1. No category

EEA & Norway Grants
TERMS OF REFERENCE
for services related to a
Review of Decent work and Tripartite dialogue
Financial Mechanism Office
Rue Joseph II, 12-16 – 1000 Brussels, Belgium • [email protected] • www.eeagrants.org
Terms of Reference
The Financial Mechanism Office (FMO) is seeking to review the Global
Fund for Decent Work and Tripartite Dialogue funded by the Norway
Grants.
EEA and
Norway Grants

Decent
work is about equal access
to
employment
without
discrimination, receiving a living wage, security in the workplace, social
protection, when, for example, ill or pregnant, and the freedom to
assemble and organise.
Tripartite dialogue is the interaction of government, employers and
workers (through their representatives) as equal and independent
partners to seek solutions to issues of common concern.
The objective of the Fund is to promote decent work and tripartite
cooperation between employers’ organisations, trade unions and public
authorities in supporting equitable and sustainable economic and social
development.
Background
The EEA and Norway grants are disbursed to the 16 Beneficiary States via
a programme structure covering 32 distinct topics or programme areas,
each contributing to the primary objective of reducing economic and
social disparities. In all, there are over 150 individual programmes in this
financing period, which between them will support a few thousand
projects up to the end of April 2016.
The EEA and Norway Grants are linked to the Agreement on the European
Economic Area through which Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway
participate in the internal market with the EU. The EEA Grants are jointly
financed by Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway, who contribute according
to their size and economic wealth. The Norway Grants are financed by
Norway alone and amount to approximately €804 million in this period.
2
Through the EEA and
Norway Grants,
Iceland, Liechtenstein
and Norway contribute
to reducing disparities
in Europe and to
strengthening bilateral
relations with 16
countries in central
and southern Europe.
The three countries
cooperate closely with
the EU through the
Agreement on the
European Economic
Area (EEA).
The EEA EFTA States
have contributed to
European cohesion
efforts ever since the
EEA Agreement
entered into force in
1994. €1.79 billion has
been set aside under
the Grants for 2009 to
2014. Norway provides
97% of the funding.
Read more on
www.eeagrants.org
Norway and the EU both support the principles of decent work and equal opportunities for all.
Through the Norway Grants, the Norwegian government is helping to stimulate social dialogue and
cooperation between labour market partners in Europe with the aim of promoting decent work.
The Nordic model is characterised by a high level of social dialogue built on strong cooperation
between employers, employees and government. Norway has a strong tradition of tripartite
consultation, bringing together workers, employers and governments in formulating and negotiating
labour standards and policies. Bilateral cooperation plays a very strong role in the Fund with the
close involvement of Norwegian social partners sharing expertise and experience.
The Global Fund for Decent Work and Tripartite Dialogue, which is one of the programme areas
funded under the Norway Grants, supports strengthened dialogue and ensures that beneficiary
countries are better placed to address decent work objectives, such as non-discrimination and
receiving a living wage. The Fund, worth €8.1 million, covers 13 of the 16 beneficiary countries
(Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland,
Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia) and the programme is operated by Innovation Norway. The Fund is
being implemented until December 2015, however most projects were finalised in December 2014.
The specific objective of the Global Fund for Decent Work and Tripartite Dialogue is to promote the
social dialogue on decent work issues and improve tripartite cooperation between employer’s
organisations, trade unions and public authorities in supporting equitable and sustainable economic
and social development. By improving this dialogue the social partners in each country will better
contribute to a more sustainable economic and social development. In addition, of equal importance
is the objective to strengthen bilateral relations with the social partners in each country.
The Programme Operator is Innovation Norway (IN). Innovation Norway is the Norwegian
Government's most important tool for developing Norwegian trade and industry. Innovation Norway
is represented in the following beneficiary countries: Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland,
Hungary, Romania and Spain. Innovation Norway has developed an administrative model for the
Global Fund for Decent Work and Tripartite Dialogue to be carried out in the 13 beneficiary.
This administrative programme model should be assessed as part of the review.
3
Purpose of the review
The review should assess to what extent the programme has contributed to:
(1) Improved social dialogue and tripartite dialogue structures and practices; and
(2) Enhanced understanding of the importance of decent work, and finally
(3) Strengthened bilateral relations through the 28 partnerships established at project level.
The wide range of available grant amounts (each country had to earmark 1% of the Norway Grants)
called for a differentiated size of project grants. The amount of grant assistance is in the range of
€ 50.000 to € 400.000. An assessment of this approach is also relevant.
Norwegian social partners took an active part in the programme, as partners or as promoters. A
“Reference Group” was established to advise Innovation Norway who is the Programme Operator on
the implementation of the Global Fund for Decent Work and Tripartite Dialogue. It consists of the
following social partner organisations in Norway: The Norwegian Confederation of Trade Unions
(LO), The Confederation of Unions for Professionals, Norway (Unio), The Confederation of
Norwegian Enterprise (NHO), The Norwegian Association of Local and Regional Authorities (KS), The
Confederation of Vocational Unions (YS) and Ministry of Labour (AD). How has this contributed to
the programme implementation?
More information about the programme can be found on the following web-sites:
http://eeagrants.org/What-we-do/Programme-areas/Decent-work-and-tripartite-dialogue/Globalfund-for-decent-work-and-tripartite-dialogue/Overview
http://norwaygrants.inekstranett.no/en/Prosjekt/About-Decent-Work/
More concretely, the objectives of the review are as follows:

