Request for Proposals. Enhancing and Updating the Canadian Evaluation Society Sanctioned. Logic Model Workshop. Canadian Evaluation Society

Transcription

1 Request for Proposals Enhancing and Updating the Canadian Evaluation Society Sanctioned Logic Model Workshop Canadian Evaluation Society March 2011

2 Contents 1.0 Proposal Content and Requirements Submission of Proposals Selection Criteria General Conditions Questions and Inquiries Appendix A... 6

3 1 P age 1.0 Proposal Content and Requirements 1.1 Purpose and Objectives The purpose of this Request for Proposal (RFP) is to solicit proposals for enhancing/updating the Canadian Evaluation Society (the Society, CES) sanctioned Logic Model Workshop. 1.2 Nature and Scope of the Work In 2004, the CES commissioned an intermediate level one-day course on the topic of Logic Models. The aim of this workshop is to build the capacity of participants to assess, develop and utilize logic models for planning and evaluation. Appendix A presents the overview for this workshop, which covers the following topics: Introduction What is evaluation and how do logic models fit in? What is a logic model and how did this all start? What are the different components of logic models? What are the potential uses, benefits and limitations of logic models? What are the different types of logic models? What are the characteristics of good logic models? How do you build a logic model? What are the challenges in developing and using logic models? Over the last number of years, knowledge and understanding of logic models has advanced, requiring the update of the material currently covered in this workshop. In particular, feedback received about this training indicates that the materials are outdated and are at a more beginner level. As such, bidders are encouraged to suggest proposed changes to the approach for the workshop and the topics covered to ensure the relevance of materials at an intermediate level. The proposed changes to the approach for the workshop could also include a one-day, two-day, or two one-day workshop format. This project requires the contractor to: review the existing workshop materials (i.e., presentation, trainer s guide, trainer s resources and participant handouts), which are based on the overview included in Appendix A;

4 2 P age review available feedback forms from recently completed (i.e., within the last three years) workshops to identify what is working well and what needs to be improved 1 ; develop updated workshop materials (i.e., presentation and participant handouts); and, develop a trainer s guide and additional trainer s resources (as necessary) for delivering the updated workshop. 2.0 Submission of Proposals An electronic copy of the proposal must be submitted to sue.ryan@thewillowgroup.com by 5pm EDT April 8, Acceptable formats for the electronic version are, *.pdf, *.doc or *.docx. 2.1 Length Proposals should not exceed 10 pages, single-spaced, 1-inch margins, and 12-point font (excluding references and appendices). 2.2 Qualification of Vendor(s) Submissions must identify the academic and/or practical qualifications and competencies of the bidder(s) as related to the identified subject matter and scope of the project. Reference letters should be provided in writing at the time the proposal is submitted. These reference letters should comment on the relevant experiences of the bidder(s) as described in the proposal. All participating individuals must be identified in the bid and a curriculum vitae (CV) is required for each person named. Submissions must specify the services and associated level of effort and costs to complete this project. 3.0 Selection Criteria Each proposal will be assessed as: not acceptable, acceptable, and superior, based on the extent to which they meet the criteria outlined in sections 3.1 through 3.4, below. 1 Although it is anticipated that the review of feedback forms will be sufficient to identify areas for improvement, there may be a need/desire to contact trainers for additional feedback.

5 3 P age 3.1 Mandatory Requirements The contractor must submit the proposal by 5PM EDT, April 8, Submissions received after the closing date will be deemed not acceptable. The price must not exceed $ CAD (inclusive of GST/HST) 3.2 Bidders Qualifications Priority shall be given to bidders who are members in good standing of CES with second priority to members of a professional evaluation organization recognized by the International Organization for Cooperation in Evaluation (IOCE) prior to the submission; Relevant experience; and Relevant academic qualifications. 3.3 Proposal quality Demonstrated knowledge of evaluation concepts, theories and methodologies, in particular logic models and their role in planning and evaluation; Demonstrated experience in developing professional development workshops and with adult learning strategies; and Adequacy of approach and methodology. 3.4 Project management Willingness and ability to consult and work collaboratively with CES; Detailed project work plan, with the following deliverables and timelines: o May 25, 2011 draft updated workshop presentation and participant handouts o June 8, 2011 finalized workshop presentation and participant handouts, as well as a draft trainer s guide and additional trainer s resources o June 22, 2011 finalized trainer s guide and additional trainer s resources Detailed description of expectations from CES National Council Completeness of the proposal. 3.5 Proposed costs Remuneration or per diems must be specified in the proposal. No travel is expected for this project.

