of receipt of any material marked 'confidential'
or equivalent.

By submitting a PQQ for your organisation you agree to this information being securely held by DFID in
an electronic format and to DFIDs obligations under the above regulations.

13 Publicity

Respondents should not disclose or make available to the press, or in any other way make public, any
information in respect of this PQQ without the express written permission of DFID.

14 Reliance on Information

The information in this document and any other information provided by DFID is provided in good faith.
However, DFID (including its directors, officers, employees, agents or advisers) does not give any
warranty as to the accuracy or completeness of any information supplied.

15 Costs of the Procurement

Respondents will remain responsible for all costs and expenses incurred by them, their staff, and their
advisors or by any third party acting under their instructions in connection with this PQQ. This will be
regardless of whether such costs arise as a result of any direct or indirect amendments made to this PQQ
by DFID at any time. For the avoidance of doubt, DFID shall have no liability whatsoever to Respondents
for the costs of any amendments, changes, discussions or communications.

16 Collusion and Canvassing

Any attempt by an organisation, its staff, advisors or agents to influence the pre- qualification process will
result in its response being disqualified.

Direct or indirect canvassing by the organisation, its staff, advisors or agents in relation to this PQQ, or
any attempt to obtain information, on another Respondent or another PQQ submission, from DFID, its
officers, employees or their appointed advisors will result in disqualification.

17 Change of Control or Information Provided in the PQQ

Where a change in the structure, control, composition or membership of an organisation takes place at
any time prior to execution of the Contract, DFID must be informed of the change in writing and DFID
reserves the right to re-evaluate the relevant Respondent’s PQQ submission.

Page 12 of 24
18. Pre-Qualification Questionnaire

Application Questionnaire

The questionnaire is designed to enable DFID to verify the suitability of the Respondent to carry out the
Civil Society Governance Fund. Part A requires the Respondent to complete a series of questions
concerning its organisation and Part B lists the documentation which Respondents are required to
submit together with the completed questionnaire.

This questionnaire will form the basis of a decision as to which suppliers to short-list to invite for tender
for the Contract. However, DFID reserves the right to request further information and/or to visit the
Respondent’s premises.

Respondents MUST provide ALL of the information requested below by the above date. Failure to
address any area may result in exclusion from the tender list.

PART A - GENERAL INFORMATION

1. ORGANISATION IDENTITY

1.1 Name of the organisation (Prime or Single

Contractor) in whose name the tender would be
submitted:
1.2 Lead contact name and job title:
1.3 Address:

Post Code :
1.4 Telephone number:
1.5 E-mail address:
1.6 Company Registration number:
1.7 Date of Registration:
1.8 Registered address if different from the above:

Post Code :
1.9 VAT Registration number:
1.10 Website address (if any):
1.11 Please advise the details of the Executive Directors/ Partners of your organisation:
Name

1.12 Please provide a pen portrait with details and experience of the senior management personnel who
will be responsible for implementation and management of any awarded contract. Please limit your
response to no more that 1 x A4 page using a minimum of arial size 10 point font.

Page 13 of 24
2. ORGANISATION INFORMATION

2.1 Is your organisation: i) a public limited company? iii) a sole trader?

ii) a limited company? iv) a partnership?

v) a statutory corporation vi) a consortium

2.2 Where applicable, please provided a copy of your organisation’s Certificate of Incorporation or
similar.

2.3 Is your company a subsidiary of another company?

If yes, please advise the name and address of the holding or parent company:

And the ultimate parent company (if applicable) including details of the Parent Company’s percentage
holding.

2.4 Please provide a one-page chart illustrating the ownership structure of the Respondent including
relations to any parent or other group or holding companies.etc and include as an attachment.

2.5 Please provide details of any significant corporate changes (e.g. changes in ownership, etc) or
impending/future changes since the last financial year end.

2.6 Is your organisation:

a) Bidding to provide the services required entirely on its own? YES/NO
b) Bidding in the role of Prime Contractor and intends to use third parties to provide some YES/NO
services?
c) Bidding in the role of a consortium? YES/NO
2.7 If your answer to 2.6 is (b) please identify intended subcontractors / partners for the bid below:
Organisation name Organisation address and contact details Service provision responsibility

2.8 a) Have any of the Respondent’s directors, partners, etc been disqualified from acting
as directors of any company, under the provisions of the Company Directors Disqualification YES/NO
Act, 1986, or equivalent host country legislation, in the last five years?

