request to participate in the bidding of...
TRANSCRIPT
1
REQUEST TO PARTICIPATE IN THE BIDDING OF CONSULTING SERVICES
FOR THE CONDUCT OF BOTH OR ANY OF THE TWO EVALUATION STUDIES
UNDER THE MONITORING AND EVALUATION CY 2016 FUND
1. The National Economic and Development Authority Regional Office 1 (NEDA
RO1), through the Monitoring and Evaluation Fund, shall engage the services of consultants for the conduct of both or any of the evaluation studies indicated
in the table below:
Study Title ABC
1. Conduct of a Study of the Effectiveness of the
Regional Project Monitoring and Evaluation
System (RPMES) at the Sub-national Levels
Php 1,500,000.00
2. Study of the Efficiency of the Banaoang Pump
Irrigation Project (BPIP) in Providing Irrigation
to its Service Area
Php 1,500,000.00
2. Consultants interested to participate in the bidding of both or any of the projects
are invited to attend the negotiation meeting to be conducted on May 2, 2017
(1:30 P.M.) at JOO Conference Hall, NEDA Regional Office 1, San Fernando
City, La Union. The objective of the meeting is to discuss and negotiate on the
technical, legal and financial requirements of the two projects to allow
prospective consultants to prepare and submit a responsive quotation or
proposal. Attached to this invitation are the Eligibility Documents and Terms of
References for guidance.
3. NEDA RO1 reserves the right to reject any and all proposals, including that of a
single eligible proponent, waive any minor deviation in the submitted documents
which will not materially affect the substance of the proposal, annul the selection
process, or not award the contract at any time prior to contract award, without
thereby incurring any liability to the affected participating consulting firm/s.
4. For further information, please refer to the NBAC Special Technical Working
Group (STWG):
Project Monitoring and Evaluation Division National Economic and Development Authority Regional Office 1
Guerrero Road, San Fernando City
2500 La Union (072) 888-5501 loc. 109 / (072) 888-2679 to 80 Fax No. (072) 888-2708
Issued on April 18, 2017.
GIDEON D. NUESCA
Chief Administrative Officer
Chairman
NEDA RO1 Bids and Awards Committee
2
Eligibility Documents
1. Eligibility Criteria
1.1. The following persons/entities shall be allowed to participate in the bidding for
Consulting Services:
(a) Duly licensed Filipino citizens / sole proprietorships;
(b) Partnerships duly organized under the laws of the Philippines and of which at
least sixty percent (60%) of the interest belongs to citizens of the Philippines;
(c) Corporations duly organized under the laws of the Philippines and of which
at least sixty percent (60%) of the outstanding capital stock belongs to
citizens of the Philippines;
(d) Cooperatives duly organized under the laws of the Philippines, and of which
at least sixty percent (60%) interest belongs to citizens of the Philippines; or
(e) Persons/entities forming themselves into a joint venture (JV), i.e., a group of
two (2) or more persons/entities that intend to be jointly and severally
responsible or liable for a particular contract: Provided, however, That
Filipino ownership or interest thereof shall be at least sixty percent (60%).
For this purpose, Filipino ownership or interest shall be based on the
contributions of each of the members of the JV as specified in their JV
Agreement (JVA).
1.2. When the types and fields of Consulting Services involve the practice of professions
regulated by law, those who will actually perform the services shall be Filipino
citizens and registered professionals authorized by the appropriate regulatory body to
practice those professions and allied professions.
1.3. Government corporate entities may be eligible to participate only if they can establish
that they (a) are legally and financially autonomous, (b) operate under commercial
law, and (c) are not dependent agencies of the Government of the Philippines (GOP)
or the Procuring Entity.
2. Eligibility Requirements
2.1 The following eligibility requirements shall be submitted on or before May 11, 2017
(9:00 A.M.) as stated in Clause 5 for purposes of determining eligibility of
prospective bidder
(a) Class "A" Documents —
Legal Documents
(i) Registration certificate from the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC),
Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) for sole proprietorship, or Cooperative
Development Authority (CDA) for cooperatives, or any proof of such registration;
(ii) Valid Mayor's permit issued by the city or municipality where the principal place of
business of the prospective bidder is located;
(iii) Valid Tax Clearance Certificate per Executive Order (EO) No. 398, Series of 2005,
reviewed and approved by the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR);
3
Technical Documents
(iv) Statement of the prospective bidder of all its ongoing and completed government and
private contracts (properly labeled), including contracts awarded but not yet started,
if any, whether similar, relevant or not similar/relevant in nature and complexity to
the contract to be bid, within the last ten (10) years prior to May 11, 2017. The
statement shall, for each contract, include, but not limited to, the following:
(iv.1) complete name/title and location of the contract;
(iv.2) date of award of contract (in day-month-year);
(iv.3) description of the project including the type/nature of the scope of works;
(iv.4) consultant's role (whether main consultant, subcontractor, or partner in a JV),
including a detailed discussion/description of such role
(iv.5) total project/contract cost;
(iv.6) contract amount for the consulting services rendered;
(iv.7) contract duration for the services rendered (in month and year); and
(iv.8) certificate of completion / satisfactory service / final payment, or
equivalent/similar document, in the case of a completed contract (with the
date of issuance of such certificate indicated);
(v) Statement of the consultant specifying its nationality and confirming that its key
personnel and other consultants under its employ who may actually perform the
service are registered professionals authorized by the appropriate regulatory body to
practice those professions and allied professions in accordance with Clause 1.2,
including a list of the principals/key personnel of the firm and prospective personnel
to be assigned to the project, and their respective updated curricula vitae (CVs) that
show, at the very least, the consultant's educational background, related training and
relevant experience (in months and years with detailed description/discussion on the
nature and scope of work/services rendered).
NOTES FOR NEW FIRMS: New firms (not reorganized or recently amalgamated but only
established for less than two (2) years reckoned from the date of preparation of these
eligibility documents) may cite experience and capabilities of the principals and key
staff of the firm based on performance and responsibility while in the employ of
others. In item iv, projects of principals/key personnel for the last ten (10) years plus
consulting services rendered by the New Firm may be indicated.
Financial Document
(vi) The consultant's audited financial statements, showing, among others, the
consultant's total and current assets and liabilities, stamped "received" by the BIR, or
its duly accredited and authorized institutions, for the preceding calendar year which
should not be earlier than two (2) years from the date of bid submission.
(b) Class "B" Document —
Valid JVA preferably specifically named/titled as a "Joint Venture Agreement", in
case a JV is already in existence. In the absence of a JVA, duly notarized statements
from all the potential JV partners stating that they will enter into and abide by the
4
provisions of the JVA in the instance that the bid is successful, shall be included in
the bid. Failure to enter into a JV in the event of a contract award shall be ground for
the forfeiture of the bid security. Each JV partner shall submit the legal eligibility
documents. The submission of technical and financial documents by any of the joint
venture partners constitutes compliance.
3. Format and Signing of Eligibility Documents
3.1. Prospective bidders shall submit their eligibility documents through their duly
authorized representative on or before May 11, 2017 (9:00 A.M.) specified in Clause
5.
3.2. Prospective bidders shall prepare an original and copies of the eligibility documents.
In the event of any discrepancy between the original and the copies, the original shall
prevail.
3.3. The eligibility documents, except for unamended printed literature, shall be signed,
and each and every page thereof shall be initialed, by the duly authorized
representative/s of the prospective bidder.
3.4. Any interlineations, erasures, or overwriting shall be valid only if they are signed or
initialed by the duly authorized representative/s of the prospective bidder.
4. Sealing and Marking of Eligibility Documents
4.1. Prospective bidders shall enclose their original eligibility documents described in
Clause 2.1, in a sealed envelope marked "ORIGINAL — ELIGIBILITY
DOCUMENTS". Each copy (four copies) of the eligibility documents shall be
similarly sealed, duly marking the envelopes as "COPY NO. - ELIGIBILITY
DOCUMENTS". These envelopes containing the original and the copies shall then be
enclosed in one (1) single envelope.
4.2 The original and the four copies of the eligibility documents shall be typed or written
in indelible ink and shall be signed by the prospective bidder or its duly authorized
representative/s. All envelopes shall:
(a) contain the name of the contract to be bid in capital letters;
(b) bear the name and address of the prospective bidder in capital letters;
(c) be addressed to the Procuring Entity's BAC;
(d) bear the specific identification of the Project; and
(e) bear a warning "DO NOT OPEN BEFORE MAY 11 (9:00 A.M.)” for the
opening of eligibility documents.
