Dear Sir/Madam,

Subject: Request for Proposals for Consulting Services: Project in support to the 10-year
UNAIDS Evaluation

1. The United Nations Office for Project Services (UNOPS) is seeking qualified offers for the
above-mentioned consulting services. Your company is kindly invited to submit your best
technical and financial offer for the requested services. Your proposal could form the basis
for a contract between your firm/institution and the United Nations Office for Project
Services (UNOPS).

2. To enable you to submit a proposal, please find enclosed:

a) Annex I: Terms of Reference (TOR), containing a description of UNOPS

requirements for which these services are being sought;

b) Annex II: Proposal Submission Form, to be completed and returned with your
proposal; and

c) Annex III: A draft of the form of contract under which the services would be
performed, including the "General Conditions for UNOPS Contracts for
Professional Services".

This letter is not to be construed in any way as an offer to contract with your firm/institution.

../..
Company
Street
City
Country
Att.: xxxx
Tel.: +
Fax: +

Manner of Submission

INSERT NAME, ADDRESS, TEL, FAX, E-MAIL 0F YOUR OFFICE

3. Your proposal shall be prepared in the English language.

4. Your proposal shall comprise the following documents:

(a) Proposal Submission Form;

(b) Technical Component; and

(c) Price Component.

5. Your proposal shall be prepared in duplicate with one marked "Original" and the other
marked "Copy". In the event of any discrepancy between them, the original shall govern. The
proposal shall be sealed in one outer and two inner envelopes, as detailed below.

The outer envelope shall be addressed as follows:

ATTN: PROPOSAL FOR CONSULTING SERVICES

PROJECT # SUPPORT TO THE 10-YEAR UNAIDS EVALUATION
Attn: Ms. Agnes Lefort
Portfolio Associate
United Nations Office for Project Services
11-13 CHEMIN DES ANEMONES

Both inside envelopes shall indicate your firm's name and address. The first inner envelope
shall be marked "Technical Proposal" and contain the Proposal Submission Form and Technical
Component of your proposal. The second inner envelope shall be marked "Price Proposal" and
include your financial cover letter (paragraph 15, below) and Price Component.

6. Proposals must be received by UNOPS at the above address on or before 30 June 2008 at
17 hrs MET. Any proposal received after this date may be rejected. UNOPS may, at its discretion,
extend the deadline for the submission of proposals, by notifying all prospective proposers in
writing. The extension of the deadline may accompany a modification of the solicitation
documents prepared by UNOPS at its own initiative or in response to a clarification requested by
a prospective proposer.

7. You are requested to hold your proposal valid for 90 days from the deadline for
submission. UNOPS will make its best effort to select a firm/institution within this period.

8. Assuming that a contract can be satisfactorily concluded by month/year, the assignment is

expected to commence in month/year.

INSERT NAME, ADDRESS, TEL, FAX, E-MAIL 0F YOUR OFFICE

9. If you consider that your firm/institution does not have all the expertise for the
assignment, there is no objection to your firm/institution associating with another firm/institution,
particularly from a developing country, to enable a full range of expertise to be proposed.
UNOPS strongly encourages association with a local firm/institution in the country of assignment.
However, any invited firm/institution may not participate in more than one consolidated proposal.
Similarly, a local firm/institution may associate with only one invited firm/institution that is making
a proposal.

Any consulting, manufacturing or construction firm/institution with which you might be

associated may not be eligible to participate in proposing/bidding for any services, goods or works
which may result from or be associated with the project of which this assignment forms a part.

10. Please note that the cost of preparing a proposal and of negotiating a contract, including
any related travel, is not reimbursable nor can it be included as a direct cost of the assignment.

11. Any requests for clarification should be referred to Ms. Katrin Lichtenberg, Portfolio
Manager, e-mail katrinl@unops.org, telephone: +41 22 917 84 73. Any written reply to a
particular question may be copied to all other invited firms/institutions, at the discretion of
UNOPS.

