REQUEST FOR PROPOSALDATED: 09 JULY 2020

GAVI DATA SFA SPECIAL INVESTMENTS LOOKBACK

032-2020-GAVI-RFP

TABLE OF CONTENTS1. PURPOSE.........................................................................................................42. RFP INSTRUCTIONS.......................................................................................42.1. RFP Rules.........................................................................................................42.2. Time Plan..........................................................................................................5

Request For Proposal032-2020-GAVI-RFP

2.3. RFP Process and Contact Information..............................................................52.3.1. Instructions to Service Providers.......................................................................52.3.2. Confirmation of Intent / Confidentiality...............................................................52.4. Required Proposal Format & Proposal Content................................................62.5. Conflict of interest..............................................................................................63. GAVI OVERVIEW.............................................................................................63.1. Our Mission.......................................................................................................64. BACKGROUND OF DATA SFA AND CONTEXT FOR THIS LOOKBACK.......74.1. Purpose of Data SFA........................................................................................74.2. Design of Data SFA and Special Investments (Data SFA SI)...........................84.2.1. Theory of Change and results framework.........................................................94.2.2. What were the primary areas of focus for the Data SFA to achieve its objectives 104.2.3. How much money?..........................................................................................104.2.4. Who were the key players and stakeholders?.................................................114.3. Implementation of Data SFA-SI and role of key stakeholders.........................114.3.1. Key teams within the Gavi Secretariat.............................................................114.3.2. Alliance partners..............................................................................................124.3.3. Alliance expanded partners.............................................................................124.3.4. Alliance governing bodies................................................................................124.4. Key contextual issues from Gavi 4.0 Data SFA-SI..........................................135. OBJECTIVES AND SCOPE OF THE EVALUATION......................................145.1. Scope..............................................................................................................145.2. Objectives........................................................................................................156. LOOKBACK QUESTIONS...............................................................................156.1. Data SFA design and management................................................................166.1.1. Investment Approach......................................................................................166.1.2. Management and implementation...................................................................166.2. Effectiveness of Data SFA design and investments in achieving intended results 176.2.1. Effectiveness of Data SFA design and management......................................176.2.2. Effectiveness of data investments under Special Investments under Data SFA186.3. Implications for future approach of data investments in Gavi 5.0....................187. METHODOLOGY............................................................................................187.1. Data collection.................................................................................................197.2. Assumptions....................................................................................................207.3. Stakeholder Engagement................................................................................208. DELIVERABLES & TIMELINES......................................................................219. EVALUATION CRITERIA................................................................................219.1. Evaluation Criteria...........................................................................................21

10. PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS.......................................................................2210.1. Requirements for Technical Proposal.............................................................2210.2. Requirements for Financial Proposal..............................................................2210.3. Provider Information........................................................................................2311. MANAGEMENT AND OVERSIGHT................................................................2312. ANNEXES.......................................................................................................2312.1. Annex 1: Written Intent to Participate.............................................................2312.2. Annex 2: Q&A Form........................................................................................2312.3. Annex 3: Financial Proposal Template...........................................................2312.4. Annex 4: Workplan Template..........................................................................23

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL

1. PURPOSE Gavi Alliance (“Gavi”) is commissioning this independent, external review with the objective to generate key learnings from the implementation of Special Investments (“SI”) under Data Strategic Focus Area (“SFA”) in current strategic period of 2015-2020 (“Gavi 4.0”) that can inform a data related investment approach in next strategic period of 2021-2025 (“Gavi 5.0”).

The findings and recommendations from this retrospective review (“Lookback”) are intended to inform the decisions related to improving the way in which Gavi undertakes and manages strategic investments aimed at improving availability and use of fit for purpose data at the country and global level. Key target audiences for this Lookback includes the Gavi Alliance Coordination Team (ACT) and the Gavi Secretariat.Gavi Data SFA Special Investments Lookback

2. RFP INSTRUCTIONS2.1.RFP Rules

Gavi invites you as a Service Provider to submit a competitive bid by responding to this Request for Proposal (“RFP”) for the Lookback of Gavi’s Data SFA Special Investments (“Data SFA SI”), (032-2020-GAVI-RFP). Please follow these instructions in completing your bid.

i. This entire RFP and all related discussions, meetings, exchanges of information, and subsequent negotiations that may occur are confidential and are subject to the confidentiality terms and conditions of the Intent to Participate letter attached as Annex 1. All bidders are required to complete and return the Intent to Participate letter.

ii. The issuance of this RFP in no way commits Gavi to make an award. Gavi is under no obligation to justify the reasons for its supplier(s) choices as a result of this RFP. Gavi may choose not to justify its business rewarding decision to the participants to this tender.

iii. Gavi reserves the right to:- reject any proposal without obligation or liability to the potential Service Provider;- withdraw this RFP at any time before or after submission of bids, without prior

notice, explanation or reason;- modify the evaluation procedure described in this RFP;- accept other than the lowest price offer;- award a contract on the basis of initial offers received, without discussions or

requests for best and final offers;- decide not to award any contract to any Service Provider responding to this RFP,- award its total requirements to one Service Provider or apportion those

requirements among two or more Service Providers as Gavi may deem necessary.

iv. All bids must indicate that they are valid for no less than sixty (60) days from the quotation due date.

v. Faxed copies will not be accepted. Late quotations are subject to rejection.

vi. Gavi reserves the right to request additional data, information, discussions or presentations to support part of, or your entire bid proposal. Service Providers or their

032-2020-GAVI-RFP 4/24

representatives must be available to discuss the details of their proposal during the evaluation process.

vii. All responses should be submitted in electronic version.

viii. The proposed time plan set out below indicates the process Gavi intends to follow. If there are any changes to this time plan, Gavi will notify you in writing.

ix. If the applicant is a US Citizen or resident (Green Card holder) or a non-US person living or working in the US, they should be aware of OFAC regulations.