4.4. If the eligibility documents are not sealed and marked as required, the Procuring
Entity will assume no responsibility for its misplacement or premature opening.
5. Deadline for Submission of Eligibility Documents
Eligibility documents must be received by the Procuring Entity's BAC on or before May 11,
2017 (9:00 A.M.) at the following address:
5
NEDA Regional Office 1 Guerrero Road, San Fernando City, La Union.
6. Late Submission of Eligibility Documents
Eligibility documents submitted after the deadline for submission and receipt prescribed in
Clause 5 shall be declared "Late" and shall not be accepted by the Procuring Entity.
7. Modification and Withdrawal of Eligibility Documents
7.1. The prospective bidder may modify its eligibility documents after it has been
submitted; provided that the modification is received by the Procuring Entity prior to
the deadline specified in Clause 5. The prospective bidder shall not be allowed to
retrieve its original eligibility documents, but shall be allowed to submit another set
equally sealed, properly identified, linked to its original bid marked as
"ELIGIBILITY MODIFICATION" and stamped "received" by the BAC.
Modifications received after the applicable deadline shall not be considered and shall
be returned to the prospective bidder unopened.
7.2. A prospective bidder may, through a letter of withdrawal, withdraw its eligibility
documents after it has been submitted, for valid and justifiable reason; provided that
the letter of withdrawal is received by the Procuring Entity prior to the deadline
prescribed for submission and receipt of eligibility documents as specified in Clause
5.
7.3. Eligibility documents requested to be withdrawn in accordance with this Clause shall
be returned unopened to the prospective bidder concerned. A prospective bidder may
also express its intention not to participate in the bidding through a letter which
should reach and be stamped by the BAC before the deadline for submission and
receipt of eligibility documents. A prospective bidder that withdraws its eligibility
documents shall not be permitted to submit another set, directly or indirectly, for the
same project.
8. Opening and Preliminary Examination of Eligibility Documents
8.1. The Procuring Entity's BAC will open the envelopes containing the eligibility
documents in the presence of the prospective bidders' representatives who choose to
attend, at the time, on the date, and at the place specified in Clause 5. The prospective
bidders' representatives who are present shall sign a register evidencing their
attendance.
8.2. Letters of withdrawal shall be read out and recorded during the opening of eligibility
documents and the envelope containing the corresponding withdrawn eligibility
documents shall be returned unopened to the withdrawing prospective bidder. If the
withdrawing prospective bidder's representative is present during the opening, the
original eligibility documents and all copies thereof shall be returned to the
representative during the opening of eligibility documents. If no representative is
present, the eligibility documents shall be returned unopened by registered mail.
8.3. A prospective bidder determined as "ineligible" has seven (7) calendar days upon
written notice or, if present at the time of the opening of eligibility documents, upon
verbal notification, within which to file a request for reconsideration with the BAC:
Provided, however, that the request for reconsideration shall not be granted if it is
established that the finding of failure is due to the fault of the prospective bidder
concerned: Provided, further, that the BAC shall decide on the request for
6
reconsideration within seven (7) calendar days from receipt thereof. If a failed
prospective bidder signifies his intent to file a request for reconsideration, in the case
of a prospective bidder who is declared ineligible, the BAC shall hold the eligibility
documents until such time that the request for reconsideration or protest has been
resolved.
8.4. The eligibility documents envelopes and modifications, if any, shall be opened one at
a time, and the following read out and recorded:
(a) the name of the prospective bidder;
(b) whether there is a modification or substitution; and
(c) the presence or absence of each document comprising the eligibility
documents vis-à-vis a checklist of the required documents.
The eligibility of each prospective bidder shall be determined by examining each bidder's
eligibility requirements or statements against a checklist of requirements, and shall be
determined as either "eligible" or "ineligible." If a prospective bidder submits the specific
eligibility document required, he shall be rated "passed" for requirement. In this regard,
failure to submit a requirement, or a patently insufficient submission, shall be considered
"failed" for the particular eligibility requirement concerned. If a prospective bidder is rated
"passed" for all the eligibility requirements, he shall be considered eligible to participate in
the bidding, and the BAC shall mark the set of eligibility documents of the prospective bidder
concerned as "eligible." If a prospective bidder is rated "failed" in any of the eligibility
requirements, he shall be considered ineligible to participate in the bidding, and the BAC
shall mark the set of eligibility documents of the prospective bidder concerned as "ineligible."
In either case, the BAC Chairperson, or his duly designated authority, shall countersign the
markings. Notwithstanding, NEDA reserves the right to reject any and all proposals,
including that of a single eligible proponent, waive any minor deviation in the submitted
documents which will not materially affect the substance of the proposal, annul the selection
process, or not award the contract at any time prior to contract award, without thereby
incurring any liability to the affected participating consulting firm/s.
7
Terms of Reference (TOR)
Conduct of a Study of the Effectiveness of the Regional Project Monitoring and Evaluation
System (RPMES) at the Sub-National Levels
1. BACKGROUND AND RATIONALE
1.1 Contracting Authority
The General Appropriations Act (GAA) for FY 2016 has allocated the amount of PhP
1,500,000.00 for the conduct of impact evaluation studies to be administered by the National
Economic and Development Authority Regional Office 1 (NEDA RO1).
For this Terms of Reference (TOR), NEDA RO1 shall be the Executing Agency and Contracting
Party while XXX (Consulting firm) will be the Consulting Firm. The proposed project study is
consistent with NEDA’s major final outputs (MFOs), specifically under Monitoring and
Evaluation (M&E) Services.
1.2 The RPMES in Region 1
The Regional Project Monitoring and Evaluation System (RPMES) had been in place as the main
monitoring tool in the regions and sub-regional levels since 1994 when the Operations Manual
was first published. The RPMES was established in 1989 through Executive Order No. 376 and
later amended in 1993 through Executive Order No. 93.
In 2015, further improvements to the system were recommended but the Draft RPMES
Operational Guidelines basically retains much of the features of the 1994 version except for new
reporting templates. Additional reporting forms are included in the 2015 version to cover the
conduct of problem-solving sessions, field validation activities and the monitoring of project
results.
In the case of Region 1, the RPMES continues to be the main monitoring system in the reporting
of project accomplishments at the regional level. While the system has been regularly subjected to
review and evaluation by the Secretariat of the Regional Project Monitoring Committee (RPMC),
its effectiveness in responding to implementation bottlenecks and thereby facilitating project
completion on time has not been studied and documented. Similar studies of the system’s
effectiveness at the sub-regional levels, i.e., at the provincial, city and municipal levels are also
lacking. It is within this context that this study is recommended.
2. USEFULNESS OF THE STUDY
The study results will be used to enhance the effectiveness of the RPMES as a project monitoring and
evaluation tool, to wit:
a) For project facilitation
The RPMES provides a venue for problem-solving sessions (PSS) with concerned
implementing entities whose projects are encountering implementation delays. The PSS are
conducted to discuss the issues hampering project implementation and agree on measures to
put the delayed projects back on track.
b) For providing timely information on project implementation status
8
Policy makers and project planners need vital real-time information on whether development
projects are being undertaken on time or not in order to make any necessary adjustments
when implementation issues do arise.
c) For determining whether project outcomes are being met or not
While the RPMES should also cover the monitoring of project results or outcomes, this
feature has only been recently introduced in the 2015 version of the RPMES Operational
Guidelines.
d) For documenting best practices
Best practices on project implementation, monitoring and evaluation can better be shared to
other project planners and implementers when these are documented. The project
documentation report can serve as guide / reference in the planning, development and design
of future similar projects.
3. OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
The study aims to determine the effectiveness of the RPMES at the regional and sub-regional levels.
The RPMES is fully operational at the regional level with the NEDA Regional Director acting as the
Chairman of the Regional Project Monitoring Committee (RPMC) and the NEDA Region 1 Office
(NEDA RO1) as the committee’s Secretariat; operational as far as the system is implemented
following the procedures set forth in the RPMES Manual of 1994 and the more updated Draft RPMES
Operational Guidelines of 2015.
If one were to go down, however, to the sub-regional levels, particularly at the provincial, city and
municipal levels, this may not be so.