12. We would appreciate you informing us by e-mail or telefax as to:

a) your receipt of this letter request for competitive proposals.

b) whether or not you will be submitting a proposal.

c) the date and mode of submission, in case you decide to submit a proposal.

Content of Proposal

Technical Component

13. The technical component of your proposal should be concisely presented and structured in
the following order to include, but not necessarily be limited to, the following information:

a) Description of the Firm and the Firm's Qualifications

A brief description of your firm/institution and an outline of recent experience on projects
of a similar nature, including experience in the country and language concerned. You
should also provide information that will facilitate our evaluation of your firm/institution's
substantive reliability and financial and managerial capacity to provide the services.

INSERT NAME, ADDRESS, TEL, FAX, E-MAIL 0F YOUR OFFICE

b) Understanding of the Requirements for Services, including Assumptions

Include any assumptions as well as comments on the data, support services and facilities to
be provided as indicated in the TOR, or as you may otherwise believe to be necessary.

c) Proposed Approach, Methodology, Timing and Outputs

Any comments or suggestions on the TOR, as well as your detailed description of the
manner in which your firm/institution would respond to the TOR. You should include the
number of person-months in each specialization that you consider necessary to carry out
all work required.

d) Proposed Team Structure

The composition of the team which you would propose to provide in the country of
assignment and/or at the home office, and the work tasks (including supervisory) which
would be assigned to each. An organigram illustrating the reporting lines, together with a
description of such organization of the team structure, should support your proposal.

e) Proposed Project Team Members

The curriculum vitae of the senior professional members of the team.

Price Component

14. Your separate price component must contain an overall quotation in a single currency,
either in US Dollars or in the currency of your home country. If you opt for the latter, and for
evaluation purposes only, your proposal will be converted into US dollars using the United
Nations rate of exchange in effect on the date submissions are due.

15. The price component shall have a cover letter wherein your firm/institution's authorized
representative affirms the following:

(a) a summary of the price; and

(b) the period of its validity.

In preparing your proposal, please note carefully from Annex III the various contract
provisions regarding UNOPS policies on limitations on advance payments, retention, performance
bonds, etc.

16. In addition, the price component must cover all the services to be provided and must
itemize the following:

INSERT NAME, ADDRESS, TEL, FAX, E-MAIL 0F YOUR OFFICE

 a) An all-inclusive rate per person-day (including honorarium and living expenses) for
each team member to be assigned to the mission in the field and a rate for his/her
work at the home office, if any.

b) An all-inclusive amount for international travel and related expenses (indicating

number of round trips per team member).

c) An all-inclusive amount for local travel.

d) Other costs, if any (indicating nature and breakdown).

e) Summary of total cost for the services proposed. [N.B.: The remuneration
received by your firm/institution and persons performing services for your
firm/institution (other than nationals of the host country) normally will not be
subject to tax liability in the host country].

f) A proposed schedule of payments, all of which must be expressed and will be

effected in the currency of the proposal.

17. You should also indicate any comments or reservations to the draft form contract.

Payment Provisions

18. UNOPS' general policy is to pay for the performance of contractual services rendered or
to effect payment upon the achievement of specific milestones described in the contract. Please
refer to section 3.4 of the Model Contract for Services1 that is enclosed as Annex III.

19. Please note that UNOPS' policy is not to grant advance payments except in unusual
situations where the potential contractor/tenderer, whether a private firm, NGO or a government
or other entity, specifies in the proposal that there are special circumstances warranting an
advance payment. UNOPS, at its discretion, may however determine that such payment is not
warranted or determine the conditions under which such payment would be made. In any case
where an advance payment for $50,000 or more is requested and subsequently approved, UNOPS
will normally require a bank guarantee or other suitable security arrangement.