2.2.Time PlanEvent Responsible Party Time Line Launch RFP Gavi 9 July 2020Send Intent to Participate letter Service Provider 16 July 2020Q&A sent to Gavi Service Provider 16 July 2020Conflict of Interest sent to Gavi Service Provider 16 July 2020Gavi response to Q&A Gavi 21 July 2020Proposals received by Gavi Service Provider 31 July 2020Service Provider Selection Gavi & Service Provider 10 August 2020Contract issued – Project start Gavi & Service Provider 20 August 2020

2.3.RFP Process and Contact Information

2.3.1. Instructions to Service ProvidersAny Service Provider may request further clarification on matters pertaining to this RFP by submitting its question(s) in writing to the individual identified below. Due date for Q&A submission is stated in Section 2, para 2.2 Time Plan. In order to keep the RFP competition fair, questions on the substance of the RFP will only be answered in a public document released as stated in Section 2, para 2.2 Time Plan. Please do not contact other Gavi staff to discuss the RFP. To address your questions, please use the form attached as Annex 2.

2.3.2. Confirmation of Intent / ConfidentialityPlease transmit your intent to participate using and signing the document in Annex 1. This RFP contains information that is confidential and proprietary as stated by the “Intent to Participate” document. Each Service Provider is required to transmit a written confirmation of intent or decline as stated in Section 2, para 2.2 Time Plan. Confirmations of intent should be submitted by email to the below mentioned contacts.

Acceptable means of transmission include computer file with digital signature.

Gavi Alliance RFP Contact Information

Contact Person Contact Role/Title Contact Information

Manfred Wattinger Senior Manager, Procurement Email: procurement@gavi.org

2.4.Required Proposal Format & Proposal ContentResponses to this RFP must consist of the following:

1. Cover letter, which includes:

032-2020-GAVI-RFP 5/24

Name and address of the Service Provider Name, title, telephone number, and e-mail address of the person authorized to

commit the Service Provider to a contract Name, title, telephone number, and e-mail address of the person to be contacted

regarding the content of the proposal, if different from above A signature of this letter done by a duly authorized representative of your

company

2. Electronic copy Documents and spreadsheets in Office 2010 format. Diagrams and drawings in Visio 2010 or PowerPoint Office 2010 format.

Please do not submit generic marketing materials, broadly descriptive attachments, or other general literature.

2.5.C Conflict of interest and Vendor AssessmentNo members of the team may have been involved in the design, implementation, supervision or coordination of any intervention to be assessed. Please complete, sign and send the conflict of interest form in Annex 5, as stated in Section 2, para 2.2 Time Plan.

3. GAVI OVERVIEW3.1.Our Mission

To save children’s lives and protect people’s health by increasing access to immunisation in developing countries.

The Gavi Alliance is a unique organisation that aligns public and private resources in a global effort to create greater access to the benefits of immunisation. It does this with precision and in creative, innovative ways to ensure that donor contributions efficiently save lives and help build self-sufficiency in the world’s poorest communities and regions. It brings together all the main actors in immunisation including developing country and donor governments, the World Health Organization, UNICEF, the World Bank, the vaccine industry in both industrial and developing countries, research and technical agencies, civil society organisations, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and other private philanthropists.

For more information please visit the Gavi website https://www.gavi.org/our-alliance/about

4. BACKGROUND OF DATA SFA AND CONTEXT FOR THIS LOOKBACKGavi will be entering its 5th five-year strategic period starting 2021, referred to as Gavi 5.0. As a learning organisation, it is taking all the lessons learnt in the past strategic periods and applying these learnings to our improvement plans for Gavi 5.0. Gavi will look back to see what has worked and what improvements can be made in its modalities, mechanisms and investment priorities.

One such area of strategic importance are Gavi’s investments in ensuring strong data systems in the beneficiary countries in service of immunization service delivery. The strength of data systems and resulting data quality in countries has also been identified by Gavi as a risk to effectively delivering on the Gavi strategy. In the last strategic period, a mechanism used by Gavi called the Data Strategic Focus Area acted as a means to make special investments (SI) in data and data systems to mitigate this risk and enhance our ability to deliver on the Gavi strategy. This look back will focus on the Strategic Investments (SI)

032-2020-GAVI-RFP 6/24

In November 2019, the Gavi risk committee agreed that an internal review of what works, and what need to be done differently in Gavi 5.0, would be helpful . This section provides the background of the Data SFA, particularly the Special Investments (SI), and articulate the learning questions we seek to answer and make clear how these answers will be applied to Gavi 5.0.

4.1. Purpose of Data SFA

4.1.1. When was it started? What were the key objectives?Gavi has been supporting investments in activities meant to improve immunisation data at the country as well as global level since its inception. However, the funding for such activities have been largely fragmented

across various types of support and have lacked a strategic framework to systematically address data related challenges. However, this changed in Gavi 4.0. In late 2015, as part of the approach to operationalizing the Gavi 4.0 strategy in the 2016-2020 period, the PPC endorsed, and the Gavi Board approved1, the Data Strategic Focus Area (SFA).

The overarching goal of the Data SFA as presented in the schematic below (Figure 1) was to improve country immunization programme performance through strengthening the availability, fit for purpose, and use of data and to mitigate the risk to the Alliance of countries’ deficient data systems and ensure country data systems were strong enough to fulfil the Gavi 4.0 strategy.

