Request For Proposals To Conduct End-Term Evaluation Resilience, Health and Rights: sustainable solutions and support to vulnerable displaced Full Time NEW

Request For Proposals

To Conduct

End-Term Evaluation

Resilience, Health and Rights: sustainable solutions and support to vulnerable displaced and host communities.

Document Release Date: 30th October 2025

Last Date for Receipt of Proposals: 20th November 2025

Time: 17.00HRS

Tender Number: PRF29115

Submission Method: email to [email protected]

Tender Opening Venue and Time: Virtually via Microsoft Teams at 1200HRS on 21st November 2025.

1. Summary of the End-Term Evaluation
   1. Purpose:

The primary purpose is to conduct the end-term evaluation for the Resilience, Health and Rights: Sustainable solutions and support to vulnerable displaced and Host Communities in Northern Kenya Project. The end-term evaluation seeks to provide relevant data and analysis against the Project indicators and understand the intended and unintended change resulting from project interventions

Partners

Danish Red Cross, Kenya Red Cross Society and County Government.

Duration

30 days

Estimated Dates

24th November 2025 – 26th December 2025

Geographical Location

Turkana (Kalobeyei), Garissa (County and Dadaab), Wajir, Mandera, Marsabit Counties– Kenya.

Target Population

Targeted community members, stakeholders (County Government Representatives & Partners), Project Staff and Volunteers.

Deliverables

Inception report and tools, 3 documented case studies/best practices, Draft and final report, dissemination of the report and additionally all data sets.

Methodology

Quantitative and Qualitative methods.

Evaluation Management Team

KRCS MEA&L team, KRCS Project representatives and Danish Red Cross Representatives.

1. Background Information

Over the past decade, Kenya has made significant progress on sustained economic growth, socio-economic development, and the achievement of the SDGs and the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Still, challenges exist in the form of high levels of food insecurity, poverty and youth unemployment combined with recurrent disasters and rising levels of conflict leading to further displacement and disruption of livelihood opportunities. The frontier sub-counties in Turkana, Marsabit, Wajir, Mandera and Garissa (project target counties), bordering South Sudan, Ethiopia and Somalia, are especially and disproportionately affected by these issues.

KRCS in partnership with the Danish Red Cross (DRC) and other partners is mitigating the social, economic and health impacts of COVID-19: 1) Social (rights and social cohesion); 2) Economic (livelihood opportunities and cash/community inclusion currencies) and; 3) Health (primary health including MHPSS and GBV prevention and management) in the frontier counties. The project is employing a longer-term inclusive Whole of Society approach, a Dignity, Access, Participation and Safety (DAPS) approach, mainstreaming of Protection, Gender and Inclusion and a rights-based approach addressing structural issues facing people affected by displacement through an advocacy component.

The counties, Turkana, Marsabit, Mandera, Wajir and Garissa were selected due to being disproportionately affected by displacement, Turkana and Garissa hosting the largest refugee camps/settlements in Kenya and Marsabit, Mandera and Wajir also hosting refugees during conflict situations across the border. Both in and outside camp/settlement settings, ongoing effects of climate disaster and conflict as well as limited access to primary health services, resources, and livelihood opportunities exacerbate existing vulnerabilities of persons affected by displacement and reduce their capacities to cope with humanitarian shocks and challenges. Based on this, the overall change this project aimed to achieve is to address short-term humanitarian needs mainly in terms of primary health services, including protection from GBV and MHPSS, as well as longer-term development goals to promote resilience and sustainability, through cash (including community inclusion currencies – CIC) and livelihood initiatives, which seek to complement one another. To maximise the impact on vulnerable groups in the selected target areas and beyond, the interventions seek to influence policy change and highlight gaps in the implementation of existing laws and policies for protection of rights of displaced persons, as well as engagement of displacement-affected communities in accessing the services they are entitled to and dialogue with local decision-makers on the inclusion of their concerns and needs in local plans and budgets.