6 4 P age 4.0 General Conditions 4.1 Right to Amend RFP CES reserves the right to amend or supplement the RFP, giving equal information and cooperation by way of issued addendum to all proponents through the CES website. 4.2 Bidder Incurred Costs All costs incurred in the preparation and presentation of proposals in any way whatsoever shall be wholly absorbed by the bidder(s). 4.3 Indemnity The bidder(s) will indemnify and save harmless CES from and against all claims, demands, losses, damages, costs and expenses made against or incurred, suffered or sustained, done or omitted by CES at any time before or following termination of the agreement. 4.4 Acceptance of Proposals CES is not bound to accept the lowest price or any proposal of those submitted. Proposals will be assessed in light of the evaluation criteria specified in section 4.0 above. 4.5 Evaluation of Proposals Three members of the CES Professional Development Committee will evaluate all complete proposals. The right is reserved to make an award based directly on the proposals submitted or to negotiate further with one or more proponents. 4.6 Maximum Funding The funding for this project is limited to $ CAD (inclusive of GST/HST) inclusive of all expenses (as noted previously, no travel is expected as part of this project). Bids in excess of this amount will be considered non-responsive. The payment schedule for the project will include: 25% upon receipt of the draft update workshop presentation and participant handouts;

7 5 P age 50% upon receipt of the finalized updated workshop presentation and participant handouts, as well as a draft trainers guide and additional trainer resources (as necessary); and 25% upon receipt of the finalized trainers guide and additional trainer resources (as necessary). 4.7 Ownership The proposal shall be the property of the CES and shall not be published or released without the written consent of CES. 4.8 Termination of Contract A contract awarded on the basis of a response to this RFP may be terminated by either party with two weeks notice, with outstanding payments to be negotiated between the contractor and the CES. 5.0 Questions and Inquiries 5.1 Communication The prospective bidders may approach the Chair Professional Development Committee about this project. The questions should be submitted in writing via , no later than a week before the closing date, to: Terry Spencer Chair of Professional Development, CES pd_chair@evaluaitoncanada.ca The goal is to answer each question within two working days of its receipt. The answers to questions will be distributed to all vendors who have informed Susan Ryan of the Willow Group (sue.ryan@thewillowgroup.com) of their intent to make submissions.

8 6 P age 6.0 Appendix A Overview of Current Logic Model Workshop Part A: Introduction Topics Learning Outcomes Time Introduction To understand the aim, objectives and learning approach of the workshop Part B: Logic Model Context What is evaluation and how do logic models fit in? What is a logic model and how did this all start? Part C: Characteristics and Types of Logic Models What are the different components of logic models? Coffee Break (15 minutes) What are the potential uses, benefits and limitations of logic models? What are the different types of logic models? What are the characteristics of good logic models? Lunch Break Part D: Developing Logic Models To understand evaluation and its key uses To understand how logic models are used in evaluation To understand what a logic model is To understand the origins of logic models To understand and to distinguish between different logic model components To understand different applications and uses of logic models To understand the benefits and limitations of logic models To understand the different types of logic models To understand the characteristics of good logic models How do you build a logic model? To understand how to build a logic model Coffee Break Part E: Overcoming Challenges in Developing and Using Logic Models What are the challenges in developing and using logic models? To understand the key challenges in developing and using logic models To understand how to address those challenges 9:00-9:15 9:15-9:30 9:30-9:45 9:45-10:15 10:30-10:50 10:50-11:20 11:20-12:00 1:00-3:00 3:15-3:45 Workshop Evaluation 3:45-4:00