A comparative study on the degree of implementation of the RPMES at the various levels should help
policy makers address whatever gaps may exist at the sub-regional levels in the area of project
monitoring and evaluation.
The study should focus on enhancing the usefulness of the RPMES as a tool for project facilitation,
providing timely information on project implementation status, documenting best practices and
providing feedback for future project planning and design particularly at the sub-regional levels.
Strengthening the involvement of the sub-regional levels in the whole development planning process
up to project monitoring and evaluation is in synch with the government’s mantra of inclusive growth.
With a strong monitoring and evaluation system, policy makers can be provided timely and accurate
feedback on whether or not development projects have achieved their objectives and contributed to
the twin national goals of poverty reduction and inclusive growth.
4. EVALUATION METHODOLOGY
The descriptive (survey) method of research shall be used for the RPMES effectiveness study. Face-
to-face interview of selected respondents from the study area will be used. Guide questionnaires will
also be formulated to ensure that all aspects of the study will be covered by the consultants.
A review of RPMES – related documents will also be done, e.g., completed project monitoring
reports, field visit reports, minutes of RPMC and Local PMCs meetings cum project facilitation
sessions, RPMES manual and operational guides.
9
The study shall be guided by the evaluation framework shown in Figure 1.
5. SCOPE OF THE WORKS AND EXEPECTED OUTPUTS
5.1 Area Coverage of the Study The Study shall cover 17 areas of Region 1 as follows:
a. the regional level operationalization
b. the 4 provinces of Region 1, namely, Ilocos Norte, Ilocos Sur, La Union and Pangasinan
c. 1 city per province
d. 2 municipalities per province (1 from among the 1st to 3
rd class and 1 from among the 4
th to
5th class)
5.1 Phase I: Data Gathering Stage Following the evaluation framework as shown in Figure 1, the scope of consulting services under
this TOR shall include, but not necessarily be limited to the following:
Conduct activities such as data gathering, consultations and verifications with the concerned
government line agencies, non-government organizations and selected local government units.
Among the more important data / information which need to be gathered include the following:
a) The extent the RPMES is used as the monitoring tool at the regional, provincial, city
and municipal level to cover the following:
Scope and coverage
Organizational framework / structure
Project Monitoring Committees
Entities involved and their responsibilities
Systems framework
Process flow
Reporting
Monitoring procedures
Problem-solving mechanism
Procedure for computing accomplishments
b) Staff complement of the project monitoring units at the regional and sub-regional levels
including their responsibilities, if these exist at all
c) Logistical support provided for project monitoring activities at the regional and sub-regional
levels
d) Problems and issues encountered in the use of the RPMES
The main output of Phase I of the study will be a profile of the 17 areas detailing how the
RPMES is being operationalized.
5.2 Phase II: Study Proper
The study proper will focus on determining the extent the following RPMES objectives were
achieved at the regional and sub-regional levels:
a) provide a system for the integration, coordination and linkage of all monitoring activities in
the region;
10
b) provide up-to-date information on the overall status of project implementation at each level
for planning and budget allocation, to include employment generation of the various
programs/projects expressed in man-days;
c) identify problems/issues which impede project implementation for remedial actions at the
regional and sub-regional levels and to elevate unresolved issues and problems at these
levels to the Cabinet or the President for resolution and final action through the NPMC;
d) provide information on lessons learned in project implementation for planning and
implementation of future similar projects;
e) Staff complement of the project monitoring units at the regional and sub-regional levels
including their responsibilities, if these exist at all
11
Figure 1: Evaluation Framework
Note: The above evaluation framework is indicative only and does not preclude the shortlisted Consulting Firms from submitting their
own Evaluation Framework/ Methodology as part of their Technical Proposal.
Comparative Assessment across Areas
Conclusions/Recommendations
Phase II
Study Proper
Phase III
Review of the extent of the RPMES objectives’ attainment
Survey Questionnaire Interview
Relevant Documents Phase I
D
A
T
A
G
A
T
H
E
R
I
N
G
S
T
A
G
E
Tabulation/ Description of Findings along the following by area
RPMES as an M & E Tool
Scope and coverage
Organizational
Framework/Structure
Project Monitoring
Committee
Entities involved and their
responsibilities
Systems Framework
Process Flow
Reporting
Monitoring Procedures
Problem Solving
Mechanism
Procedure for computing
accomplishment
Problems/Issues Encountered
Other Logistical Support
Funds
Supplies
Vehicle
M & E Manpower
Support
12
f) Staff complement of the project monitoring units at the regional and sub-regional levels
including their responsibilities, if these exist at all
g) Logistical support provided for project monitoring activities at the regional and sub-
regional levels
h) Problems and issues encountered in the use of the RPMES
The main output of Phase I of the study will be a profile of the 17 areas detailing how the
RPMES is being operationalized.
5.2 Phase II: Study Proper
The study proper will focus on determining the extent the following RPMES objectives were
achieved at the regional and sub-regional levels:
i) provide a system for the integration, coordination and linkage of all monitoring activities in
the region;
j) provide up-to-date information on the overall status of project implementation at each level
for planning and budget allocation, to include employment generation of the various
programs/projects expressed in man-days;
k) identify problems/issues which impede project implementation for remedial actions at the
regional and sub-regional levels and to elevate unresolved issues and problems at these
levels to the Cabinet or the President for resolution and final action through the NPMC;
l) provide information on lessons learned in project implementation for planning and
implementation of future similar projects;
m) assess and ascertain whether projects implemented are supportive of regional development
goals and plans as well as national development thrusts and priorities; and
n) provide a venue for greater participation of nongovernment organizations (NGOs) in the
development planning process.
It is important that a comparative assessment of the degree of compliance / non - compliance of
the parties involved to the requirements of the RPMES be made as basis later on in the
formulation of recommendations to improve the usefulness and effectiveness of the system as a
monitoring and evaluation tool at the various levels.
Best practices at the regional and sub-regional levels shall be documented for sharing later on
with all stakeholders involved in the RPMES.
5.3 Phase III: Conclusions and Recommendations
The study recommendations should focus on how to make the RPMES a more effective
monitoring tool at the regional and sub-regional levels, This shall include recommendations on
all support needed to make the RPMES more effective, e.g., operational guide, organizational
structures, monitoring processes, manpower support, financial support and other needed support.
6. COMPOSITION OF STUDY TEAM AND ROLES OF TEAM MEMBERS
13
6.1 Key Experts and Activities
Following are the key experts required and the corresponding major activities which they will
undertake, among others:
6.1.1 Team Leader (1)
6.1.1.1 Provide overall direction to all personnel making up the Consulting Firm.
6.1.1.2 Manage relationships with concerned regional and sub-regional line agencies
(RLAs) and local government units (LGUs).
6.1.1.3 Prepare detailed, time-bound work plans for the preparation of the
effectiveness study, assigning various team members to each key task.
6.1.1.4 Provide technical support and guidance in all aspects of the consulting
services.
6.1.1.5 Organize and take the lead in the conduct of regular site visits in the LGUs
and RLAs covered in the study.
6.1.1.6 Monitor the progress of all tasks ensuring that deadlines relating to delivery
dates are met.
6.1.1.7 Take the lead and assign / delegate other tasks / activities to the members of
the Consulting Firm and support staff as may be required during the conduct of the
Study.
6.1.1.8 Ensure the timely delivery and quality control of all required outputs, in
particular the Inception Report, Monthly Progress Reports, the Interim Report, the
Draft Final Report and the Final Report.
6.1.1.9 Ensure that the NEDA RO1 and NEDA-MES are furnished the prints and
electronic copy of the abovementioned deliverables / reports, including all necessary
tables and figures to facilitate and expedite complete review of the submissions.
6.1.2 Assistant Team Leader (1)
6.1.2.1 Provide assistance to the Team Leader in the overall supervision of the study.
6.1.2.2 In the absence of the Team Leader, assume full responsibility, including
leadership of the Consulting Firm.
6.1.2.3 Check and review all prepared reports / documents relative to the conduct of
the study.
6.1.2.4 Take the lead in preparing the drafts of the Inception Report, Monthly
Reports, Interim Report, Draft Final Report and the Final Report.
6.1.2.5 Undertake other tasks / activities assigned / delegated by the Team Leader as
may be required during the conduct of the Study, as articulated under Section 3.2.1.7
of this TOR.
