Funding universal service and access projects: Form strategy to impact

C.4     Call for bids and project selection

It is important that the project selection process is objective, fair and transparent. Projects may be (1) initiated or identified by the policy-maker or fund administrator as part of the strategy (such as school connectivity projects); or (2) may be initiated by industry stakeholders such as Internet service providers (ISPs), operators, NGOs, other ministries and consumer groups; or (3) they may also be initiated by project developers.  Ultimately, project selection is the responsibility of the fund. The fund may allow applications at specific times, or at any time on an ongoing basis. The details of how eligible applicants can apply for funding must be clearly stipulated in the Fund Manual which should be publicly available.

Fund projects range from community access points and free Wi-Fi to building mobile base stations. These projects will have differing contract terms and will have to address different considerations in the request for proposals (RFP) development and contracting phases, however, the RFP process is broadly the same.

The template below is intended to assist the fund or other public financier to choose the projects to pursue and finance, and on what terms. The template is illustrative and can be modified to address the specific project type, and to meet local needs and priorities.

C.4.1   Procurement and selecting vendors

Procurement principles

The USAF and other funders can design project frameworks but are not the implementors of the projects themselves. Funds rely on a range of vendors, suppliers and consultants to deliver the infrastructure and services that are required to bring projects to life. Selecting delivery partners is a critical role of the USAF. It can also potentially turn into a legal challenge if:

• delivery partners are selected that are not able to deliver on time, to specification or by using the correct standards;
• processes used to select them are not fair and transparent.

Projects must provide value for money. The public procurement process design and principles checklist provides an overview of considerations for USAF and other funders to take into account before starting to procure services or equipment from delivery partners.

Efficient procurement: Defining lots

A clear and considered approach to the design of “lots” or groups of beneficiaries should be taken. These lots should be eligible for support as a single project – this applies to infrastructure projects such as connection of clinics or schools. Badly designed lots will increase costs and reduce confidence in the project. Best practice design of lots reduces the risk for the vendors, operators and other project partners. Good design should also facilitate an equitable roll-out and reduce discrimination between institutions, such as clinics and schools, or between locations, such as villages, districts and counties. Lots should be designed based on:

• Facilities located within a single geographic area to facilitate the aggregation of demand, benefit from economies of scale and reduce infrastructure costs. This approach will have the added benefit of facilitating the connection of communities beyond the specific beneficiary facility.
• A single product area, for example, the bulk procurement of devices, so that manufacturing and development costs are kept to a minimum and economies of scale and scope can be leveraged.

It may be more efficient to separate the request for proposals (RFPs) for the provision of connectivity and other parts of the solution such as devices, software and content. Bundling them in a single lot may serve to increase costs. It is critical however, that they are aligned and coordinated so that for example only schools with connectivity receive devices, software and content.

Request for proposals (RFPs)

Once the project has been designed on the basis of robust research, there is a need to identify a vendor or vendors and other delivery partners to provide the requisite services. These services could relate to any aspect of the service such as connectivity, digital literacy and training or consulting on reporting frameworks.

An RFP should specify what is required from the delivery partner. In instances where not enough is known by the USAF or other funders about what it will take to implement the project, a request for information (RFI) may be issued before the RFP.  The RFI is more of a fact-finding document than the RFP, which compares proposals from vendors. Issuing an RFI could be useful if insufficient information was gathered at the earlier stages of the project design phase, or if some information is needed that will assist in designing the RFP but is better known to the vendors.

Once the decision has been made to proceed to the RFP stage, it is important that the RFP is clear and contains enough information to enable the respondents to provide comprehensive, well-planned and implementable proposals. The RFP responses will be essential to the selection and contract awarding process (according to the evaluation and award criteria) as well as the conditions and commitments captured in the contracts, against which implementation success will be measured.

It is important to note that the project summary template is the basis for the RFP summary, however it excludes budget and cost information so that a competitive bidding process can be used to derive the least cost bid.

In addition, project specific information must be indicated in the RFP as follows:

In addition, a list of all relevant reference documentation should be provided by the project manager to enable the bidder to understand and align the project goals, including:

• relevant national objectives and regional objectives (e.g. broadband policy or digital agenda);
• baseline research / needs analysis;
• mapping;
• forecasting.