20. Any request for an advance payment is to be justified and documented and must be
submitted with the financial proposal. This justification shall explain the need for the advance
payment, itemize the amount requested and provide a time-schedule for utilization of said amount.
In addition, you must submit documentation regarding your financial status - e.g. audited financial
statements at 31 December of the previous year and include this documentation with your
financial proposal. Further information may be requested by UNOPS at the time of finalizing
contract negotiations with the selected proposer.

Evaluation of Proposals

INSERT NAME, ADDRESS, TEL, FAX, E-MAIL 0F YOUR OFFICE

21. A two-stage procedure will be utilized in evaluating the proposals, with evaluation of the
technical component being completed prior to any price component being opened and compared.
The Price Component will be opened only for those firms/institutions whose Technical
Component meets the requirements for the assignment. The total number of points which a
firm/institution may obtain for both components is 120 .

22. The technical component, which has a total possible value of 100 points, will be evaluated
using the following criteria:

a) the firm/institution's general reliability as well as experience and capacity in the

specific field of the assignment 20 points;

b) the approach in responding to the TOR and the detailed workplan 30 points; and

c) the qualifications and competence of the team leader and the personnel proposed
for the assignment for a total of 50 points). The personnel will be rated in
accordance with:

23. a) The Price Component of any proposal will only be evaluated if the Technical
Component of that proposal achieves a minimum of 70 points. Proposals failing to obtain this
minimum threshold will not be eligible for further consideration.

b) The maximum number of points for the Price Component is 20. This maximum
number of points will be allocated to the lowest price proposal. All other price proposals will
receive points in inverse proportion according to the following formula:

Points for the Price Component of a proposal being evaluated =

[Maximum number of points for the Price Component] x [Lowest price]

[Price of proposal being evaluated]

23. The prospective team leader may be invited to the Oversight Committee of the evaluation.

24. Please note that the UNOPS is not bound to select any of the firms/institutions submitting
proposals. Furthermore, since a contract will be awarded in respect of the proposal which is
considered most responsive to the needs of the project concerned, due consideration being given
to UNOPS 's general principles, including economy and efficiency, UNOPS does not bind itself in
any way to select the firm/institution offering the lowest price.

Yours sincerely,

INSERT NAME, ADDRESS, TEL, FAX, E-MAIL 0F YOUR OFFICE

 Bernhard Schlachter
Director, UNOPS SWOC
Geneva

INSERT NAME, ADDRESS, TEL, FAX, E-MAIL 0F YOUR OFFICE

 PROPOSAL SUBMISSION FORM
Project No.

TO: United Nations Office for Project Services

[INSERT ADDRESS]

Dear Sir/Madam:

Having examined the Solicitation Documents, the receipt of which is hereby duly acknowledged,
we the undersigned, offer to supply the required services for the sum as may be ascertained in
accordance with the Price Component attached herewith and made part of this proposal.

We undertake, if our proposal is accepted, to commence and complete delivery of all items in the
contract within the time frame stipulated.

We understand that you are not bound to accept any proposal you may receive and that a binding
contract would result only after final negotiations are concluded on the basis of the Technical and
Price Components proposed.

Dated this day of 20 .

Signature

(in the Capacity of)

Duly authorized to sign proposal for and on behalf of:

INSERT NAME, ADDRESS, TEL, FAX, E-MAIL 0F YOUR OFFICE

 ANNEX 1

TERMS OF REFERENCE
I. Background

Established by an ECOSOC Resolution of the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA), the
Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS) supports and coordinates the efforts
of ten cosponsoring UN organizations (ILO, UNICEF, UNDP, UNFPA, UNESCO, WHO, World
Bank, UNHCR, UNODC and WFP), and works with a wide range of other private and public
partners in the global response to AIDS. UNAIDS is governed by a Programme Coordinating
Board (PCB) with representatives of 22 governments from all geographical regions, five
representatives of nongovernmental organizations including people living with HIV/AIDS, and
the ten Cosponsors. The Cosponsors also meet as a Committee of Cosponsoring
Organizations (CCO) a standing committee of the PCB. In some 85 countries, UNAIDS
Theme Groups oversee the Programme, with the assistance of a UNAIDS Country Coordinator
(UCC). The UNAIDS Secretariat, based in Geneva, provides support for all aspects of the
Programme.