6.1.3 Support Staff (optional)
14
6.1.3.1 Provide technical and administrative support in the conduct of the field
interviews, e.g., coordinating with the concerned RLAs and LGUs on the date, time
and venue of the interview or meeting; making the necessary arrangements for any
needed logistical support for the field interviews.
6.1.3.2 Prepare all relevant documents which may be needed prior to the field
interviews / meetings to include presentation slides.
6.1.3.3. Document the proceedings of the field interviews and meetings.
6.1.3.4 Prepare all needed reports as may be required by the Team Leader or Deputy
Team Leader.
Aside from the specified scope of works mentioned above, the Consulting Firm may propose
additional works to enhance the Study, provided it shall bear no additional cost to
Government. The scope of any additional proposed works by the Consulting Firm shall be
established within the first three (3) months of the Study, subject to the approval of the NEDA
RO1.
The Consulting Firm may propose additional experts other than those listed herein, as it
deems necessary, as long as such proposal is consistent with its proposed approach and
methodology and without additional cost to Government. Moreover, the Consulting Firm may
propose an expert to undertake more than one (1) activity, provided that: (i) all the necessary
expertise required in delivering the desired output/s are present in the Firm; (ii) the activities
proposed to be undertaken by each expert should be consistent with the proposed approach
and methodology; and (iii) the merging of expertise shall not prejudice the outputs.
The Consulting Firm shall also accommodate at least one (1) counterpart personnel from
Government (i.e., personnel from NEDA RO1), who shall be detailed to the Project for the
purpose of capacity-building and technology transfer. (The Consulting Firm is not required to
pay remuneration to the Government counterpart staff, but will shoulder all expenses
attendant to their assigned tasks such as travel, accommodation, etc.).
6.2 EXPERTISE REQUIREMENTS AND QUALIFICATIONS
The conduct of the Study shall be undertaken by the Consulting Team composed of the following
key experts, whose minimum qualifications are stated herein.
6.2.1 Team Leader (1)
The Team Leader must have a Bachelor’s Degree in Social Sciences such as Economics,
Statistics, Urban and Regional Development, Project Management, Business / Public
Administration. An advanced degree in one of the above fields is desirable.
He / She must have at least 4 years of professional experience in the field of project
monitoring and evaluation, and research in the public sector, preferably related to urban
and regional development.
He / she must have excellent analytical and interpersonal skills along strong
organizational ability; must be able to obtain, analyze and evaluate a variety of
information; organize and interpret and present it in meaningful oral and written form for
varied audiences and provide solid analysis leading to sound decision-making. He / she
must be computer literate.
6.2.2 Assistant Team Leader (1)
15
The Assistant Team Leader must also have a Bachelor’s Degree in Social Sciences such
as Economics, Statistics, Urban and Regional Development, Project Management,
Business / Public Administration. A master’s degree in one of the above fields is
desirable.
He / She must have at least 2 years of professional experience in the field of project
monitoring and evaluation, and research in the public sector, preferably related to urban
and regional development.
He / she must have very good analytical and interpersonal skills along strong
organizational ability; must be able to obtain, analyze and evaluate a variety of
information; organize and interpret and present it in meaningful oral and written form for
varied audiences and provide solid analysis leading to sound decision-making. He / she
must be computer literate.
6.2.3 Support Staff (optional)
The support staff must have a Bachelor’s Degree in Social Sciences such as Statistics,
Economics, Business / Public Administration.
They must have good coordination skills, and written and oral communication skills.
They must possess a high degree of computer know-how.
They must be willing to work overtime and do varied tasks as may be assigned by the
Team Leader or Assistant Team Leader.
7. TIMELINES AND DELIVERABLES
7.1 Commencement Date and Period of Implementation
The Study shall be completed within a period of six (6) months, commencing from the date of
receipt of the Notice to Proceed (NTP). Refer to Annex A for an illustration of the indicative
implementation timelines for the Study.
7.2 Table of Deliverables
A detailed Work and Financial Plan (WFP) shall be submitted by the Consulting Firm to NEDA
RO1 for review and payment processing (copy furnished NEDA-MES for monitoring purposes)
within seven (7) calendar days from the date of commencement as indicated in NTP.
The deliverables for the subject as enumerated below shall be submitted by the Consulting Firm
in four (4) hard copies to NEDA RO1 for review and payment processing and two (2) hard
copies to NEDA-MES for monitoring purposes. An electronic/soft copy shall also be submitted
to NEDA RO1 and NEDA-MES.
Deliverable Time-line
Draft Inception Report including WFP
and presentation of methodology
One (1) month from receipt of NTP
Final Inception Report including WFP Half (0.5) month after receiving comments
from the NEDA
Monthly Progress Reports Monthly, within seven (7) calendar days from
end of agreed month-period
Interim Report Six (6) months from receipt of NTP
Draft Evaluation Report Eight-and-a-half (8.5) months from receipt of
16
NTP
Final Evaluation Report One (1) month after receipt from NEDA of
the evaluation / comments but not more than
ten (10) months from receipt of NTP
NEDA RO1 and NEDA-MES shall provide comments on the Draft Inception Report within ten
(10) calendar days from submission.
7.2.1 The Inception Report and WFP, which shall be submitted to NEDA RO1 and NEDA-MES
for approval, shall include the detailed work program for the scope of work of the Study, and a
detailed schedule for all work, including study methodology and field work related to applicable
tasks. It shall also include the fulfilment of the Study conditions listed in this TOR as well as
approaches and methodologies to be utilized in the development of the Study.
7.2.2 The Monthly Progress Reports shall include updates on the physical and financial
accomplishments of each of the activities under the Work and Financial Plan, including the
difficulties encountered and measures taken to overcome them.
7.2.3 The Interim Report shall include, among others, the status of implementation of the Study
in relation to the scope of work, as well as preliminary results of the Study.
7.2.4 The Evaluation Report shall be submitted within 30 calendar days after receipt from NEDA
RO1 and NEDA-MES of the evaluation/comments on the “Draft Evaluation Report”.
A “Recommendation for Release of Final Payment” shall be issued by NEDA RO1 to the
Consulting Firm.
8. CRITERIA FOR SELECTION
The Consulting Firm shall be selected using the Quality-Cost Based Selection procedure under
Republic Act (RA) No. 9184, or the Government Procurement Reform Act (GPRA), and its Revised
Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) and based on the following criteria:
Technical Proposal: 85%
Financial Proposal: 15%
9. SOURCE OF FUNDS
Funds for the conduct of the Evaluation Study shall be sourced from the NEDA-administered M&E
Fund.
10. INSTITUTIONAL SET-UP / RESPONSIBILITIES
10.1 NEDA-MES
10.1.1 Shall download the funds to the NEDA RO1 upon the final approval of the study
by the Steering Committee and once the contract becomes executory;
10.1.2 Shall provide its comments and recommendations on the study on a quarterly
basis and prior to the finalization of the report;
10.1.3 Shall provide assistance to the NEDA RO1 in the preparation of the needed
financial reports as required by the Department of Budget and Management (DBM) and
other reportorial requirements.
17
10.2 NEDA RO1
10.2.1 Shall be the Executing Agency (i.e., representative of the Government in the
Contract Agreement with the Consulting Firm);
10.2.2 Shall through its NEDA Bids and Awards Committee (NBAC), be responsible for
facilitating the bidding and tendering of the consulting services in compliance with RA
9184 and its Revised IRR;
10.2.3 Shall be responsible for the disbursement of the fund for the conduct of the
Effectiveness Study once the contract becomes executed;
10.2.4 Shall be responsible for the preparation and submission of financial reports as
required by the DBM and other reportorial requirements regarding the M&E Fund
administration;
10.2.5 Shall evaluate all requests for payments/billings and determine the
acceptability/correctness of the same;
10.2.6 Shall have the option to detail at least one (1) counterpart technical personnel to
the Project for the purpose of on-the-job capacity building/technology transfer; and
10.2.7 Shall provide, upon the request of the Consulting Firm, available information/data
and also, if available, copies of previous related studies subject to the execution of the
Non-Disclosure Agreement, if necessary.