4.1.2. How was it contributing to the overall 4.0 strategy?The Data SFA was a response to the Board defined recognition that the availability, quality, and use of data was critical to the Alliance’s 2016-2020 Gavi 4.0 strategy, and that deficiencies at the country level in these areas put the strategy at significant risk. The Data SFA created a financial and partnership mechanism to respond to these risks and opportunities in a concentrated way, looking across investments in data to improve overall quality of those investments. It was also a key mechanism created for Alliance partner2 coordination as the funds we’re programmed through a consultative process comprising of the Secretariat and Alliance partners. Furthermore, a majority of the funds were to be allocated to Alliance partners.

4.2.Design of Data SFA and Special Investments (Data SFA SI)The fundamental design principle of Data SFA was to align and leverage complementary funding mechanisms such that targeted and innovative data approaches could be developed and

1 PPC and Board Papers from 2016 2 Note that Gavi “Alliance partners” include WHO, UNICEF, CDC, BMGF, and the World Bank. BMGF does not receive any funding through the Data SFA. Gavi “Expanded partners” are other implementing agencies and organizations. Section 2.3 elaborates on the role of these organizations.

032-2020-GAVI-RFP 7/24

Figure 1: Broad objective of Data SFA

subsequently scaled up. The framework presented in Figure 2 represents the intended complementarity of funding mechanisms. The figure shows that Data SFA uses both Partner’s Engagement Framework (PEF) and direct financial support to countries as a means to develop, test and scale up innovative approaches.

Figure 2: Data SFA design (leveraging complementary funding mechanisms)

Partner’s Engagement F ramework (PEF) was launched in 2016 as part of the Gavi 4.0 strategy. PEF is organized into three primary funding streams:

- Targeted Country Assistance (TCA)- Foundational Support (FS), and;- Special Investments (SI) in strategic focus areas (Data, Supply Chain, Sustainability,

Demand, Political Will, and Leadership, Management, and Coordination).

It is important to note here that, as explained in the figure above, the Special Investments (SI) funding stream within the Data SFA is used for developing, testing and preparing innovative data approaches at global and regional level. At the country level, the Direct Financial Support in the form of Health System and Immunisation System Strengthening (HSIS) and Targeted Country Assistance (TCA) through the partners is leveraged to implement and scale innovative data approaches coming out from Special Investments. This funding system is a very important part of Gavi financial support to building and maintaining a modern data infrastructure.

Since HSIS and TCA are separate funding mechanisms in their own right, this review will only focus on Data SFA-SI and this will be further expanded in the section describing scope of this review.

4.2.1. Theory of Change and results frameworkTo optimize the funding and guide the investments in the Data SFA portfolio, a Theory of Change (TOC) and associate results framework were developed through a joint effort of Gavi secretariat based M&E team and the Alliance Partners. It was developed in a consultative process and operationalized in 2017. The TOC underpinned the overall objectives of improving data availability, fit for purpose and its use. This was intended to be achieved through establishment of minimum set of fundamentals and ensuring they are in place at the country level. The figure below (Figure 3) depicts the success pathway and associated data fundamentals.

032-2020-GAVI-RFP 8/24

Figure 3: Data Fundamentals and Theory of Change

In accordance with the data process pathway and data fundamentals, a two tired results framework was developed to measure progress as depicted in Figure 4 below:

Figure 4: Two-tiered results framework for Data SFA TOC

It is important to note that the process to develop a results framework was an iterative one with the Alliance partners and was completed only in 2018. Hence, the indicators were collected only from 2017 onwards.

032-2020-GAVI-RFP 9/24

4.2.2. What were the primary areas of focus for the Data SFA to achieve its objectives

After analysis conducted by the Boston Consulting Group (BCG), and then approved by the Gavi board, it was determined that three areas of investment were to be focused upon in the Data SFA during the funding period 2016-2020. These include:

Immunisation Delivery, Coverage and Equity (DCE). Improving immunization delivery, coverage, and equity through investments in i) strengthening the availability, quality, and use of immunization coverage data; ii) strengthening health workforce capacity and motivation to collect, analyse and use data; and iii) generating evidence, learning, and accountability.

VPD Surveillance. Improving VPD Surveillance through investments to produce high-quality a timely data to address critical questions across the vaccine portfolio, and to optimise programmes, through investments in i) strengthening country surveillance systems; ii) developing regional networks of sites with capacity to answer critical questions.

Vaccine Safety. Improving vaccine safety surveillance and response by investing in i) defining minimum standards and creating incentives and support to prioritised countries ii) developing enhanced pharmacovigilance capacity in selected countries through regional networks with strengthened technical capabilities, and iii) supporting response and communication strategies to ensure safe and sustainable immunization programmes.

4.2.3. How much money?Over the full strategy period from 2016-2020, ~$97M has been allocated from the Data SFA SI at roughly $20M/year. This budget amount was allocated based on a 2015 Boston Consulting Group analysis of the resources allocated through HSS funds to data from 2011-2015 combined with the Board approved Data SFA goals, and forecasts of the resources required to achieve those goals. These investments are independent of the incremental investments in data through other parts of the PEF including FS and TCA.3

4.2.4. Who were the key players and stakeholders?The primary recipients of Data SFA funding over the strategy period, by design, are the Gavi “Alliance partners”.4 This includes the World Health Organization, which accounted for over half of the disbursements, UNICEF who received the second largest disbursement of funds, and was followed by the CDC. The World Bank Group has traditionally received a very small amount. The execution of the Data SFA is aligned with the alignment principles of the Partner Engagement Framework which came into force in 2016 and was designed to enable closer collaboration between Gavi and Alliance partners. The amount of distribution is in line with our Alliance partnerships, which draw the WHO and UNICEF closest due to our operational work in country EPI programmes.