An initial evaluation of UNAIDS was completed in 2002 and covered the first five years of
UNAIDS (1996-2002). This Second Independent Evaluation will cover a period (2002-2008)
during which the AIDS epidemic, the global response to it, and UN organizational reform
efforts, have considerably changed UNAIDS environmental contexts. The pessimism that faced
the world during the first twenty years of the epidemic has diminished somewhat in the face of
much improved treatment and signs that prevention efforts are beginning to have an impact,
even in some of the hardest-hit regions of the world. Meanwhile, the response by the
international community has been strengthened and financial and human resources allocated
to this response have increased significantly. The number of interested parties, stakeholders
and groups responding to the challenge has expanded and major new actors have appeared,
including the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, the U.S. Presidents
Emergency Plan For AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the
William H Clinton Foundation, UNITAID and other key public and private partners. There have
been a number of important reform initiatives for better harmonization within the UN system,
such as the Millennium Development Goals, the Secretary-Generals High Level Panel on
System-wide Coherence, the results of which based around the mandate of Delivering as
One are currently being piloted in eight countries. Despite these developments, the threat
posed by the pandemic remains as large, if not larger, today than it was in 2000.

Background documents are available on the websites for UNAIDS and UNOPS.

II. Purpose and Scope

The purpose of this Evaluation is to assess the efficacy, effectiveness and outcomes of
UNAIDS (including UNAIDS Secretariat, the PCB and Cosponsors) at the global, regional and
country levels.

The assessment should relate to how UNAIDS has met its ECOSOC mandate for an
internationally coordinated response to the HIV/AIDS pandemic with the following core
objectives:
a) provide global leadership in response to the epidemic;
b) achieve and promote global consensus on policy and programmatic approaches;
c) strengthen the capacity of the United Nations system to monitor trends and ensure
that appropriate and effective policies and strategies are implemented at country
level;
 d) strengthen the capacity of national Governments to develop comprehensive
national strategies and implement effective HIV/AIDS activities at the country level;
e) promote broad-based political and social mobilization to prevent and respond to
HIV/AIDS within countries, ensuring that national responses involve a wide range of
sectors and institutions;
f) advocate greater political commitment in responding to the epidemic at the global
and country levels, including the mobilization and allocation of adequate resources
for HIV/AIDS-related activities.

The Evaluation should assess to what extent UNAIDS has met its objectives, and the
continuing relevance of its mandate and objectives in the current global environment.

The Evaluation will cover global, regional and national levels and all components of UNAIDS,
including the PCB, CCO, UNAIDS Secretariat, and AIDS-related work of the ten Cosponsors
as described in the Unified Budget and Workplan (UBW). Between 12-16 country studies
could be carried out, and the proposal should state the selected number of countries to be
evaluated, provide a rationale of why these countries were chosen, and the research methods
to be employed. These studies will feed directly into the overall Evaluation, which will draw
together assessments of all components into one synthesis report with conclusions on
UNAIDS performance as a whole.

III. Questions to be addressed

In accordance with the background, overall purpose and scope, and guiding principles (Section
VII), a number of questions are to be included in the overall evaluation framework:

a) The evolving role of UNAIDS within a changing environment

Given the changing global, regional and country environments, the evolving role and
priorities of the Joint Programme needs to be clearly defined, especially concerning
working relationships with institutions like the Global Fund, PEPFAR, UNITAID, bilateral
donors, private sector, civil society, regional organizations and others, all of which have
grown in importance since the Five Year Evaluation.

