Comic Relief and Value for Money Invitation to Tender
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
2012-01-09 Comic Relief Value for Money ITT
C
Comic Relief and Value for Money
Invitation to Tender
1. BACKGROUND
Value for money is rising fast on the international development agenda. It is borne partly out of growing
public and government scepticism around the impact of international development and partly from a
growing recognition to improve aid effectiveness within the industry. DfID, particularly under the coalition
government, are making value for money and important feature of their approach.
There are various interpretations of what constitutes value for money and how it is applied. Even DfID
have yet to establish a clear definition of value for money, which provides an opportunity for those in the
sector to contribute to the debate and help to shape the term and its application.
One of the most widely used definitions is that used by the UK National Audit Office (NAO) which defines
value for money as, ‘the optimal use of resources to achieve the intended outcomes’1 and identifies
economy, efficiency and effectiveness (the three E’s) as the core ways of achieving this:
Economy refers to the costs of inputs and resources of an intervention (unit costs are typically used
as a measure of economy).
Efficiency refers to how much you get out in relation to what you put in. It’s about maximising an
output for a given input, or minimising input for an output.
Effectiveness refers to how far a programme achieves its intended outcomes, using qualitative and
quantitative assessments of change.
Linked to the three Es is the element of ‘option appraisal’; that is, the choices one makes to pursue
particular funding options or development strategies in the belief that ‘x’ will deliver better outcomes more
cost effectively than ‘y’.
Few UK NGOs have functioning definitions and practice around value for money. Some have experimented
with tools such as SROI (Social Return On Investment), BER (Basic Efficiency Resource), QALY (Quality
Adjusted Life Years or its cousin, DALY – Disability Adjusted Life Years). There is some feedback that the
processes are often more useful than the results; that the set up costs in terms of time and money are high;
and that few organisations have embedded any of these approaches across the organisation.
The notion of Value for Money is also contested. Detractors argue that defining value is notoriously
difficult. There are major challenges of attribution (was it our work that created the change or other
factors?) and deadweight and displacement (would these changes occurred anyway?). There is a risk that
Value for Money leads people to investing in what is measurable rather than what is required, which in turn
leads to organisations focusing more on service delivery and less on empowerment, advocacy, social capital
and organisational development. It can lead to assigning a monetary value on change – but what is the
monetary value of a more cohesive community in a country emerging from conflict? It can deaden the ‘art’
of social change which relies of skills of intuition, agility and experience at the expense of a notion of social
change which is predictable, linear and formulaic (which it almost never is!).
1
NAO Analytical Framework for Assessing Value for Money, December 2010
Page 1 of 52012-01-09 Comic Relief Value for Money ITT
The supporters of Value for Money argue that it makes organisations’ choices about what to invest in more
explicit – their own theory of change (and the associated costs) apparent to all. It forces organisations to
define what they mean by value and explain more transparently the associated costs. It applies much-
needed pressure on both funders and social change organisations to adequately resource and implement
good monitoring, evaluation and learning strategies. It can challenge orthodox ideas and ways of working
that have continued to exist simply because they’ve never been challenged. It has the power to instil
better and more accountable management systems and practices.
For Comic Relief, this is a timely opportunity to define for ourselves what we mean by Value for Money and
how we might apply it. It is an important issue on which we need to develop a response; it plays into
considerable work we have been doing with grantees on improving their approaches to monitoring,
evaluation and learning; and it links neatly to our collaboration with BOND (British Overseas NGOs for
Development) on ‘cost of effectiveness’ (i.e. how much does it cost to be able to measure change) and on
common indicators (can the sector develop common metrics of change within particular themes or
issues?). Not only that; we are now a recipient of significant funding from DFID: a £26m PPA for education
match funding and the Common Ground Initiative; a £16m match funding grant with Red Nose Day 2011
for health and education and a pending £10m match funding grant with Sport Relief 2012 for work in urban
slums.
2. PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES
The purpose of this consultancy is to draw on existing literature and practice on Value for Money and to
propose a framework for its application within Comic Relief, and with particular reference to our
international grant making and our relationship with DfID.
The objectives of the evaluation are therefore to:
undertake a literature review of current thinking and practice relating to Value for Money with
particular focus on the field of international development and among the usage of Value for Money
among grant making bodies and summarise the debates
synthesise those aspects of Comic Relief’s international grant making and grant management that
already apply policies and practices that are part of a Value for Money framework
explore options for the application of a Value for Money framework for Comic Relief and the
implications this would have for grantees (primarily UK charities) and their grant partners in
developing countries, and the associated risks and opportunities for all concerned.
make recommendations on how Comic Relief should apply a Value for Money framework and
approach.
3. SCOPE
It is anticipated that the consultancy will have three components:
a literature review and ‘audit’ of Comic Relief’s existing modus operandi
a consultation process with internal and external stakeholders as identified by the consultants and
Comic Relief staff
a pulling together of options and recommendations for ways forward.