10.2.8 Shall be the beneficiary/End-User of the consulting services;
10.2.9 Shall be responsible for contract implementation and management, including
ensuring the quality of outputs. Further, the NEDA RO1 shall be responsible for the
monitoring and evaluation of the progress of the Study and approval of reports to ensure
delivery of outputs as specified in Sections 2, 3 and 5 of this TOR;
10.2.10 Shall provide assistance in the coordination with other agencies related to the
Study;
10.2.11 Shall report to NEDA-MES the physical progress of the Study on a quarterly
basis;
10.2.12 Shall provide feedback to the Consulting Firm on the comments and
recommendations of the NEDA-MES for consideration in the study.
10.3 Consulting Firm
10.3.1 Shall be responsible for the conduct of the Study and the timely delivery of
results/outputs as indicated under Sections 4, 5 and 7 of this TOR;
10.3.2 Shall be responsible for the provision of necessary office space, which shall be
within close proximity to NEDA-1, for their project staff as well as the Government’s
detailed personnel, including the necessary office equipment (i.e., computer, printers,
office supplies, etc.) for the conduct of the Study. All equipment procured for the
development of the Project shall be transferred to the Government by the end of the
Project;
18
10.3.3 Shall shoulder all expenses required in the conduct of the Study, including travel
costs and lodging of detailed Government personnel during field visits, except for their
salaries;
10.3.4 Shall: (a) carry out the services with sound evaluation theories and practices to
ensure that the final works will provide the most economical and feasible development
for the Study; (b) accept full responsibility for the consulting services to be performed
under this TOR for which the Consulting Firm is liable to NEDA-CO/NEDA-1; (c)
perform the work in an efficient and diligent manner and shall use its best effort to keep
reimbursable costs down to the possible minimum without impairing the quality of
services rendered; and (d) comply with, and strictly observe any laws regarding
workmen’s health and safety, workmen’s welfare, compensation for injuries, minimum
wage, hours of labor and other labor laws;
10.3.5 Shall: (a) keep accurate and systematic records and accounts in respect of the
services in such form and detail as is customary and sufficient to establish accurately that
the costs and expenditures under this TOR have been duly incurred; and (b) permit the
duly authorized representatives of the Government from time to time to inspect its
records and accounts as well as to audit the same;
10.3.6 Shall not assign nor sub-contract any part of the evaluation services under this
TOR to any person or firm, except with prior written consent of NEDA RO1/NEDA-
MES. The approval by the Government to the assignment of any part of said services or
to the engagement by the Consulting Firm of sub-contractors to perform any part of the
same shall not relieve the Consulting Firm of any obligations under this TOR;
10.3.7 Shall prohibit full-time foreign staff during his assignment under this TOR to
engage, directly or indirectly, either in his name, or through the Consulting Firm, in any
business or professional activities in the Philippines other than the performance of his
duties or assignment under this TOR;
10.3.8 Shall not at any time communicate to any person or entity any information
disclosed to them for the purpose of this services, nor shall the Consulting Firm make
public any information as to the recommendations formulated in the course of or as a
result of the services, except with prior consent of NEDA RO1/NEDA-MES;
10.3.9 Shall agree that nothing contained herein shall be construed as establishing or
creating between the Government and the Consulting Firm, the relationship of employer
and employee or principal and agent, it being understood that the position of the
Consulting Firm and anyone else performing the services is that of an independent
contractor;
10.3.10 Shall hold the Government free from any and all liabilities, suits, actions,
demands, or damages arising from death or injuries to persons or properties, or any loss
resulting from or caused by said personnel incident to or in connection with the services
under this TOR. The Consulting Firm shall agree to indemnify, protect and defend at its
own expense the Government and its agents from and against all actions, claims and
liabilities arising out of acts done by the Consulting Firm or its staff in the performance
of the services, including the use of, or violation of any copyrighted materials, patented
invention, article or appliance;
10.3.11 Shall provide on-the-job capacity building/technology transfer to the
Government’s personnel detailed to the Project.
19
11. APPROVED BUDGET FOR CONTRACT (ABC)
11.1 The ABC for the proposed Study is ONE MILLION FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND
AND 00/100 PESOS (PhP1,500,000.00), inclusive of all applicable government taxes and
charges, professional fees, and other incidental and administrative costs.
11.2 Please note that this consulting contract shall be a fixed price contract. Any extension of
contract time shall not involve any additional cost to the Government.
12. PAYMENT SCHEME/SCHEDULE
12.1 Billings shall be in accordance with the following delivery schedule and subject to the usual
Government accounting and auditing requirements:
Description Payment Amount(PhP)
Upon acceptance of the
Inception Report 20% 300,000.00
Upon acceptance of the
Interim Report 30% 450,000.00
Upon acceptance of the Draft
Final Report 25% 375,000.00
Upon acceptance of the Final
Report 25% 375,000.00
TOTAL 100% 1,500,000.00
12.2 The Consulting Firm may also be allowed to submit its own payment schemes for the
remuneration component only subject to compliance with existing regulations/laws.
12.3 No advance payment shall be made.
12.4 Since all of these payments shall be subject to the usual government accounting and
auditing requirements. The Consulting Firm is expected to be familiar with the Government
Accounting and Auditing Manual (GAAM).
13. RETENTION PAYMENT
13.1 A retention payment of ten (10) percent shall be withheld. It shall be based on the total
amount due to the Consulting Firm prior to any deduction and shall be retained from every
progress payment until 50 percent of the value of Study, as determined by NEDA RO1 is
completed. If, after 50 percent completion, the Study is satisfactorily done and on schedule, no
additional retention shall be made; otherwise, the ten (10) percent retention shall be imposed.
13.2 The total "retention money" shall be due for release upon approval of the Final Report. The
Consulting Firm may, however, request the substitution of the retention money for each progress
billing with irrevocable standby letters of credit from a commercial bank, bank guarantees, or
surety bonds callable on demand, of amounts equivalent to the retention money substituted for
and acceptable to NEDA RO1, provided that the project is on schedule and is satisfactorily
undertaken. Otherwise, the ten (10) percent retention shall be made. Said irrevocable standby
letters of credit, bank guarantees and/or surety bonds, to be posted in favor of NEDA RO1 shall
be valid for the duration of the contract.
20
14. LIQUIDATED DAMAGES
14.1 Where the Consulting Firm refuses or fails to satisfactorily complete the work within the
specified contract time, plus any time extension duly granted and is hereby in default under the
contract, the Consulting Firm shall pay NEDA RO1 for liquidated damages, and not by way of
penalty, an amount, as provided in the conditions of contract, equal to at least one tenth (1/10) of
one (1) percent of the cost of the unperformed portion of the works for every day of delay.
Should the amount of liquidated damages reaches 15 percent of the contract amount, NEDA
RO1 shall at its own discretion terminate the contract without prejudice to any further action it
may take to recover whatever losses incurred due to non - performance of the Consulting Firm.
14.2 To be entitled to such liquidated damages, NEDA RO1 does not have to prove that it has
incurred actual damages. Such amount shall be deducted from any money due or which may
become due the Consulting Firm under the contract and/or collect such liquidated damages from
the retention money or other securities posted by the Consulting Firm whichever is convenient to
NED RO1
21
ANNEX A
STUDY OF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE RPMES AT THE SUB-NATIONAL
LEVELS
GANTT CHART OF ACTIVITIES
Note: The above chart is indicative only and does not preclude the shortlisted Consulting Firm from
submitting their own Work Plan and Gantt Chart of Activities as part of their Technical
Proposal
ACTIVITIES
MON
TH 1
MON
TH 2
MON
TH 3
MON
TH 4
MON
TH 5
MON
TH 6
MON
TH 7
MON
TH 8
MON
TH 9
MON
TH 10
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
1 Data gathering and
interview of identified
respondents
x x x x x x x x x x x x
2
Data review and analysis
x x x x x x x x x x x
3
Consolidation of findings
x x x x x x
4 Preparation of
conclusions and
recommendations
x x x x
5 Finalization of the
Effectiveness Study
x x x x
6
7
8
22
ANNEX B
List of Available Baseline Data:
a) At the regional Level:
Project monitoring reports (Annual Project Monitoring Plans and Quarterly Project
Monitoring Reports)
Agenda folders of the RPMC meetings
Project field visit reports
Problem-solving session highlights
RPMES Budget utilization
Documentation reports on the RPMC Searches
Documentation reports on the Annual RPMES Conference
Project Selection Criteria
b) At the Provincial Level
Project monitoring reports
Other M&E – related documents
c) At the city and municipal levels
No info on available M&E-related documents
23
TERMS OF REFERENCE
Study of the efficiency of the Banaoang Pump Irrigation Project (BPIP) in providing irrigation
to its Service Area
1. BACKGROUND/RATIONALE
1.1 Contracting Authority
The General Appropriations Act (GAA) for FY 2016 has allocated the amount of Php
1,500,000.00 for the conduct of impact evaluation studies to be administered by the National
Economic and Development Authority Regional Office 1 (NEDA RO1).