1. Project Objectives

The project is divided into three outcomes, which combined will support the achievement of the overall objective. The first outcome seeks to support vulnerable target groups to enhance livelihood opportunities and increase access to markets through Income Generating Activities (IGA) and the distribution of Community Inclusion Currencies (CIC) and cash. The second outcome endeavors to improve the health and well-being among vulnerable groups and ensure access to primary health care services, mental health and psychosocial support (MHPSS). Outcome three on the other hand seeks to improve the conditions of vulnerable groups in camps and settlements through promoting policy change and increased awareness among displacement-affected groups on their rights to access services, livelihood opportunities and protection.

1. Key Project Stakeholders

The project is being implemented by, Kenya Red Cross Society (KRCS) in the project sites in close coordination with key stakeholders in-country such as government authorities like the Social Protection, Social Service, Trade and Enterprise, health, Department of Refugee Services, Ministry of Interior, National Cohesion & Integration Committee, UNHCR and other organisations. Other local implementing partners include Grassroot Economics on CIC components, and the Centre for Rights Education and Awareness (CREAW) on activities related to the integration of GBV in health activities. For the advocacy and policy outcome, DRC and KRCS is collaborating closely with and retrieve technical inputs from the Regional Durable Solutions Secretariat (ReDSS) that applies research and analysis in search of durable solutions for protracted displacement situations. ReDSS is supporting the development of an advocacy plan and a policy brief and join learning events/meetings of the project to inform ongoing analysis.

At community level the project is working with vulnerable community groups among them women and children, displaced population, population on the move and Refugees including the LGBTQ+.

1. Evaluation Purpose & Scope
   1. Purpose.

The end-term evaluation seeks to provide relevant data against the project indicators, to understand the impact of the project’s interventions. It will also bring out issues that were affecting the project implementation and things that aided the success of the project as well as looking into the impact of the project.

The specific objectives of the end-term evaluation will be:

• To measure project achievements against log frame indicators and compare to baseline findings.
• To determine the relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, impact, sustainability and coherence of the project results in consideration of its goal and objectives.
• To understand whether intended or unintended shifts in knowledge, attitudes and social norms around livelihoods, MHPSS, GBV, access to primary health care for persons on the move, policy, advocacy and awareness on the rights amongst the target community/population as a result of the project interventions.
• To review the proposed indicators within the log-frame and set targets based on the findings that will guide the next phase of the project implementation.
• To identify and provide evidence for the project’s impact, sustainability measures in place, good practices, lessons learned and recommendations for scale up or cross programming.

1. Key Questions

The following are the key questions to be addressed during the ETE. The evaluator may however suggest changes/additional questions at the inception stage:

1. Effectiveness

• To what extent were the project expected results achieved (objectives, outputs and outcomes)? How does that compare to the target and the baseline findings?
• What changes as reported by the community/stakeholders can be attributed to the project (positive, negative, expected and unexpected)
• How have the project interventions contributed to the livelihoods, MHPSS/GBV, access to primary health care for persons on the move, policy, advocacy and awareness on the rights of the target community?
• What changes could have happened as a result of building synergy because of other projects in the same area?
• Have there been any positive or negative unintended outcomes of the work?

1. Efficiency

• Were all activities done within the budget? If there were any significant variances (whether early or late, over or under expenditure), what caused them?
• How did the efficiency affect the effectiveness of the project?
• Was there value for money at both project and beneficiary level?
• What has been done in an innovative way?
  1. Sustainability
• What sustainability measures were put in place – institutional/financial/technical?
• To what extent have socio-cultural factors affected the uptake of project interventions? And what measures have been/should be taken to address the same?
• To what extent will the net benefits of the intervention continue, or are likely to continue after the end of the project?