4. METHODOLOGY
The methods to be used will be decided in discussion with the selected consultant(s), but it is anticipated
that methods would include:
Desk based review of literature on value for money, in particular generated by the UK international
development sector and DFID
Page 2 of 52012-01-09 Comic Relief Value for Money ITT
Analysis of Comic Relief’s existing international grant making and management processes and
policies including our work with grantees on monitoring, evaluation and learning and the review of
a limited sample of grant reports and evaluations and a gap analysis of what is missing
Key informant interviews with a small number of international grantees and their local partners,
Comic Relief staff, DfID and BOND representatives, a limited number of other grant makers and
grant making affinity groups and any other relevant stakeholders
An analysis of the options available to Comic Relief as a grant maker and of the risks, opportunities
and implications of different options for Comic Relief as well as grantees and their local partners
5. OUTPUTS
The consultants will be expected to produce:
A draft report and a final report of no more than 20 pages plus appendices
A PowerPoint presentation of no more than 15 slides for sharing report findings with key internal
audiences
The report should include:
Executive summary – The summary will need to be extractable and read as a stand-alone report.
Introduction – Purpose of the project, methods used and limitations
Context analysis of Value for Money
Synthesis of findings of the application of Value for Money principles in Comic Relief’s grant making
and grant management
Options for the application of Value for Money principles and practices
Conclusions and recommendations
Appendices, that lists all key informants, references of documents reviewed, finalised ToR and any
other relevant background information.
A draft report will need to be provided to Comic Relief for discussion and feedback before the final report is
completed.
6. AUDIENCE
The primary audiences for the report are Comic Relief Directors, the International Grants Committee and
the international grants team. The final report is also likely to be shared with external audiences such as
other funders, grantees and the UK NGO sector.
7. BUDGET AND TIMEFRAME
The evaluation should be carried out over the period February-March 2012, with the final report delivered
by the mid May 2012. However, there can be some flexibility around these dates for the right consultant(s).
Final key dates and milestones will be agreed as part of contract negotiations with the selected
consultant(s).
A budget will be agreed with the selected consultant(s) although we would anticipate that the work would
take no more than 25 billable days.
8. DELIVERY TEAM
The selected consultant(s) or organisation will be supported by the following Comic Relief staff and
devolved grant making partners, to carry out the consultancy:
Page 3 of 52012-01-09 Comic Relief Value for Money ITT
Project Manager: Richard Graham (Comic Relief Head of International Grants)
Project Team: Caroline Lien; Judith McNeill; Colin Simon; Les O'Dea; Michele Settle; Matthew
Godfrey; Caroline Gurney; Mark Hoult-Allen
9. TENDER PROCESS
We are looking for individuals or organisations that:
Demonstrate a good understanding of grant making
Have an understanding of Value for Money concepts and their application
Have experience of working with civil society organisations in the UK and internationally
Have demonstrable analytical skills
Can demonstrate professional integrity
Have excellent interpersonal skills and communication skills, both written and verbal
We welcome joint bids where it is clear that each partner can bring a particular expertise that will enhance
and maximise the consultancy, including collaborations of northern and southern
consultants/organisations.
Tenders will need to include:
1. A framework and methodology for the work including key milestones and accompanying time line;
2. Examples of other similar work;
3. A budget for the work to include any management costs including figures for expenses and VAT
where appropriate;
4. Key personnel involved in undertaking the work – their experience and past work;
5. The name and contact details of two independent referees.
Interested parties will need to submit their tender by 9am on Monday 20th February 2012. We will
shortlist a number of candidates who will be invited to Comic Relief to give a brief presentation and to
discuss their proposal in greater detail w/b 27th February 2012. We would hope to commission the
successful candidate to begin work w/b 5th March 2012 with an inception meeting the following week.
If you are interested in bidding for this work, and would like to discuss your ideas before submitting an
application please email Richard Graham at: r.graham@comicrelief.com. Please email your tender to Anna
Hughes at a.hughes@comicrelief.com
9. TERMS AND CONDITIONS
Please note that if you participate in the tendering process, you will accept the following terms and
conditions:
In the event that we select you to supply any services, we would expect to enter into negotiations
with you to agree a suitable contract for the provision of the services, on terms to be agreed in
writing and signed by authorised representatives of each party.
Both of us agree that any information that we supply to you, and any information that you supply
to us, in connection with the invitation to tender (both before and after this email) is supplied on a
confidential basis, and may only be used by the receiving party for the purposes of the invitation to
tender, and may not be disclosed to any other party. Neither party gives any warranties, or accepts
any liability for the accuracy or completeness of the information it supplies or any statement made
in connection with this invitation to tender.
We may in our sole discretion decide to cancel the tendering process and/or reject some or all bids
at any time prior to concluding a signed written contract without incurring any liability to you or
any other person. We also reserve the right not to accept the lowest (or any) tender, or any part or
Page 4 of 52012-01-09 Comic Relief Value for Money ITT
any tender or tenders at our sole discretion. Acknowledgment of receipt of a submitted tender
does not constitute an agreement, acceptance or offer. The invitation to tender is not an invitation
to treat or an offer.
You agree to bear all costs, expenses and liabilities that you incur in connection with responding to
our invitation to tender and prior to the conclusion of a signed written contract.
You must not tell anyone else what your tender price is (except if you require an insurance
quotation). You must not try to obtain any information about anyone else's tender.
The tender process, and any subsequent contracts that may be entered into, will be subject to the
laws of England & Wales and the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the English & Welsh courts.
Page 5 of 5You can also read