To what extent does UNAIDS generate and take advantage of synergies with its partners
including HIV vaccine and other appropriate technologies, advocacy, and development
partners and organizations of vulnerable populations and people living with HIV? A special
focus will be placed upon the role of UNAIDS in monitoring and evaluation of different
interventions, policies and strategies implemented across many partners.

b) Governance of UNAIDS
This evaluation should involve a review of the governance and accountability structures of
UNAIDS (Program Coordinating Board, Committee of Cosponsoring Organizations and the
Unified Budget and Workplan), and its relationships with the Cosponsors and other UN
bodies on a wide range of issues, especially given the organizations expansion, the entry
of new partners into the field, and the growing range of activities being undertaken. The
evaluation should consider the progress on recommendations of the Global Task Team
(GTT), review and the Review of NGO/Civil Society Participation in the Programme
Coordinating Board.

c) The response to the Five Year Evaluation of UNAIDS

Assessing the extent to which UNAIDS has been able to respond to the recommendations
and proposed activities that emerged from the Five Year Evaluation based on the PCB
decisions is important. It is also necessary to identify any factors, which may have
facilitated or limited UNAIDS implementation of these recommendations such as national
capacities, availability of resources and resource gaps. Implementation will also have to be
evaluated at headquarters, regional and country levels to determine the overall
effectiveness, efficiency, equity and acceptability of the Programme.

d) The Division of Labour between the Secretariat, Cosponsors, Agencies and

Countries
The components of UNAIDS, and the operational relationships between Secretariat,
Cosponsors and other institutions, like the Global Fund, at headquarters, regional and
country levels need to be reviewed. This should also involve evaluating the efficiency of
UNAIDS in terms of coordination, consistency and compatibility of activities and
programmatic strategies and, how the Division of Labour has affected working
relationships in country, taking into account the perspective of national governments. Does
UNAIDS fulfill its global coordination role on AIDS?

e) Strengthening Health systems

The Evaluation should include an assessment of UNAIDS role in strengthening health
systems and determine what improvements could be made to strengthen health systems in
ways that support UNAIDS objectives.

f) The administration of the Joint Programme

This involves evaluating how the administration and business practice of the UNAIDS
Secretariat has evolved since its creation, including its institutional relationships with WHO
and UNDP, and whether it has been flexible and creative enough to keep up with the
changing pace and types of demands that have emerged over time, including transfer of
resources to countries. Patterns and processes of staff deployment and management will
need to be examined.

g) Delivering as One
UN Reform, Global Task Team (GTT) and the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness all
influence the context in which UNAIDS operates. The impact of these changes on how
UNAIDS is viewed (by countries, co-sponsors donors and staff) and on how it works to
meet its mandate (particularly in countries), should be assessed. Implications and choices
for the future should be identified.

h) Involving and working with civil society

The extent to which UNAIDS has been able to, support, include, engage and incorporate in
a meaningful and measurable way the concerns and capacities of civil society, and what
types of functional relationships and partnerships have evolved at different operational
levels should be reviewed and should be an integral part of all questions to be addressed
by this Independent Evaluation.
 i) Gender dimensions of the epidemic
The extent to which gender equality has been incorporated as an integral part of the work
of UNAIDS at the global and national levels and the extent to which these issues have
been incorporated in national strategies and actions. This must include the degree to which
UNAIDS has supported countries in their efforts to address the gender dimensions of the
epidemic. The measurement of impact on the gender equality must include:

analysis of the development of policy guidance;

monitoring of gender-differentiated impact of programmes;
systematic disaggregation of data by sex and integration of gender and equality
indicators in monitoring and evaluation frameworks;
internal capacity for gender analysis and policy guidance.