The Alliance partners also play a critical role in the Data SFA, and in addition to being recipients of the funding, also play a significant role is developing the activities for submission and aligning the submission to the Data SFA strategy. For example, in 2019 and 2020 concept notes were developed for each focus area within the Data SFA to lead investments, and these concept notes were produced by a collection of partners from across the Alliance.

We also have partnered through the Data SFA with a number of “expanded partners” including PATH, JSI, and others. We also have steadily increased our investments with the University of

3 Information related to the development of the Data SFA strategy, and budget formation, can be found in the following folder. Strategy Development4.

032-2020-GAVI-RFP 10/24

Oslo which provides Digital Health Information Software 2 (DHIS2) and related services to a number of our Gavi-eligible countries.

4.3. Implementation of Data SFA-SI and role of key stakeholdersAs indicated in the previous section, the Data SFA implementation has been under the PEF process in terms of planning, funding and reporting cycle. The planning process and roles have seen a consistent evolution over the last four years with each annual cycle being used as an opportunity to improve based on experience from the previous year. With the roles, the responsibilities have also evolved over time. It is therefore an area that is needed to be documented as part of this review to understand the evolution of responsibilities of various stakeholders and its impact on the overall implementation and success of Data SFA. The sections below describe some of the broad roles and responsibilities of key stakeholders in Data SFA process.

4.3.1. Key teams within the Gavi SecretariatWithin the Secretariat, the Data SFA is primarily managed by the Gavi Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) team. The M&E team partners internally with PEF team on submissions and financial distribution of funds. The M&E team organizes the partners in a series of meetings over the course of the year leading to a consolidated, annual submission of activities. It is important here to note that the process through which the M&E team manages Data SFA has continuously evolved each year so as to overcome the difficulties experienced in the previous year. This review is sought to document the evolution of this process and churn our learnings.

Then, in partnership and guided by PEF standards, the M&E team coordinates a final submission to the decision-making body, the PEF Management Team (PEF MT), which ultimately approves the consolidated submission. This coordination with PEF team is necessary in the current context as they are responsible for all contracts and financial relationship with all partners with regards to PEF for all SFAs.

After disbursement, activities are monitored by Alliance partners and the Gavi M&E team for completeness, quality, and other investment management functions. While it is expected that the above monitoring process be conducted jointly with the PEF team and Alliance partners, it is often not realistically possible. It will therefore be critical in this review to examine the impact of this on quality of reporting and results.

While M&E and PEF are key teams in implementation of the Data SFA, the other teams which are closely implicated include the Country Support, HSIS, Vaccine Implementation (VIFGO), INFUSE and Executive Office. The review is expected to gather the perspectives from all relevant stakeholders in the review.

4.3.2. Alliance partnersThe Alliance partners are the technical leads for identifying the priority activities in each annual round and are also responsible for implementation of those activities upon approval from PEF MT. Each of the three focus areas DCE, Surveillance and Safety has a working group that has participation from Alliance partner agencies with a nominated lead person who coordinates development of a list of activities for each of those three areas. Gavi secretariat based M&E team convened all partners in a Data Partners Working Group which jointly discussed and agree on a set of pry priority activities for submission to the PEF MT. The identified activities are then reviewed by the PEF MT with inputs from the secretariat-based teams (as mentioned above).

The Alliance partners also play a role in identifying activities that would require support from expanded partners, engaging expanded partners in carrying out those activities and monitor their

032-2020-GAVI-RFP 11/24

implementation. This role however is not always clear and consistent, and this review is expected to examine this aspect to understand how Alliance partners roles can be improved.

The Alliance partners are also responsible for the implementation of activities in the agreed timeline and reporting on the milestones as per the requirement in the PEF process. The process of reporting and feedback to the partners is also an area that requires attention in this review to come up with learnings on how it can be improved.

4.3.3. Alliance expanded partnersThe expanded partners (as defined in the PEF model), are roped in to provide support in implementation of specific activities that cannot be supported by the Alliance partners. The expanded partners are not engaged in the activity prioritisation process. While the expanded partners’ engagement do not follow the same planning cycle as Alliance partners, similar to the Alliance partners, the expanded partners are responsible for ensuring implementation of agreed activities are per the agreed plans and reporting on the milestones. However, the follow up on reporting from expanded partners is less clearly defined. The engagement process of expanded partners has also evolved over the years. While there are some expanded partners who are more closely and frequently engaged in the Data SFA process, there are others who are unable to engage or are minimally engaged. This review is expected to document how the process of engaging expanded partners has evolved overtime, what can be learnt from it and how it can be improved in Gavi 5.0.

4.3.4. Alliance governing bodiesPEF Management Team (PEF MT)The governance of Data SFA-SI follows the same process as the rest of PEF process. PEF MT is the highest decision-making body for PEF and hence the data SFA SI activities also fall in the remit of PEF MT. The PEF MT is therefore also responsible for providing oversight and guidance on all activities funded under PEF. This review is will critically assess the adequacy the oversight mechanism and the improvements needed in the oversight mechanisms through Alliance governance bodies.Alliance Coordination Team (ACT)Alliance Coordination Team (ACT)5 is expected to ensure operational oversight and coordination across the matrix operational structure of the Alliance so as to ensure that country, regional and global-level technical assistance and resources provided through the Alliance meet the disparate needs of national immunisation programmes. The ACT has representation from leadership from Alliance partners and serves as a more frequent, formal touch point to review the performance of Alliance investments in support of national immunisation programmes related to vaccine introduction and uptake, immunisation system strengthening and delivery and programme sustainability. The Issues relevant to Data SFA are brough to the table of ACT by the Data Coordination and Oversight Team which has been set up as management group focusing on Data SFA within the Alliance. Feedback from the ACT is essential to inform PEF Management team decisions related to partner Foundational Support submissions and TCA allocations with reference to trade-offs and priorities

4.4.Key contextual issues from Gavi 4.0 Data SFA-SIIn order to develop a comprehensive analysis for this review, it is critical to understand some of the key contextual issues that existed during Gavi 4.0 Data SFA. Ensuring that these contextual issues are included in the review is critical so as to develop learnings that can meaningfully inform our thinking going forward.