1. Relevance

• Are the outputs/outcomes of the project consistent with the overall purpose/goal and are they critical, balanced and appropriate?
• To what extent did the intervention objectives and design respond to communities’ needs, policies, and priorities and continue to do so if circumstances change?
• Are the project objectives still valid?
• How satisfied are the community members with the interventions undertaken by the project?

1. Coherence

• How well has the project’s intervention been compatible with other interventions in the project sites?
• Was the intervention aligned with the national development plan and other relevant policies and strategies?
• Whether, (which) and how did the referrals processes deployed in the project aligned with the policies of the KRCS, local referral pathways and the roles and mandates of the stakeholders involved?

1. Community Engagement and Accountability

• To what extent were the KRCS minimum accountability standards integrated?
• How much do the beneficiaries understand the project?
• How much were beneficiaries involved in the project decision making?
• What complaints and feedback mechanism were put in place? What were the common community complaints addressed during the project period? How did the community complaints and feedback influence program adjustments?
• Whether and to what degree has the project implementation been sensitive with regards to populations culture/religion/daily routines/community calendars etc. and how did that affect the project uptake?

1. Survey Methodology

The consulting firm will propose the most suitable study design, sampling methods, sample size, data collection and analysis approaches that are suitable for the end term evaluation. This should be clearly outlined in the bidding document/proposal and if the consulting firm proceeds to the oral stage they will have further discussion with the evaluation management team. The consulting firm will also propose targeted respondents to interview or data sources that can answer the log frame indicators and provide comparable statistics to document any changes. The methodology should consider triangulation of findings, adequate and representative sample size for the targeted beneficiaries with clear sampling methods. All the log frame indicators should be given operational definition in the bid submission. A data analysis plan should be embedded indicating how the indicators will be analyzed and presented.

The evaluation will use the following literature and any other sources for reference and to inform the evaluation process further:

• Final Baseline and Mid Term Survey Reports.
• Project proposal, theory of change and log frame.
• Existing project reports, both narrative and financial, by the time of data collection.
• Documents, policies and frameworks by partners, county and national government.

The project outcome and output indicators are shown in the table below: –

Outcome and Output

Indicator

OUTCOME 1

Vulnerable target communities are using markets for enhanced livelihoods.

1.1 Percentage of targeted households accessing basic commodities from local markets

1.2 Percentage of market traders able to meet demand for key commodities/goods/services

output 1.1

Cash or Community Inclusion Currency interventions have been implemented amongst targeted communities

1.1.1. Number of targeted households reached with cash or CiC interventions

1.1.2. Percentage of targeted households satisfied with CIC or cash delivery mechanisms

output 1.2

Targeted communities trained in locally adapted Income Generating Activities (IGA)

1.2.1 Number of people trained in establishing preferred IGAs disaggregated by age, gender and disability

1.2.2 Number of people implementing IGAs

output 1.3

Peacebuilding and social cohesion events are held for enhanced trade between target groups

1.3.1 Number of peacebuilding and social cohesion events held or supported

1.3.2 Number of people freely participating in peace building events disaggregated by age, gender and disability

OUTCOME 2

Vulnerable target groups have improved health and wellbeing

2.1 Percentage of targeted beneficiaries reporting access to healthcare services

output 2.1

Primary health care, GBV referrals and MHPSS services are provided through existing health care in camps and settlements

2.1.1 % of effective referrals GBV referrals made through existing healthcare services in camps and settlements

2.1.2 Number of people reached with MHPSS disaggregated by age, sex and disability

output 2.2

Humanitarian Service Points for health care, GBV referrals and MHPSS services established for underserved target groups

2.2.1 Number of humanitarian service points established

2.2.2 Number of people reached through the service points disaggregated by age, sex and disability

output 2.3

Awareness campaign on risks related to health, diseases and GBV completed

2.3.1 Number of health, diseases and GBV campaigns conducted

2.3.2 Number of people reached through the campaigns disaggregated by age, gender and disability status

OUTCOME 3

The most vulnerable groups have improved conditions in camps/settlements as a result of (government) policy change and increased awareness among displacement affected groups on their rights