2.8 b) If the answer to question 2.8 a) above is yes, please provide below a brief explanation of the
details of the relevant disqualifications.

2.9 Please give a brief outline on your policy regarding the use of sub-contractors and, if applicable, the
extent to which you might envisage using them for this requirement. In particular, please indicate the
nature of the relationship which you intend to create with the those third parties (including details of any
previous collaboration with each) and the extent to which the relationships would be defined and
governed in contracts or other forms of documentation e.g. collateral warranties.

Page 14 of 24
 2.10 Do you acknowledge that any anticompetitive behaviour, collusion, or any attempt to
distort the market in any way, could preclude your organisation from being a Supplier / YES/NO
Prime Contractor?

If NO, please give details and outcome (continue on a separate sheet if necessary)

2.11 Is your organisation an existing supplier to DFID?

If YES, please provide your Supplier ID number below: YES/NO

2.12 Are there any conflicts of interest between

YES/NO
the Respondent and DFID or any Advisor to DFID?
YES/NO
any advisors appointed by the Respondent and those appointed by DFID

If the answer to 2.12 is YES, please provide details.

3. COMPLIANCE WITH EU LEGISLATION/UK PROCUREMENT LEGISLATION

3.1 Do any of the circumstances as set out in Regulation 23 Public Contracts

Regulations 2006 (from the EU) apply to your company? YES/NO

If YES, please supply details:

DFID may seek evidence at a later date, in confirmation of your answer.

(A summary of the circumstances of Regulation 23 is provided at the end of this questionnaire, Please
see Appendix 1)

4. FINANCIAL (APPLICANT) and (Parent Company if applicable)

4.1 The following financial information is required to be provided.

(a) A copy of the most recent audited accounts for your organisation that cover the last two years of
trading or for the period that is available if trading for less than three years. As required by the
Companies act, the latest of these accounts should be those that were filed a maximum of 10 months
ago. This should include a statement of the organisation’s turnover, profit & loss and cash flow position
for the most recent full year of trading (or part year if full year not applicable) and an end period balance
sheet.

(b) A statement of the organisation’s cash flow forecast for the current year and a bank letter outlining
the current cash and credit facility position.

(c) If the organisation is a subsidiary of a group, (a) and (b) are required for both the subsidiary and the
ultimate parent.

(d) A Parent company and/or a Performance Bond YES/NO

may be required if considered appropriate. Is your
organisation willing to arrange for a suitable
guarantee and/or a performance bond if
appropriate?

Page 15 of 24
 (e) Please provide the name and address of your banker for the
purposes of DFID obtaining a bank reference. (NB. DFID
reserves the right to contact your bank for a reference. Your
permission to do so will be assumed unless you explicitly state
any objections).

4.2 Please give details of any event between the date on which the latest set of accounts was authorised
for issue and the date of the submission of this PQQ that, had the accounts not been authorised for issue
until the submission date, would have required an adjustment or disclosure in accordance with the
provisions of International Accounting Standard 10.

4.3 Please give details of any significant pending developments, changes in financial structure or
ownership, prospective take-overs bids or buy outs which are currently in the public domain; copies of
any company announcements made to the authorities of the stock exchange, market or bourse on which
the stocks or shares of the company are publicly traded, since the date of publication of the latest set of
accounts.

5. INSURANCE

5.1 Please provide details of your organisation’s insurance protection.

Type Insurer Policy Number Indemnity Value (£)
Employers Liability
Public Liability
Professional Indemnity
Other (please specify)
5. 2 Please provide details of any proposed subcontractor’s insurance protection.
Subcontractor
Type Insurer Policy Number Indemnity Value (£)
Employers Liability
Public Liability
Professional Indemnity
Other (please specify)

6. RELEVANT EXPERIENCE AND REFERENCES

6.1 Please provide details of three major contracts you have been awarded for the provision of services
similar to those required by DFID during the last 3 years. In particular those awarded by central
government departments, agencies, local authorities, health authorities NHS trusts or Global Aid
Agencies. A4 continuation sheets may be appended where required.

Page 16 of 24
 Customer name, Contact name and Date contract Service description Names of
address and e-mail Telephone number awarded, and size of subcontractors
contract period organisation and/ or
and value of consortium
contract members and
their role

NB. DFID may elect to contact any of the given companies for a reference. Your permission to do so will
be assumed unless you explicitly state any objections.

DFID reserves the right to take into account its own experience of any Respondent.