- Alliance’s ability to continuously and effectively monitor progress:

5 The Alliance Coordination Team’s Terms of Reference can be found here.

032-2020-GAVI-RFP 12/24

o The Secretariat has struggled to achieve the right level of specificity, frequency, and systematic progress monitoring mechanisms to achieve both programmatic accountability as well as optimized Alliance learning.

o Data SFA-SI constitutes a large number of activities and it is challenging to deliver on and monitor progress over time and across the different programmatic areas. Secretariat portfolio management systems has continued to be a barrier.

o A large number of activities are occurring across the space of data improvement, but understanding the collective impact of sets of activities has been difficult.

o The time needed for some of the activities to show impact from scale up may not be sufficient in one strategic cycle and hence the timing of measuring outcomes would accordingly be longer

- Partnership model and coordination:o As the partnership model through PEF evolved overtime, there has been a

continued effort to strengthen coordination with and among Alliance partners on key sets of activities.

o There is a continued need to identify ways for improving and understanding the quality and impact of TCA, Foundational Support, and combining this understanding with Special Investments in data-focused portfolio planning.

o The engagement of expanded partners has been limited to working with them on specific projects, and has not involved expanded partners in strategic development or discussions.

o There was no direct representation from the Secretariat’s M&E team on the ACT - Data SFA process and focus

o The annual cycles of funding and reporting are not aligned with the variable timelines of data activities.

o The often-misaligned funding and reporting cycle has limited the partners’ ability to meet the timeline on delivery and reporting of key deliverables.

5. OBJECTIVES AND SCOPE OF THE EVALUATIONIn the five years that comprised Gavi 4.0, significant investments have been made at Global, Regional as well as country level through Data SFA as described in the previous section. As Gavi prepares to enter into its version 5.0 in 2021, it is critical to examine this experience from the last five years to systematically document important lessons to memorialize the efforts and impact, and also to inform our thinking going forward.

In order to do so, based on the directives of the Risk Committee, Gavi has decided to use an external reviewer who could provide independent and expert review process that follows a systematic approach with clearly defined scope and objectives. The Secretariat agrees with the Risk Committee that this independent review will complement our routine annual review processes, and in light of the new strategic period, will contribute significantly to an improved and more robust approach to data investing in Gavi 5.0. This chapter describes the attributes of the planned review. These attributes will form the basis of an RFP through which the most suitable external reviewer will be identified

M&E conducts annual review to map all activities that represents activities in investments in activities in data. This mapping provides a broad overview of the overall investments in 7 predefined categories. This mapping will be made available to successful bidder.

032-2020-GAVI-RFP 13/24

5.1. ScopeAs indicated in the previous section this review is expected to focus on the special investments (SI) through Data SFA. The figure below highlights (part inside the red box) the Special Investment (SI) part of Data SFA that is expected to be in the scope of this review.

Figure 5: Scope of Data SFA to be reviewed

The Risk Committee noted that several sources are available to assess how/if efforts to improve data are working including, but not limited to, the Data SFA results framework, evaluations of specific data initiatives and audits. They agreed that an external review would be helpful to make the case adjusting tactics and funding in Gavi 5.0.To provide recommendations for the role(s) the Gavi Secretariat could play in the future, vis-à-vis other global and/or regional initiatives, to support CSOs to improve immunisation systems and outcomes

5.2. ObjectivesThe overall goal of the look back is:

To generate key learnings from Gavi 4.0 Data SFA, and particularly the Data SFA-SI, that can inform a data strategy in Gavi 5.0.

The following objectives have been set to achieve the above goal:

1. In relation to the design of the data SFA, review:• Investment approach to:

assess the strengths and weaknesses of data SFA theory of change and results framework (it is to be noted here that while the TOC and Results Framework cover the entirety of the Data SFA and not just the SI part, the investment decisions in SI are expected to be based on the overall TOC and hence it is necessary to consider this while undertaking this review)

assess the strengths and weaknesses of the thematic structure adopted for data SFA strategic investment (SI) priorities with respect to achievement of theory of change, alignment with overall Gavi 4.0 strategic framework and complementarity with other SFA areas

• Management and partnership model to:

032-2020-GAVI-RFP 14/24

assess the strengths and weaknesses of data SFA management processes with respect to partner coordination, setting investment priorities, size of funding, fund allocation process and accountability mechanisms

assess the effectiveness and efficiency of the partnership model of the alliance to manage and monitor investments overtime, with respect to the role of PEF MT, Alliance Coordination Team (ACT) and leadership of partner organisations

2. In relation to the effectiveness of investments, to:• determine the collective effect of strategic investments under Data SFA on the data

availability, quality and use• determine the key success stories and challenges with respect to specific large-scale

investments in improving data availability, quality and use, that demonstrate value for money3. In relation to overall learning, to:

• document key lessons learnt with respect to design, process and results of data SFA in terms of what worked well and what did not

• develop and share actionable recommendations to inform, if and how, Gavi should improve strategic data investment approach in Gavi 5.0 strategic period to achieve its goal

6. LOOKBACK QUESTIONSThere are three main groups of questions that should guide the Lookback and achieve the goal and objectives: those related to the Data SFA design and management, those related to actual investments and effective results, and those related to the potential future approach for data investments in Gavi 5.0. Each includes a limited number of sub-questions. Bidders may propose additional questions to the list below as part of their proposals, with justification. These questions may also be adjusted based on evolving priorities and direction from the Alliance members.