Work on gender norms, work with sexual minorities, including men who have sex with men
and transgender communities, should also be examined.

j) Technical support to national AIDS responses

The outcome of the technical support rendered by UNAIDS through an examination of
activities in, and the needs and priorities of affected countries, and the quantity and quality
of support rendered, including transaction costs, accessibility of funding, coordination
mechanisms such as Joint UN Teams and others designed to enhance service delivery. To
what extent does UNAIDS allow for flexible procedures that are adaptable to different
national or regional situations?

k) Human rights
How UNAIDS programmes and policies have contributed to strengthening the rights of
vulnerable populations, have addressed issues of gender inequality, stigma and
discrimination, the empowerment of vulnerable populations among its priorities, and
ensures that programme objectives reflect the priorities expressed by vulnerable
populations themselves. This should include mechanisms to enable meaningful
participation of vulnerable populations in policy and programme development.

l) The greater and meaningful involvement of People living with HIV

The extent to which UNAIDS has enabled the active and meaningful engagement of
people living with HIV through the:

transparent and democratic selection processes and choices of representatives;

involvement in the design of policy making;
involvement in the implementation of programmes;
involvement on the monitoring and evaluation of UNAIDS programmes.

IV. Client

The PCB is the body mandated to act upon the results of the Evaluation and initiates the
Evaluation and receives its results. The PCB has formal responsibility for mandating the
Oversight Committee and the Evaluation Team, reviewing the process of the Evaluation,
receiving and disseminating the results of the Evaluation, and carrying out follow-up actions as
it sees fit.
V. Timeframe

The Evaluation will cover the period 2002-2008, with the Evaluation Report due in September
2009. The Evaluation should take into account significant events up until June 2009.

VI. Organizational Arrangements

To ensure impartiality and credibility of the Evaluation, the PCB has created an Oversight
Committee (OC) composed of 11 independent representatives from a cross-section of UNAIDS
constituencies. The OC is mandated to oversee the Evaluation and reports to the PCB via the
OC Chair on Evaluation progress, and matters requiring PCB action. An Evaluation Team (ET)
will be contracted to carry out the Evaluation. The ET will be supervised by the OC for the
duration of the Evaluation, but will submit its Final Report directly to the PCB Chair.

VII. Guiding Principles for Conducting the Evaluation

All aspects of UNAIDS work are directed by the following guiding principles:

I) aligned to national stakeholders priorities;

II) based on the meaningful and measurable involvement of civil society,
especially people living with HIV and populations most at risk of HIV
infection;
III) based on human rights and gender equality;
IV) based on the best available scientific evidence and technical knowledge;
V) promoting comprehensive responses to AIDS that integrate prevention,
treatment, care and support.

Moreover, to ensure credibility of the Evaluation, it is to be conducted in accordance with the

following principles:

a) Independence and Impartiality.

b) Retrospective and prospective based on retrospective lessons learned and best
practices applied to prospective future policies, strategies and programming.
c) Involvement of stakeholders. Stakeholders are understood to include UNAIDS
Secretariat, Cosponsors, PCB members, governments, organizations working on HIV,
civil society and the corporate sector, and particularly people living with HIV.
d) Transparency.
e) Foster a learning environment throughout the process.
f) Strategic and forward-looking for future policy and programme development.
g) With reference to international norms and definitions such as the OECD Development
Assistance Committee (DAC) principles of efficiency, effectiveness, relevance, outcome
and sustainability.

VIII. The Evaluation Team

The Evaluation Team will be selected by international competitive bidding. The ET should
demonstrate competence, experience and sensitivity to the complexity of the evaluation
process, its geographic scope and levels, and the many underlying components and issues
 indicated in the evaluation questions in section III. The Evaluation Team could comprise an
organization or consortium of both public and private entities to cover the range of
competencies required, but must be independent of the UN system.

Overall the Evaluation Team should demonstrate qualification, experience and

competencies in the following areas:

a) evaluation and monitoring of multi-organisational systems within and outside

the UN, preferably where they involve inter-agency cooperation;
b) excellent knowledge of HIV/AIDS issues;
c) assessing institutional change;
d) modern evaluation methodologies including both qualitative and quantitative
methods;
e) health sector issues, and design and methodology for social development and
health system impact evaluations, with specific reference to HIV;
f) evaluation of issues of governance, policy, and business practices in both
public and private sector settings;
g) experience and skills in financial management, preferably in institutional
settings;
h) experience in working in resource-limited countries, preferably in relation to
HIV;
i) ability to draw on short-term expertise and resources through collaboration with
global, regional or national research institutions or other organizations as
required;
j) superior oral and written and communication skills, including ability to deal with
multiple evaluation departments, programme managers, and technical staff;
k) capacity in, or access to, multilingual skills relevant to country studies;
l) balanced gender, geographic, and stakeholder representation through team
members or collaborative arrangements, including people living with HIV;
m) experience in managing large, complex evaluations.