Assess to what extent the programme has contributed to the two expected outcomes
selected for this programme area, which is to promote Decent work and Tripartite dialog
and Enhance the understanding of the benefits of decent work;

Assess the achievements towards strengthening bilateral relations;

Assess the relevance, efficiency (the extent to which the costs can be justified compared to
results), effectiveness and sustainability of the programme and their activities;

Identify facilitating factors, bottlenecks and challenges in implementation of the
programme, assess what has contributed to success (what are the key factors);
4

Identify any unintended effects;

Assess the institutional factors, including the administrative model of the Fund and the
operational and management aspects of the implementation of the programme;

Make recommendations for improving the programme in the next financial mechanism and
identify key lessons learned.

Identify case studies/best practice examples.
Some key questions are:

What were some of the main challenges and lessons learned in implementing this
programme?

How can the results framework be improved for the next mechanism?

What is the understanding of the Nordic model among the beneficiary states?

To what extent is the programme contributing to increased capacities and understanding of
the benefits of decent work and tripartite dialogue?

What should be the priorities for the next mechanism?

What is the visibility of the activities and contributions and activities at national/local levels?

How sustainable are the project results?

How efficient is the current administrative model and how could it be improved to increase
the efficiency of the Programme? To what extent could this model be replicated for other
programmes?
The bidders are requested to expand on this in the proposal.
Scope of the review
The Norway grants are supporting 53 projects under the Global Fund for decent work and tripartite
dialogue in 13 beneficiary countries. The desk review and survey will cover all of these by reviewing
available background information, data and reports with the Innovation Norway and in the FMO
database. A document review of the Nordic model and relevant ILO documents should also be done.
A context analysis based on programme and project documentation should also be done. A survey
should be developed for all 53 project promoters and follow up questions should also be done
through interviews over the phone. An in-depth review should be done in 6 of the countries where
Innovation Norway has a local office: Bulgaria, Estonia or Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Hungary and
Romania. The FMO, the Donor, the Programme Operator and the Reference group should be
interviewed. Case studies and or best practices should be presented to illustrate projects.
5
Methodologies
The tenderer is expected to propose a methodological approach which will include, but may not be
limited to:

Desk review of background documents leading to context analysis for each beneficiary
states, an analysis of the Nordic model and a review of 1 programme proposal, 53 project
proposals, Annual Reports and projects reports.

Survey for all project promoters to address some of the objectives and key questions

Interviews with the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Innovation Norway, Members of
the Reference group, selected Embassies, selected National Focal Points, ILO and other
relevant stakeholders.