6.2 Please provide details of your organisation’s performance with existing and recent clients, in
similar service provision environments, as follows:

a) Client testimonials that we may substantiate.

b) Details of recent performance scores in accordance with your existing contractual performance
mechanisms.
c) Details of any performance issues and how these were addressed satisfactorily by your
organisation and the client’s organisation.
d) Details of any outstanding performance issues.

6.3 By reference to one or more specific project(s), on no more than one side of A4 paper using a
minimum of arial size 10 point font, describe the methods you have employed to improve or to facilitate
the improvement of service performance including how you have involved the client and stakeholders.

7. DISPUTES

7.1 Have you had any contracts which have been Yes/No
terminated for poor performance or has a court has
awarded any damages against the Respondent
within the last 5 years?
If Yes, please provide details below:
Customer name Contract reference and Date of Reason for claim/ contract termination
and address brief description of services claim/
provided contract
termination

7.2 Has your organisation been involved in any court action and/ or significant disputes (including
employment tribunals) over the last 3 years?

If yes, please supply details:

Page 17 of 24
 7.3 Are there any court actions and / or significant disputes (including employment tribunals) pending
against your organisation?

If yes, please supply details:

8. AREAS OF BUSINESS

8.1 Please indicate below the principal areas of business activity of your company:

9. BUSINESS CAPABILITY

9.1 Please advise the number of staff currently involved in the provision of services similar to those
required by DFID:

Year The average numbers of staff who The number of Turnover (%)
undertake similar work managerial staff in
post
Permanent staff numbers:

2007: Third party staff numbers

2008: Permanent staff numbers:

Third party staff numbers
Permanent staff numbers:

2009: Third party staff numbers

9.2 All staff must be security cleared by DFID. Are you willing to supply details
to DFID to enable certification to take place?

9.3 Is there a code of discipline and behaviour for employees?

If Yes please supply a copy.

10. PROFESSIONAL ORGANISATIONS

10.1 Please indicate which professional or trade bodies your organisation belongs to.

Page 18 of 24
 10.2. Is your organisation notified under the Data Protection Act 1998 (or equivalent national
legislation)? If so, what is your DPA notification number:

11. QUALITY ASSURANCE/ HEALTH & SAFETY

11.1 Does your organisation hold any quality assurance accreditations such as
BS EN ISO9001 or equivalent standard? YES/NO

If YES, please enclose a copy of the relevant accreditation certificate

11.2 Please provide details of any quality assurance certification for which you have applied.

11.3 If your organisation does not hold a recognised quality assurance certification,
does your organisation have a quality management system in place? YES/NO

If YES, please provide details

11.4 Does your organisation have a written health and safety at work policy?
YES/NO
If YES, please provide a copy

11.5 Does your organisation have a health and safety at work system* ? YES/NO

11.6 If ‘YES’ please provide details and if ‘NO’ to either 11.4 or 11.5 please explain why :

11.7 Has your organisation been issued with any enforcement or prohibition notices
by H&S Exec in the last 3 years? YES/NO

If answered ‘YES’, please provide details

Notes:
“System” means processes and procedures to ensure that the subject is properly managed. This includes making sure
that legal requirements are met.

12. INFORMATION SECURITY

12.1 Please provide details of security measures to ensure the safe keeping of any paper or
computerised information provided by DFID, both in storage and in transit, in accordance with current
government guidelines

12.2 Please submit a statement of security principles and procedures for your staff.

13. EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES/EQUALITY AND DIVERSITY

13.1 Is it your policy as an employer to comply with the 2010 Equality Act in relation
to decisions to recruit, train, promote employees and foster good relations
across the strands below:

Age YES/NO

Page 19 of 24
 Disability YES/NO
Gender YES/NO
Gender reassignment YES/NO
Race YES/NO
Religion or belief YES/NO
Sexual orientation YES/NO

If yes, please provide your companies policies.

I
YES/NO
13.2 Does your organisation have an equality and diversity policy?
YES/NO
If yes, please provide your policy document.

13.3 In the last 3 years, has any finding of unlawful discrimination in the
employment field been made against your organisation by any court or YES/NO
tribunal or in comparable proceedings in any other jurisdiction?

13.5 In the last 3 years, has your organisation been or is in the process of being,
the subject of formal investigation by the Equality and Human Rights YES/NO
Commission on the grounds of alleged unlawful discrimination in the
employment field?

13.6 If the answer to question 13.3 or 13.4 is Yes, what steps have you taken as a result of that
finding or investigation?

14. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT

14.1 Does your organisation hold any Environmental Management accreditations

such as BS EN ISO14001? YES/NO

If YES, please provide copy certificates.

14.2 Please provide details of any environmental management certification for which you have
applied?

14.3 Does your organisation have an Environmental Management System?*

YES/NO
If YES, Please supply details

14.4 Please provide a copy of your companies Environmental policy

*System means processes and procedures to ensure that the subject is properly managed. This includes
making sure that legal requirements are met.

Page 20 of 24
15 CIVIL SOCIETY GOVERNANCE FUND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS

NB - Please attach answers to these questions as a separate attachment

15.1 What experience do you have of working with civil society organisations to support them to achieve
governance objectives and help successfully develop their organisational capacity?
15.2. What is your track record of successful work in Malawi, or comparable contexts, and of involving
local suppliers and building partnerships with local organisations?

15.3 What is your track record of working effectively with donor programmes, managing pooled and
multi-donor funding and demonstrating the capacity to manage scaled-up levels of funding in a flexible
way?

15.4 What is your track record of identifying strategic interventions and building or facilitating coalitions
of actors (including civil society) to work together to successfully achieve common objectives?

Page 21 of 24
PART B-ENCLOSURES

Please check that you have enclosed the following supporting documents with your completed
questionnaire:
SECTION QUESTION DOCUMENT ENCLOSED
1 1.12 Pen Portraits of senior management YES / NO
personnel
2 2.2 Certificate of Incorporation YES / NO
2 2.4 Ownership Structure chart YES / NO
4 4.1(a) Copy of most recent audited accounts to YES / NO
cover last two years of trading
4 4.1(b) Statement of the organisation’s cash flow YES / NO
forecast for the current year and a bank letter
outlining the current cash and credit facility
position
4 4.3 Copies of any companies announcements YES / NO
6 6.1 Continuation of description of three major YES / NO
contracts
6 6.2 Performance details YES / NO
6 6.3 Service Improvement details YES / NO
11 11.1 Quality Assurance certification YES / NO
11 11.3 Details of Health and Safety at work systems YES / NO
11 11.4 Health and Safety at work policy YES / NO
12 12.1 & 12.2 Details of security measures, principles and YES / NO
procedures
13 13.1 Equality Policies on Age, Disability, Gender, YES / NO
Gender Reassignment, Race, Religion or
Belief, Sexual Orientation
13 13.2 Equality and Diversity Policy YES / NO
14 14.1 Environmental Management Accreditations YES / NO
14 14.3 Details of Environmental Management YES / NO
System
14 14.4 Environmental Policy YES / NO
15 All Programme Specific Questions YES / NO

Page 22 of 24
Form completed by:

Name: …… ………………… Tel No: ………………………………

Signature: …………………..……………………… Date: …………………………………

Position: …… ……………….…… E-mail: ………………………………

Thank you for completing this questionnaire. The information it contains will be held in confidence by
DFID and used for the purpose of determining your suitability for meeting our general requirements for
the provision of the Services. Further assessment may be required before any indication can be given on
the success of your tender.

COMMENTS

Page 23 of 24
 APPENDIX 1

DISCLAIMER

SUMMARY OF INELIGIBILITY CONDITIONS PROVIDED BY REGULATION 23 OF THE PUBLIC

CONTRACTS REGULATIONS 2006

Regulation 23 sets out the grounds on which a service provider may be deemed ineligible to tender for, or
be awarded a public contract. A summary is provided below. However, Respondents should obtain their
own legal advice on this area. The Regulations are available at
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2006/20060005.htm

Rejection is permissible when a service provider:

- guilty of conspiracy, corruption, bribery, fraud or money laundering. Rejection is also permissible where
any of the directors or other significant decision makers are guilty of any of these offences;

- is in a state of bankruptcy, insolvency, compulsory winding up, administration, receivership, composition

with creditors or any analogous state, or subject to relevant proceedings;

- has been convicted of a criminal offence related to business or professional conduct;

- has committed an act of grave misconduct in the course of business;

- has not fulfilled obligations relating to payment of social security contributions;

- has not fulfilled obligations relating to payment of taxes;

- is guilty of serious misrepresentation in supplying information required by DFID under the Regulations;

- is not in possession of a relevant license or is not a member of the appropriate organisation where the
law of that State requires it) or is not registered on the relevant professional or trade register of the
relevant State in which established.

Page 24 of 24