The Evaluation Team should be headed by a Team Leader who is independent of the UNAIDS
Secretariat and Cosponsors. The Team Leader should have demonstrable track record in
managing complex projects in the field of HIV/AIDS with collaborative partners and
interdisciplinary teams of analysts. Specific competencies should include:

a) ability to coordinate multiple assessments of the Evaluation, and compile these

effectively into a synthesis report;
b) excellent communication skills including writing and presentational skills;
c) ability to deal credibly with complex inter-agency matters and personnel at highest
levels;
d) financial management skills related to complex multi-country activities and transfer
and supervision of financial resources between multi-player operations;
e) ability to meet tight deadlines with quality products.

The composition of the team should be presented in detail, including a break-down of the tasks
assigned to each, estimated time taken, possible visits to be made to consult stakeholders and
other work tasks. An organogram illustrating the reporting lines, together with a description of
the organization of the team structure should support the proposal. The full curriculum vitae of
each member of the team should be included as an Annex.
IX. Methods

Methodologies should involve a mix of recognized evaluation techniques, based on the

Guiding Principles outlined in Section VII, including but not limited to:

a) Desk-based research to review existing reports and background material, including

recent evaluations.

b) Interviews, discussion groups, surveys, drawing on expertise of UNAIDS

stakeholders, at national, regional and global levels. Active participation of the
stakeholders is expected throughout the evaluation as interlocutors and
commentators.

c) Standard evaluation methods for validation and verification of quality information.

d) Methods for identifying between 12 to 16 country visits according to the following

selection criteria, and the rationale and value added for the number(s) proposed:

Balanced regional representation

Representatives of generalized and concentrated epidemics
High and low prevalence countries
Humanitarian and emergency settings
Differing economic status

e) Methods for prioritizing issues and themes, and how they relate to each other.

f) Methods to assess how past performance has prepared and enabled UNAIDS to
deal with future challenges.
X. Stages, Indicative Timetable, Outputs

The proposal should specify the approach, personnel and specializations, person-months and
costs for each stage, as well as the costing of the number of site visits proposed.

Stage 1: Inception Stage (August September 2008)

The purpose of the inception stage is for the evaluation team to refine the scope of work and
the detailed planning for the assessment and synthesis stage. The Inception Report will
include proposals, criteria used and rationale for choice of country studies, themes and issues
to be given priority, and any thematic reports proposed. Within the broad schedule set out for
the synthesis stage, the Inception Report will show how the evaluation team will produce,
consult on, and finalize the draft and final reports.

Output: Inception Report with detailed Evaluation Workplan

Stage 2: Assessment Stage: Implementation of approved work plan (September-April

2009)

Outputs:

Quarterly progress reports

Progress Report for Oversight Committee November 2008
Draft Evaluation Report May 2009

Stage 3: Synthesis Stage: Preparation of Draft and Final Reports (June August 2009)

Outputs

Draft Final Report to Oversight Committee (August 2009)

Final Report to PCB Chair (September 2009)
Annexes: - 12-16 Country Reports as background documents
Thematic Reports as Required
Short Summary report for public dissemination (September 2009)

The Evaluation Team should specify the approach, personnel and specializations, person-
months and costs for each stage.

XI. Financial Parameters

The indicative budget for carrying out the Evaluation will be finalized after approval of the
Inception Report on the basis of methodologies and number of country visits. Proposals
should contain detailed costing as outlined in Section IX(d) and X, and paragraphs 14-17 of
the Request for Proposal..