6.1. Data SFA design and management

6.1.1. Investment ApproachThe design of the Data SFA has been described in section 1 with details on investment focus areas, theory of change and the results framework, priority setting and the funding decision making process. This section refers to the overall design and management of Data SFA.

Did the overall Data SFA design support identification of effective data investment priorities? Why or why not and what could be improved in Gavi 5.0?

1. To what extent did the data investment focus areas in the design of the Data SFA adequately reflect the country need?

o Were these focus areas in alignment with Gavi’s Strategic Plans6, and other Strategic Focus Areas?

o How did the focus areas evolve over five-year period from 2015 to 2020, and to what extent did any changes during this period affect the relevance of the focus areas to meet intended objectives of Data SFA?

2. To what extent did the Theory of Change help drive the investments and effectiveness of those investments?

o Was the success and the path to success clearly articulated in the TOC and aligned to Gavi’ Strategic Goals?

6 Gavi Strategic Plan 2011-2015: http://www.gavi.org/library/publications/pledging-conference-for-immunisation/4--gavi-strategy---business-plan/ and Gavi Strategic Plan 2016-2020: http://www.gavi.org/library/publications/gavi/gavi-the-vaccine-alliance-2016-2020-strategy/

032-2020-GAVI-RFP 15/24

o Was the alignment with other SFA areas and Gavi’s support to country governments taken into consideration?

o Were the roles and responsibilities of the secretariat, the Alliance partners and other key stakeholders clearly articulated?

o Did the TOC adequately drive identification of the priority activities for funding identified in each funding round? If not, why not and what could be improved?

3. To what extent did the Results Framework facilitate the performance management and accountability?

o How well did the Results Framework help in assessing the progress and performance of implementation of funded activities? If not well enough, then why not and what could be improved?

o How well did the Results Framework help in ensuring accountabilities? If not, then why not and what could be improved? Were the monitoring and reporting mechanisms adequately put in place?

4. To what extent does the overall design of Data SFA compare with other organizations and global health initiatives?

o What are the strengths and weaknesses of the existing structure?

o Are there alternative models to consider to enable more effective and efficient investment approaches in improving data availability, quality and use?

6.1.2. Management and implementationThis section refers primarily to the processes and implementation of the Data SFA at the level of activities identified for funding, unless stated otherwise.

To what extent was the process of selecting activities and engaging partners efficient, effective and transparent?

5. To what extent were the overall funding decision making processes performed in an effective and efficient way, including in ways that were transparent and accountable, at global, regional and country level?

o Were the processes related to identification of priority activities for funding clearly laid out with clear roles and responsibilities? Were these processes effectively communicated to all key stakeholders?

o What were the key challenges in coordination with partners and how effectively was the comparative advantage of various partners in identification of priority activities factored in?

o Was the overall size of investment adequate and effective in achieving the intended objective of the Data SFA?

o Were the criteria for funding decision making and partner identification clearly articulated and adhered to?

o How did the Gavi secretariat processes for managing funding decision making evolve over time and what were the advantages and disadvantages of the different approaches?

6. To what extent were the monitoring and accountability mechanisms effectively implemented?

o Were the monitoring and accountability mechanisms adequately communicated with the partners and adhered to?

032-2020-GAVI-RFP 16/24

o What were the strengths, weaknesses and challenges of Alliance partner’s processes in monitoring investments overtime?

o How did the Gavi secretariat-based processes to monitor investments evolve over time and what were its strengths and weaknesses?

6.2. Effectiveness of Data SFA design and investments in achieving intended results

This section refers to the effectiveness of the Data SFA design, investments and achievement of results.

To what extent were the design of Data SFA and investments under Data SFA effective and successful in improving data availability quality and use?

6.2.1. Effectiveness of Data SFA design and management7. To what extent did the partnership model and alliance structures as determined through

PEF facilitate effective implementation of data SFA activities?

a. How did the annual planning cycle under PEF affect the quality of prioritisation and implementation of Data SFA Special Investments? What could be improved for Gavi 5.0?

b. How well did the oversight and progress monitoring mechanisms work? If not well enough, why not and what could be improved in Gavi 5.0?

c. To what extent did the implementation of planned activities meet the planned schedule for completion and what were the main factors contributing to these results?

d. How well did the partnership model facilitate and/or restrict the selection of the right partners to achieve target results? If not well enough, why not and what can be improved?

8. To what extent did the partnership model and alliance structures as determined through PEF facilitate coordination?

a. What were the key challenges with respect to coordination among alliance partners in terms of process required for investment through Data SFA?

b. How could the discordance between PEF annual planning cycle and strategic timeline needed for implementation of priority activities be addressed?

6.2.2. Effectiveness of data investments under Special Investments under Data SFA

9. What was the collective effect of Data SFA-SI investments in improving availability, quality and use of immunisation data?

10. How can the Alliance consider the value of the data investments’ results in relation to the funds expended?

11. To what extent were the investments under Data SFA SI resulted in documented evidence that could be used for scale up? How well was the documentation of evidence and results done?

12. If we were to look at some of the large-scale investments, what were some of the key success stories in terms of value for money in improving data availability, quality and use of immunisation data?