For this Terms of Reference (TOR), NEDA RO1 shall be the Executing Agency and Contracting
Party while XXX (Consulting firm) will be the Consulting Firm. The proposed project study is
consistent with NEDA’s major final outputs (MFOs), specifically under Monitoring and
Evaluation (M&E) Services.
1.2 Relevant Country/Sector Context
BPIP is in line with the government’s plan to increase agricultural production, as indicated in the
Updated Philippine Development Plan (PDP) and Regional Development Plan (RDP).
Specifically, the project supports the government’s thrust of bringing potential areas under
irrigation and rehabilitating existing irrigation systems that are in need of repair.
1.3 Current State of the Irrigation Sector
Rice production is directly linked to the Government’s policy of attaining national self-sufficiency
in food and the promotion of rural development in the pursuit of equitable, efficient and
environmentally sustainable growth.
At present, the productivity of paddy is approximately 4.1 tons/hectare in irrigated paddies and
3.0 tons/hectare in rain-fed paddies. This fact implies that irrigation water delivery is undoubtedly
the primary input to increasing rice productivity.
In Region 1, the total irrigation coverage increased by 0.71 percentage points, from 58.89% in
2014 to 59.6% in 2015.
2. USEFULNESS OF THE STUDY
2.1 The Study seeks to gather lessons learned from this irrigation project that could be used for future
benefit-transfer analysis of similar pump irrigation projects in the region and even elsewhere in
the country.
2.2 Further, the study will help the NEDA RO1 staff as development planners in the technical
assessment of irrigation projects viability for different irrigation design, location, water
requirements, demand, and applications.
3. OBJECTIVES
3.1 Overall Objective of the Study
The primary objective of the Study under this TOR is to evaluate the efficiency of the BPIP 1
project in delivering irrigation water to its designed service area.
24
In addition, the Study should seek to identify other possible projects for the improvement and
rehabilitation of the existing facilities and/or construction of new facilities to ensure the adequacy
and sustainability of the irrigation supply in the project area.
Lastly, the Study should also look into measures to improve and possibly restructure the
management and organization structure of the BPIP for optimal efficiency in delivering irrigation
supply in the most cost-effective manner.
4. SCOPE OF THE WORKS
4.1 General Scope of Works
The scope of works of the Consulting Firm under this TOR shall include, but not necessarily be
limited to, the following:
4.1.1. Review
Review of all existing reports, studies and documentation regarding the BPIP.
4.1.2. Demand Assessment
Carry out an assessment of the water demand given the various cropping pattern and
cropping season in the area through the review of all existing reports, studies and
documentation.
4.1.3. Social/Consumer Assessment
Review existing consumer assessment studies and willingness-to-pay surveys, and
conduct site visits to come up with a consumer profile.
4.1.4. Irrigation System
Compare and contrast the BPIP in terms of water conveyance, structure, source,
operation and maintenance and management with other irrigation systems.
4.1.5. Data Gathering
Gather necessary data needed for various analyses to produce the required
deliverables.
25
5. EVALUATION FRAMEWORK/ METHODOLOGY
Note: The above evaluation framework is indicative only and does not preclude the shortlisted
Consulting Firms from submitting their own Evaluation Framework/ Methodology as part of their
Technical Proposal.
6. COMPOSITION OF STUDY TEAM AND ROLES OF TEAM MEMBERS
6.1.1. Team Leader
6.1.1.1. Provide overall direction to all specialists making up the Consulting Team;
6.1.1.2. Manage relationships with concerned departments/units of NEDA at the Central
Office and Regional Office 1(NEDA-MES & NEDA RO1), local government units
(LGUs), as well as with other stakeholders including farmers, non-government
organizations, and project-affected families;
6.1.1.3. Provide technical support and guidance in all aspects of the consulting services;
6.1.1.4. Organize and take the lead in the conduct of regular site visits to the dam site and
irrigation service areas for the technical supervision in undertaking the required
survey and mapping;
6.1.1.5. Monitor the progress of related work ensuring that deadlines relating to delivery dates
stipulated in their proposal are met;
6.1.1.6. Take the lead and assign/delegate other tasks/activities to the members of the
Consultancy Team and NEDA RO1 support staff as may be required during the
conduct of the Study; including, but not limited to: (1) undertaking of the Efficiency
Study and other related studies for the proposed Project; and (2) review of the
existing institutional management and arrangements of the BPIP operation, among
others
•Review of baseline data,existing documentations, studies,policies and reports Situation Analysis
•Actual field survey, interview,FGD and site visits
•Other related data gathering activities Data Gathering
•Quantitative and Qualitative (Statistical) Analysis
•Geo-spatial analysis
•Overall review of the Irrigation design
Data Analysis/ Assessment
•Processing and Consolidation of Results
•Presentation of Results Evaluation of Results
• Conclusions
• Recommendations/ Intenventions
Conclusion/ Recommendations
26
6.1.1.7. Prepare the specific details on the conduct and deliverable requirements of the Ex-
Post Evaluation (Efficiency Study), as part of the Consultant’s Inception Report and
Work Plan, which shall be subject to consultation with and approval of NEDA RO1;
6.1.1.8. Ensure the timely delivery and quality control of all required outputs;
6.1.1.9. Ensure that NEDA-MES & NEDA RO1 are furnished with the prints and electronic
copy of the abovementioned deliverables/reports, including all necessary tables and
figures to facilitate and expedite complete review of the submissions.
6.1.2. Assistant Team Leader
6.1.2.1. Provide assistance to the Team Leader in the overall supervision of the various
assessment study activities;
6.1.2.2. In the absence of the Team Leader, assume the full responsibility, including
leadership of the Consulting Team;
6.1.2.3. Collect the necessary data needed such as the latest Operation & Maintenance report,
which may include data on the firmed-up service area (FUSA ), actual irrigated area
during wet and dry season and production performance (average yield), and in
coordination with the other key experts;
6.1.2.4. Review the overall design of the BPIP vis-a-vis coverage area’s cropping pattern and
water requirement;
6.1.2.5. In collaboration with other experts/specialists, select the most appropriate scheme for
the objective of the project. Recommend the definitive viable, acceptable and doable
plan for implementation;
6.1.2.6. Undertake other tasks/activities assigned/delegated by the Team Leader as may be
required during the conduct of the Study, as articulated under Section 6.1.1.6 of this
TOR.
6.1.3. Geospatial Analyst
6.1.3.1. Review available maps and survey data for the project area, if any;
6.1.3.2. Gather GIS operable/compatible or printed maps of the project area for geo-spatial
analysis, if available;
6.1.3.3. Prepare Base Map of the project area using GIS software for geo-spatial analysis, if
necessary;
6.1.3.4. Conduct geo-spatial analysis in coordination with other key experts, if any;
6.1.3.5. Monitor the conduct of survey works such as topographic survey of main canal
alignment and the establishment of horizontal and vertical control based on the
National Mapping and Resource Information Authority (NAMRIA) reference point
(PRS 92);
6.1.3.6. Undertake other tasks/activities assigned/delegated by the Team Leader as may be
required during the conduct of the Study, as articulated under Section 6.1.1.6 of this
TOR.
27
6.2. EXPERTISE REQUIREMENTS AND QUALIFICATIONS
6.2.1. Team Leader
6.2.1.1. Team Leader must have at least a Bachelor’s degree in Engineering
(Civil/Agricultural) or equivalent, with at least four (4) years of professional
experience in the field ex-post evaluation of infrastructure projects, data gathering
and geo-spatial planning and analysis, and has handled at least three (3) projects of
similar nature as a team leader.
6.2.1.2. In addition, the Team Leader must be knowledgeable on mixed quantitative and
qualitative project evaluation methodologies.
6.2.2. Assistant Team Leader
6.2.2.1. Assistant Team Leader must have at least a Bachelor’s degree in Agricultural or
Irrigation Engineering or equivalent, with at least three (3) years of professional
experience in the field of irrigation design and water resources.