Case studies/best practise examples from the 6 in-depth countries.
Team
Members of the team are expected to have relevant academic qualifications and experience. The
selected team should have working knowledge of employment and social policies. Knowledge of the
Nordic model for social dialogue would be an advantage.
Budget and deliverables
The maximum budget for the review is EUR 100,000. The budget estimate should include travel
costs and the following deliverables:
-
Inception meeting at the FMO office in Brussels within 2 weeks of contract notification.
-
Draft inception report within 2 weeks of inception meeting.
-
Final Inception report within 1 week of receiving comments from the FMO on draft report.
-
Draft report with country chapters outlining findings, lessons learned, recommendations and
examples of good case studies/best practice examples.
-
Final draft report with a citizen summary within 2 weeks of receiving comments from the
FMO on the draft report.
-
Final report within 1 week after receiving final comments from stakeholders.
-
Presentation of findings and recommendations in the report in Oslo (please include
approximate travel costs).
6
Timing
The period of execution of the contract will be 6 months from the signature. A detailed timeline shall
be provided with the offer. Please review the tender document.
Contact persons
Trine Eriksen, Senior Reporting and Evaluation officer – [email protected]
Alex Stimpson, Head of Results and Evaluations – [email protected]
Tender Instructions
The contracting authority is:
European Free Trade Association, Financial Mechanism Office (FMO)
Rue Joseph II, 12-16 (visiting address: Boulevard du Régent 47-48)
B-1000 Brussels
Belgium
The FMO is administratively a part of EFTA which is an international organisation, counting around
50 staff all located in Brussels, Belgium. The office is and has been responsible for the administration
of the EEA Financial Mechanism 1994-1999, the EEA Financial Instrument 1999-2003 and the EEA
and Norway Grants 2004-2009 in addition to the EEA and Norway Grants 2009-2014.
FMO web-site: www.eeagrants.org
Procurement process
This procurement is an open call for tender where all suitable entities are invited to submit tenders.
Any natural person/legal entity that can show documentation that the company is registered in a
public register of enterprises, b) tax and c) VAT (mva) certificate from relevant authorities are
eligible.
Schedule, deadlines and submission of tender
Tenders shall be submitted to [email protected] by 30 March 2015, 12.00 CET. Only one tender will be
accepted from each tenderer.
Event
Invitation to tender
Tender submission
Deadline
23 February 2015
30 March 2015
7
Opening of tenders1
30 March 2015
Selection
2 April 2015
Start of work
As soon as possible
Please note that all times after Tender submission are estimates.
Communication and questions
The contact person is the recipient for all communications to the FMO. Until signing of the contract,
no communication shall take place between tenderers and persons at the FMO other than the FMO
contact person.
Contact person
Name: Trine Eriksen
E-mail: [email protected]
Office phone: +32 2 211 18 15
Language
All communication between the candidate and the FMO shall be in English. All tender documents
must be written in English. All deliverables shall be in English.
Questions and answers
Questions as to the procurement or documents must be e-mailed to the FMO contact person no
later than 20 March at 12:00 CET. The questions and answers will be shared on our web-site where
the tender was announced, without disclosing the name of the person or company raising the
question.
Corrections, additions and changes to the tender documents
Tenderers are kindly requested to notify the FMO’s contact person in writing about any errors found
in the terms of reference.
Rejection and cancellation
Tenders submitted after the deadline will be rejected. Tenders lacking any required information may
also be rejected. The FMO will as soon as possible contact tenderers whose tenders become rejected
with a justification for the rejection.
The FMO may at any time cancel the tender. All tenderers will be notified as soon as possible.
1
Tenders will be opened at and by the FMO. No public opening of tenders.
8
Content of tender and award criteria
Content of tender
The tender shall be structured as follows:
1. Understanding of the assignment and expected results. This part should summarise the most
important aspects of the assignment as perceived by the tenderer.
2. Description of the applicant’s approach to delivering the requested services and of the
methodology that will be applied in this assignment. The tenderer should explain the way in
which he/she proposes to perform the work. This entails a clear description of the
methodology that the tenderer proposes to use, including a work programme explaining the
way in which he/she proposes to perform the assignment, in line with all relevant
specifications of the ToR. It should include a description of the tasks, an indicative work
schedule and the resources that will be used to carry out the assignment.
3. Summary of experience with similar work. This section shall consist of brief descriptions of
the 3-5 most relevant and most recent experiences the proposed consultants/researchers
have worked with. The consultant/researcher’s responsibilities and the year/period of the
task shall be included. This section should be no more than 1 page in length.
4. Management and quality assurance. This section should outline the how the assignment will
be managed, including the work plan and how the quality of the work will be ensured.
5. CVs. This part must include the curriculum vitae of the team leader, any other team
members, including any persons responsible for quality assurance and any national experts
who will actually perform the tasks of this assignment. In particular it must be demonstrated
that the persons have the necessary skills to perform all tasks in line with the task
specifications as well as the qualifications outlined in the ToR. The CVs for the team leader
and any national experts should be no more than 3 pages in length, and include the
following information: Name, country of residence, birth date, level of English language,
education and most relevant experience.
6. Availability within the period May 2015 – October 2015. This part should indicate the
availability of the team leader for the whole duration of the contract and the availability of
any national experts within the proposed time period.
9
7. Price Specification, daily rates, including use of senior/junior team members and amount of
days planned for the assignment. This section should include an overview of daily rates for
each proposed team member and indicate how much time is needed for each. Travel costs
should be included in the final budget. Please see the DSA rates in the Annex.
8. a) Documentation showing that the company is registered in a public register of enterprises,
b) tax and c) VAT (mva) certificate from relevant authorities.
9. Any other supporting documentation, as necessary.
Award criteria
Each tender will be assessed as described in the table below. The Contract will be awarded to the
most economically advantageous offer with regard to the following evaluation criteria:
To be assessed
1. Quality of proposal 50/100:
1.1 Understanding of the assignment and expected
results
Max points: 15
1.2 Approach and methodology
Max points: 25
1.3 Management and quality assurance
Max points: 10
Quality of proposal
TOTAL 50/100
2. Competence/experience 40/100:
2.1 Team Leader
Max points: 15
2.2 Team as a whole
Max points: 15
2.3 Organisation track record
Max points: 10
Competence/experience
TOTAL 40/100
3. Price 10/100:
3.1 Daily rates, use of time and combination
senior/junior team members
Max points: 10
Price
TOTAL 10/100
TOTAL PROPOSAL
10
Source of information
Understanding of the assignment (tender
section 1)
Proposed approach (tender section 2)
Systems for quality assurance (tender section
4)
Tender sections 3 and 5)
Tender sections 3 and 5)
Tender sections 3 and 5)
Based on daily rate and time estimate (tender
section 7)