032-2020-GAVI-RFP 17/24

13. What have been the unintended positive and negative effects of the collective investment through Data SFA, if any?

6.3. Implications for future approach of data investments in Gavi 5.014. If, and how, should Gavi (re)structure its strategic data investments mechanisms in Gavi

5.0 to achieve its goal for reaching under immunised and zero dose children?

o What are the key lessons with respect to design of data SFA that can inform any potential change in the investment approach and in what way?

o What are the key lessons in terms what worked well and what did work well in terms of process and implementation of data SFA in Gavi 4.0?

o To what extent and in what ways should the results achieved in Gavi 4.0 influence the investment approach for Gavi 5.0 to ensure that Gavi and Alliance partners can identify, reach, and monitor reaching 0-dose children

7. METHODOLOGYIn order to respond to the above questions and provide a high-quality report, bidders are expected to employ a range of methods and to pursue innovation where suitable. Bidders should develop as part of their proposals a detailed review methodology including but not limited to the elements explained in this section. Bidders should also consider how best to maximise efficiencies in their approach for the global, regional and country levels and stakeholders.

The “Lookback” is expected to be a retrospective review of the Data SFA from the period of Jan 2015 to Jan 2020 and it should capture changes over time in this time period with a clear goal of informing approaches to data investments in 5.0.

While Gavi’s 4.0 strategic period ends in December 2020, the investment priorities for the year 2020 have been identified but will not be fully implemented till the end of 2021. This should therefore be factored into the review timeline.

The Lookback is expected to be completed to two phases with each phase focusing on specific objectives

Phase 1 This phase will focus on Objective 1 and associated learnings and recommendations

Phase 2 This phase will focus on Objective 2 and 3

As part of the retrospective review, the bidders are expected to develop a full map of activities funded in the reference period and gather perspectives from the Alliance partners and grantees to answer the key questions listed in the previous section.

7.1. Data collectionThe bidders should utilize a range of data sources, including but not limited to the following

Desk review and use of secondary data sources:o Key Gavi documents:

Gavi 4.0 strategic framework relevant Gavi Board and PPC papers

032-2020-GAVI-RFP 18/24

PEF Management Team meeting reports and minutes Data SFA submission files Terms of Reference for key stakeholders Data SFA strategic framework and results framework PEF Milestones reporting from partners MOUs with the partners Key communications with partners including process related emails and

documentation of communication implementation reports from core and expanded partners Concept notes for each annual round of Data SFA funding cycle proposed and finals set of activities in each round Excel Data investment mapping prepared on country level activities and

associated documentation (concept note, data investment mapping Masterdeck, Gavi data strategy investments to expected outputs)

o Key external documents: Publications based on the Gavi investments in Data SFA Reports and other communication materials produced based on Gavi

investments in Data SFA Documents from other similar organisation or GHIs that describe strategic

approach to investment in data improvemento Other relevant documents at global, regional and country level

As required Generation and use of primary data sources:

o A mix of key Informant Interviews, focus group discussions and self-administrated questionnaires (as per consideration of the bidder) with, but not limited to, the following stakeholders:

Global level stakeholders: the Gavi Secretariat staff

o Relevant staff from M&E teamo Relevant staff from Country Programmeso Relevant staff from strategy and PEF teamo Relevant staff from Executive Office

Alliance partner organisationo UNICEFo WHOo World Banko CDC

Expanded partnerso All partners that have received funding

Other global partnerso Other partners who are working in this space and engaged with

Gavi but may not have a formal agreement with Gavi. Regional and country level:

WHO and UNICEF focal points at regional and country levels MoH and EPI officials

7.2. AssumptionsThe following assumptions are in place to guide the analysis and the interpretation.

- The Gavi M&E team will continue to coordinate the distribution of funding to partners for data related investments in Gavi 5.0

- The amount of funding available in Gavi 5.0 dedicated to the equivalent of Data SFA-SI investments will decrease

- Data investments guided by a coherent strategy will continue to be a part of Gavi 5.0 funding model

032-2020-GAVI-RFP 19/24

- Gavi will continue to coordinate with Alliance partners, including the WHO, UNICEF, and the CDC, to fulfill data objectives

- Gavi will expand its partnership with non-Alliance partners to fulfill data objectives

7.3. Stakeholder Engagement Engagement Philosophy

Because of the multi-organization, and multi-participant nature of the Data SFA It is important to engage with the following stakeholders, organizations, and Gavi departments throughout the development and execution of the Data SFA Lookback in order for it to be fair, balanced, and comprehensive. This level of engagement will ensure the Lookback leads to an improved set of data investments, both within the Secretariat and across the Alliance, in Gavi 5.0. Below explains the involvement of these stakeholders at each phase of the Data SFA Lookback.

Engagement ModelOverall Leads and Commissioning Unit: Gavi Monitoring and Evaluation (Binay Kumar and David Cagen). The Lookback leads and commissioning unit will oversee the Lookback from end-to-end and manage stakeholder engagement.Primary Audiences: Gavi Executive Office, Gavi PEF, Gavi Risk Committee, and Core Alliance Partners including the WHO, UNICEF, BMGF, and the CDC. The primary audiences will receive the results of the Lookback to take forward into their respective organizations for consideration.Steering Committee: Chaired by the Commissioning Unit (Hope Johnson), Gavi Executive Office, Gavi PEF, Expanded Partner representative, WHO, UNICEF, CDC, BMGF. The Steering Committee plays a key function in providing quality support and expert advice to the overall leads and the commissioning unit. Tasks of the steering committee will include the provision of advice to the commissioning unit on the research questions and methodological approach, advice to the supplier during the course of the Lookback, will provision of project oversight, and review of the primary deliverables produced by the supplier.

8. DELIVERABLES, EXPECTED OUTPUTS & TIMELINES8.1. Deliverables and timelinesAll reports should be provided in English, and reports should also be provided in French for francophone countries, where relevant.