6.2.2.2. In addition, the Assistant Team Leader must be proficient with geo- spatial
analysis, project evaluation methodologies.
6.2.3. Surveyor
6.2.3.1. Surveyor must have at least a Bachelor’s degree in civil engineering/ Geodetic
engineering or equivalent, with at least two (2) years of professional experience.
6.2.3.2. Surveyor must be proficient in geospatial and statistical analysis in coordination
with other key experts, if any;
The Team Leader shall take the lead in undertaking the Ex-Post Evaluation (Efficiency Study)
and other necessary related studies, among others, as previously articulated under Section 6.1.1.6
of this TOR. The members of the Consulting Team shall be required to provide data/information
as needed by the other experts and/or by the Team Leader related to the conduct of the Ex-Post
Evaluation (Efficiency Study).
In addition to the above, each of the members of the Consultant’s Team shall prepare inputs to the
Inception Report, Monthly Progress Reports, and other reports specific to their assigned tasks.
Prints and electronic copies of the reports specific to the members’ assigned tasks, including
tables and figures, shall be required to be submitted to NEDA RO1 to facilitate review.
Aside from the specified scope of works mentioned above, the Consulting Firm may propose
additional works to enhance the Study, provided it shall bear no additional cost to Government.
The scope of any additional proposed works by the Consulting Firm shall be established within
the first three (3) months of the Study, subject to the approval of NEDA.
The Consulting Firm may propose additional experts other than those listed herein, as it deems
necessary, as long as such proposal is consistent with its proposed approach and methodology and
without additional cost to Government. Moreover, the Consulting Firm may propose an expert to
undertake more than one (1) activity/expertise, provided that:
all the necessary expertise required in delivering the desired output/s are present in
the Team;
the activities proposed to be undertaken by each expert should be consistent with the
proposed approach and methodology; and
28
the merging of expertise shall not prejudice the outputs.
The Consulting Firm shall also accommodate at least five (5) counterpart personnel from
Government (i.e., personnel from NEDA RO1 and its partner SUCs), who shall be detailed to the
Project for the purpose of capacity-building and technology transfer. (The Consulting Firm is not
required to pay remuneration to the Government counterpart staff, but will shoulder all expenses
attendant to their assigned tasks such as travel, accommodation, etc.).
7. TIMELINES AND DELIVERABLES/ OUTPUTS
7.1. Commencement Date and Period of Implementation
The Study shall be completed within a period of six (6) months, commencing from the date
of receipt of the Notice to Proceed (NTP). Refer to Annex A for an illustration of the
indicative implementation timelines for the Study.
7.2. Table of Deliverables
A detailed Work and Financial Plan (WFP) shall be submitted by the Consulting Firm to
NEDA RO1 for review within seven (7) calendar days from the date of commencement as
indicated in NTP.
Deliverable Timeline
Draft Inception Report including WFP One (1) month from receipt of NTP
Final Inception Report including WFP Half (0.5) month after receiving
comments from NEDA -1
Monthly Progress Reports Monthly, within seven (7) calendar days
from end of agreed month-period
Interim Report and presentation of
study methodology
Three (3) months from the receipt of
NTP
Draft Ex-Post Evaluation Report
(Efficiency Study)
Four (4) months from receipt of NTP
Final Ex-Post Evaluation Report
(Efficiency Study)
Half (0.5) month after receiving
comments from NEDA RO1
Presentation of Ex-Post Evaluation
Report (Efficiency Study) to NEDA
RO1 staff
Before the contract ends
NEDA RO1 shall provide comments on the Draft Inception Report within ten (10) calendar
days from submission.
7.2.1. The Inception Report and WFP, which shall be submitted to NEDA RO1 for approval,
shall include the detailed work program for the scope of work and methodology of the
Study, and a detailed schedule for all work, including field work related to applicable
tasks. It shall also include the fulfilment of the Study conditions listed in this TOR as
well as approaches and methodologies to be utilized in the development of the Study.
7.2.2. The Monthly Progress Reports shall include updates on the physical and financial
accomplishments of each of the activities under the Work and Financial Plan, including
the difficulties encountered and measures taken to overcome them.
7.2.3. The Interim Report shall include, among others, the status of implementation of the
Study in relation to the scope of work, methodology of the study as well as preliminary
results of the Study.
29
7.2.4. The Interim Report shall include, among others, the status of implementation of the
Study in relation to the scope of work, as well as preliminary results of the Study.
7.2.5. The Ex-Post Evaluation Report (Efficiency Study Report) shall be submitted within 30
calendar days after receipt from NEDA RO1 of the evaluation/comments on the “Draft
Ex-Post Evaluation Report (Efficiency Study)”. The Efficiency Study report will
contain the details related to the Project, including, among others:
7.2.5.1. Findings, Issues and Problems;
7.2.5.2. Data and Observations Gathered;
7.2.5.3. Generated Maps, Tables, charts, etc.;
7.2.5.4. Results of Different Analyses (Qualitative and Quantitative); and
7.2.5.5. Conclusions/ Recommendations.
7.2.6. A “Recommendation for Release of Final Payment” shall be issued by NEDA RO1
(copy-furnished the Consulting Firm for information) within 14 calendar days upon
receipt of the “Final Efficiency Study Report” and satisfactory review thereof.
8. CRITERIA FOR SELECTION
8.1 The Consulting Firm shall be selected using the Quality-Cost Based Selection procedure under
Republic Act (RA) No. 9184, or the Government Procurement Reform Act (GPRA), and its
Revised Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) and based on the following criteria:
Technical Proposal: 85%
Financial Proposal: 15%
9. SOURCE OF FUNDS
9.1 Funds for the conduct of the Efficiency Study shall be sourced from NEDA-Monitoring and
Evaluation (M&E) Fund to be downloaded by NEDA CO once the contract becomes
executed.
10. IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENTS
10. 1 NEDA Monitoring and Evaluation Staff (MES)
10.1.1. Shall download the funds to the NEDA RO1 upon the final approval of
the study by the Steering Committee and once the contract becomes
executory;
10.1.2. Shall provide its comments and recommendations on the study on a
quarterly basis and prior to the finalization of the report;
10.1.3. Shall provide assistance to the NEDA RO1 in the preparation of the
needed financial reports as required by the Department of Budget and
Management (DBM) and other reportorial requirements.
10.2. NEDA Regional Office 1(NEDA RO1)
10.2.1. Shall be the Executing Agency (i.e., representative of the Government in
the Contract Agreement with the Consulting Firm);
30
10.2.2. Shall, through its NEDA RO1 Bids and Awards Committee (NBAC), be
responsible for facilitating the bidding and tendering of the consulting
services in compliance with RA 9184 and its Revised IRR with the
Executing Agency (EA);
10.2.3. Shall be responsible for the preparation and submission of financial
reports as required by the Department of Budget and Management
(DBM) and other reportorial requirements regarding the M & E Fund
administration;
10.2.4. Shall evaluate all request for payments/billings and determine the
acceptability/correctness of the same;
10.2.5. Shall be the beneficiary/End-User of the consulting services;
10.2.6. Shall provide, upon the request of the Consulting Firm, available
information/data and also, if available, copies of previous related studies
subject to the execution of the Non-Disclosure Agreement, if necessary;
10.2.7. Shall be responsible for contract implementation and management,
including ensuring the quality of outputs. Further, NEDA RO1 shall
be responsible for the monitoring and evaluation of the progress of the
Study and approval of reports to ensure delivery of outputs as
specified in Sections 2, 3 and 5 of this TOR;
10.2.8. Shall provide assistance in the coordination with other regional line
agencies related to the Study;
10.2.9. Shall warrant to the extent possible, with assistance from NEDA-
RO1, that the Consulting Firm shall have free and unimpeded access
to all lands and properties required for the effective execution of the
services. Likewise, NEDA RO1 shall be jointly responsible with
Consulting Firm for any damage to such land or any property thereon
resulting from such access (unless such damage is caused by the
willful default or negligence of the Consulting Firm or its Staff);
10.2.10. Shall have the option to detail at least five (5) NEDA RO1 technical
personnel and staff from the partner SUCs to the Project for the
purpose of on-the-job capacity building/technology transfer.