Deliverable DatePreliminary findings report for Phase 1 15 September 2020Preliminary findings report for Phase 2 15 October 2020Preliminary findings full report 30 October 2020Draft final report 15 November 2020Final report 30 November 2020Presentation (slides) of evaluation results December 2020Presentations of evaluation results at regional and global (Secretariat) level(s)

December 2020

8.2. Expected outputs A systematic and robust methodology for this review A detailed report on investments mapped to the results framework

032-2020-GAVI-RFP 20/24

A detailed documentation of assessments of data interventions carried out over the last 4 years

A detailed report on the mapping of the Data SFA processes and the evolution of Data SFA over the last 4 years

A detailed report on the consultation with the key internal and external stakeholders A detailed documentation of the evolution of the Data SFA, the various processes that were

explored and respective trade-offs with each explored process option. A detailed set of recommendations and lessons learnt Deep dive analysis of specific sets of large scale investments reflecting the key questions Set of key recommendations to key stakeholders, including the Alliance partners, PEF, and

the PEF MT. These recommendations will include important considerations for tradeoffs, to inform investment governance and modality for 2021-2025 and plan for how those are implemented.

9. EVALUATION CRITERIA9.1. Evaluation CriteriaThe decision to award any contract as a result of this RFP process will be based on Service Provider’s responses to this RFP, quality of recommended expert resources and any subsequent negotiations or discussions.

The decision-making process will consider the ability of Service Provider(s) to fulfil Gavi requirements as outlined within this RFP, and cost of the review proposals will be evaluated as appropriate against the following criteria:

Technical criteria:o Lookback framework and design;o Demonstrated understanding and operationalization of the Lookback questions;o Appropriate and sufficiently detailed methods proposed for undertaking the work;o Ability of the bidder to carry out scope of work (based on qualifications of the team,

including CVs of key experts);o Understanding of, and ability to meet, Gavi’s requirements and deliverables;

Preference will be given to local / regional institutions or those partnering with local / regional institutions of Gavi countries;

o Service Provider’s qualifications, reputation and backstop support;o Experience with similar projects; ando Track record of conducting high quality evaluations.

Sustainability:o Company ISO certificationso Company Environmental programo Company Gender policy

Pricing:o Overall cost; ando Realistic costing of the proposal, based on the knowledge, skills and experience of

the team, and relative to the expected deliverables.

If a Service Provider would like Gavi to consider any other criteria during the decision making process, it should notify Gavi in writing when confirming intent to participate (see intent to participate letter attached in Annex 1).

032-2020-GAVI-RFP 21/24

10.PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS10.1. Requirements for Technical Proposal

Following the issuance of the RFP, all interested bidders are invited to submit a proposal not exceeding 25 pages including:

Understanding and background of the topic under review; Evaluation framework with the evaluation questions to be addressed; Detailed description of the evaluation methods and approaches, and acknowledgement of

potential limitations; Detailed work plan and timeline to conduct evaluation; Proposed team composition, responsibilities and structure; Detailed communication plan for dissemination of results at global and regional/country

levels; and Quality assurance plan that covers all key steps of the evaluation process.

The following documents should be attached to the proposal: CV (resumes), not exceeding five pages for each team member; Vendor Questionnaire (see template in Section 10.3); Supplier past performance information, not exceeding five pages; and Other document that may be relevant to clarify expertise in conducting the work.

The evaluation team should demonstrate qualification, experience and competencies in the following areas:

a) Professional background and competency in complex analyses and public health;b) Experience conducting evaluations, including extensive experience with appropriate

evaluation design and mixed methods evaluation skills;c) Familiarity with multi stakeholder decision-making models and civil society engagement in

public health;d) Excellent communication skills, including writing and presentation skills; e) Experience working in the region and preferable in the selected countries (as noted above,

preference will be given to local / regional institutions or those partnering with local / regional institutions); and

f) Ability to meet tight deadlines with high quality products.

Bidders are encouraged to include links to any similar previous work products available on-line that demonstrate their relevant experience and expertise.

10.2. Requirements for Financial ProposalThe financial proposal should be a standalone document (using Excel). This should:

i. Provide full details of your financial offer. This should include fixed costs and any variable costs.

ii. Indicate the components of your financial offer, including any fixed costs or overheads. NB: Gavi does not pay overheads to government agencies, other private foundations, or for‐profit organisations.

iii. We recommend using the template inserted as Annex 3.

In addition, bidders need to submit official documentation of the firm’s rules for applying indirect costs. It should be clear in the submitted financial proposal how indirect costs are applied, as per the firm’s rules.

032-2020-GAVI-RFP 22/24

Please note that in accordance with Gavi’s Headquarters Agreement with the Swiss Government Gavi is exempt from VAT, as well as customs taxes and duties in Switzerland. Consequently, your prices will have to be submitted to us net of any tax and in USD. The necessary documents will be sent to the selected provider(s) upon the ordering procedure.

10.3. Provider InformationAll interested bidders are requested to submit the completed Vendor Assessment form in Annex-6 as part of the final proposal submission

11.MANAGEMENT AND OVERSIGHTThis evaluation will be outsourced in its entirety to external Service Providers. The Gavi Secretariat will conduct a procurement exercise to recruit the Service Providers and assume responsibility for day-to-day management of the evaluation.

032-2020-GAVI-RFP 23/24

12.ANNEXES12.1. Annex 1: Written Intent to Participate

12.2. Annex 2: Q&A Form

12.3. Annex 3: Financial Proposal Template

12.4. Annex 4: Workplan Template

12.5. Annex 5: Company Conflict of Interest form

12.6. Annex 6: Vendor Assessment form

032-2020-GAVI-RFP 24/24