10.3. Consulting Firm
10.3.1. Shall be responsible for the conduct of the Study and the timely
delivery of results/outputs as indicated under Sections 2, 3 and 5 of
this TOR;
10.3.2. Shall be responsible for the provision of necessary office space, which
shall be within close proximity to NEDA RO1, for their project staff
as well as the Government’s detailed personnel, including the
necessary office equipment (i.e., computer, printers, office supplies,
etc.) for the conduct of the Study. All equipment procured for the
development of the Project shall be transferred to the Government by
the end of the Project;
31
10.3.3. Shall shoulder all expenses required in the conduct of the Study,
including travel costs and lodging of detailed Government personnel
during field visits, except for their salaries;
10.3.4. Shall: (a) carry out the services with sound engineering theories and
practices to ensure that the final works will provide the most
economical and feasible development for the Study; (b) accept full
responsibility for the consulting services to be performed under this
TOR for which the Consulting Firm is liable to NEDA RO1; (c)
perform the work in an efficient and diligent manner and shall use its
best effort to keep reimbursable costs down to the possible minimum
without impairing the quality of services rendered; and (d) comply
with, and strictly observe any laws regarding workmen’s health and
safety, workmen’s welfare, compensation for injuries, minimum
wage, hours of labor and other labor laws;
10.3.5. Shall: (a) keep accurate and systematic records and accounts in respect
of the services in such form and detail as is customary and sufficient
to establish accurately that the costs and expenditures under this TOR
have been duly incurred; and (b) permit the duly authorized
representatives of the Government from time to time to inspect its
records and accounts as well as to audit the same;
10.3.6. 8.3.6 Shall not assign nor sub-contract any part of the professional
engineering services under this TOR to any person or firm, except
with prior written consent of NEDA-RO1. The approval by the
Government to the assignment of any part of said services or to the
engagement by the Consulting Firm of sub-contractors to perform any
part of the same shall not relieve the Consulting Firm of any
obligations under this TOR;
10.3.7. Shall, during or after the conclusion or termination of the Study, limit
its role under the Project to the provision of the services and hereby
disqualifies itself and any other contractor, consulting engineer or
manufacturer with which it is associated or affiliated, from the
provision of goods and services other than the services herein, except
as NEDA-RO1 may otherwise agree;
10.3.8. Shall prohibit full-time foreign staff during his assignment under this
TOR to engage, directly or indirectly, either in his name, or through
the Consulting Firm, in any business or professional activities in the
Philippines other than the performance of his duties or assignment
under this TOR;
10.3.9. Shall not at any time communicate to any person or entity any
information disclosed to them for the purpose of this services, nor
shall the Consulting Firm make public any information as to the
recommendations formulated in the course of or as a result of the
services, except with prior consent of NEDA RO1;
10.3.10. Shall agree that nothing contained herein shall be construed as
establishing or creating between the Government and the Consulting
Firm, the relationship of employer and employee or principal and
agent, it being understood that the position of the Consulting Firm and
32
anyone else performing the services is that of an independent
contractor;
10.3.11. Shall hold the Government free from any and all liabilities, suits,
actions, demands, or damages arising from death or injuries to persons
or properties, or any loss resulting from or caused by said personnel
incident to or in connection with the services under this TOR. The
Consulting Firm shall agree to indemnify, protect and defend at its
own expense the Government and its agents from and against all
actions, claims and liabilities arising out of acts done by the
Consulting Firm or its staff in the performance of the services,
including the use of, or violation of any copyrighted materials,
patented invention, article or appliance;
10.3.12. Shall provide on-the-job capacity building/technology transfer to the
Government’s personnel detailed to the Project.
11. APPROVED BUDGET FOR CONTRACT (ABC)
11.1. The ABC for the proposed Study is One Million Five Hundred Thousand Peso
(PhP1,500,000.00), inclusive of all applicable government taxes and charges,
professional fees, and other incidental and administrative costs which shall be paid on
a reimbursement basis (e.g., travel expenses, communication expenses, office
supplies, office space, and other expenses deemed necessary for the Project as
certified by the Executing Agency). Attached, as Annex B, is the breakdown of the
ABC.
11.2. Please note that this consulting contract shall be a fixed price contract. Any extension
of contract time shall not involve any additional cost to the Government.
12. PAYMENT SCHEME/SCHEDULE
12.1. Billings shall be in accordance with the following delivery schedule and subject to the
usual Government accounting and auditing requirements:
Description Indicative
Date
Percentage (%) Amount(PhP)
Upon Acceptance of
Inception Report and
presentation of study
methodology
Week 5 20% 300,000.00
Upon Acceptance of
Interim Report Week 14 30%
450,000.00
Upon acceptance of the
Draft Final Report Week 21 25%
375,000.00
Upon acceptance/
presentation of the Final
Report and all deliverables
Week 24 25% 375,000.00
TOTAL 100%
1,500,000.00
33
12.2 The Consulting Firm may also be allowed to submit its own payment schemes for the
remuneration component only subject to compliance with existing regulations/laws.
12.3 No advance payment shall be made.
12.4 Since all of these payments shall be subject to the usual government accounting and
auditing requirements. The Consulting Firm is expected to be familiar with the
Government Accounting and Auditing Manual (GAAM).
13. RETENTION PAYMENT
13.1. A retention payment of ten (10) percent shall be withheld. It shall be based on the
total amount due to the Consulting Firm prior to any deduction and shall be
retained from every progress payment until 50 percent of the value of Study, as
determined by NEDA RO1, is completed. If, after 50 percent completion, the
Study is satisfactorily done and on schedule, no additional retention shall be made;
otherwise, the ten (10) percent retention shall be imposed.
13.2. The total "retention money" shall be due for release upon approval of the Final
Report. The Consulting Firm may, however, request the substitution of the
retention money
13.3. for each progress billing with irrevocable standby letters of credit from a
commercial bank, bank guarantees, or surety bonds callable on demand, of
amounts equivalent to the retention money substituted for and acceptable to
NEDA RO1, provided that the project is on schedule and is satisfactorily
undertaken. Otherwise, the ten (10) percent retention shall be made. Said
irrevocable standby letters of credit, bank guarantees and/or surety bonds, to be
posted in favor of NEDA RO1 shall be valid for the duration of the contract.
14. LIQUIDATED DAMAGES
14.1 Where the Consulting Firm refuses or fails to satisfactorily complete the work
within the specified contract time, plus any time extension duly granted and is
hereby in default under the contract, the Consulting Firm shall pay NEDA RO1 for
liquidated damages, and not by way of penalty, an amount, as provided in the
conditions of contract, equal to at least one tenth (1/10) of one (1) percent of the
cost of the unperformed portion of the works for every day of delay. Should the
amount of liquidated damages reaches 15 percent of the contract amount, NEDA
RO1 shall at its own discretion terminate the contract without prejudice to any
further action it may take to recover whatever losses incurred due to non-
performance of the Consulting Firm.
14.2 To be entitled to such liquidated damages, NEDA RO1 does not have to prove that
it has incurred actual damages. Such amount shall be deducted from any money
due or which may become due the Consulting Firm under the contract and/or
collect such liquidated damages from the retention money or other securities
posted by the Consulting Firm whichever is convenient to NEDA RO1.
34
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
1Review of existing records,
reports and maps
2
Design of project evaluation tools
& methods , data gathering
techniques to be used
3Preparation of Draft Inception
report
4Review of Draft Efficiency Study
report by the NEDA
5Submission of Monthly progress
report
6Preparation of Final Inception
report
7 Data gathering, survey proper
8 Data processing and analyses
9Preparation of Draft Efficiency
Study report
10Review of Draft Efficiency Study
report by the NEDA
10Preparation of Final Efficiency
Study report
11Review of Final Efficiency Study
report by the NEDA
12Submission of all deliverables to
NEDA-CO and NEDA 1
13Presentation of outputs to NEDA
1 staff
ActivityMonth 1 Month 2 Month 3 Month 4 Month 5 Month 6
ANNEX A
GANTT CHART OF ACTIVITIES
STUDY OF THE EFFICIENCY OF THE BANAOANG PUMP IRRIGATION PROJECT
Note: The above chart is indicative only and does not preclude the shortlisted Consulting
Firms from submitting their own Work Plan and Gantt Chart of Activities as part of
their Technical Proposal
35
ANNEX C
List of Available Baseline Data:
a) FS Report
b) PER
c) Quarterly accomplishment reports