3.1 Percentage of refugees satisfied with camps/settlements conditions

3.2 Percentage of refugees aware of their rights and legal status

output 3.1

Advocacy and engagement strategy designed and implemented at national and local levels for strengthening refugees’ access to services and livelihood opportunities

3.1.1 Number of refugee policies reviewed and implemented

output 3.2

Awareness-raising activities on the rights and legal status in and outside camp and settlement settings

3.2.1 Number of beneficiary committees established to lead community-centered advocacy

3.2.2 % of complaints and feedback fully addressed

1. Quality & Ethical Standards

The consultant shall take all reasonable steps to ensure that the evaluation is designed and conducted to respect and protect the rights and welfare of the people and communities involved and to ensure that the assessment is technically accurate and reliable, is conducted in a transparent and impartial manner, and contributes to organizational learning and accountability. Therefore, the evaluation team shall be required to adhere to the assessment standards and applicable practices as recommended by the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies.

• Utility: Assessments must be useful and used.
• Feasibility: Assessments must be realistic, diplomatic, and managed in a sensible, cost-effective manner.
• Ethics & Legality: Assessments must be conducted in an ethical and legal manner, with regard for the welfare of those involved in and affected by the assessment.
• Impartiality & Independence: Assessments should be impartial, providing a comprehensive and unbiased assessment that considers the views of all stakeholders.
• Transparency: assessment activities should reflect an attitude of openness and transparency.
• Accuracy: Assessments should be technically accurate, providing sufficient information about the data collection, analysis, and interpretation methods so that their worth or merit can be determined.
• Participation: Stakeholders should be consulted and meaningfully involved in the assessment process when feasible and appropriate.
• Collaboration: Collaboration between key operating partners in the assessment process improves the legitimacy and utility of the assessment.
• Inclusion: The assessment must include clear steps to ensure meaningful engagement and participation of all sections of the community, including persons with disability.

It is also expected that the assessment will respect the seven Fundamental Principles of the Red Cross and Red Crescent: 1) humanity, 2) impartiality, 3) neutrality, 4) independence, 5) voluntary service, 6) unity and 7) universality.

1. Qualifications and Experience for Consultants

The lead consultant must possess the following qualifications:

1. A minimum of a Master’s degree in Public health/ Sociology/ Community development/Project Management or related field.
2. A minimum of 5 years’ extensive experience in carrying out comprehensive evaluations or similar assignments.
3. Good understanding of Livelihoods, Cash and Voucher Assistance, Sexual and Gender Based Violence, Primary Health Care Services, Refugee Rights, disability and gender inclusion, and age among vulnerable populations in Kenya.
4. Proven experience in participatory and results-based M&E knowledge and practical experience in quantitative and qualitative research methods.
5. Must have led in at least five participatory assessments. Experience of conducting Baseline, Endline, Midterm evaluations monitoring and assessment work in the target or similar communities (preferred)
6. High level of professionalism and an ability to work independently and in high-pressure situations under tight deadlines.
7. Strong interpersonal, facilitation and communication skills
8. The team must have a statistician able to analyze quantitative and qualitative data as well as key technical team members to handle specific components of the project evaluation.
9. Team must have experience in participatory data collection methods and using mobile phone technology for data collection, monitoring and reporting.
10. The lead consultant must have strong analytical skills and ability to clearly synthesize and present findings, draw practical conclusions, make recommendations and to prepare well-written reports in a timely manner.
11. Availability for the period indicated and ready to carry out the assignment and deliver results within the specified period/time.

Availability of experts in each of the subject areas, with experience and relevant qualifications for the assignment will be highly preferred.

1. Management of the End Term Evaluation.
   1. Duration:

The end term evaluation will be conducted for 30 days from contract signing to delivery of the final report.

1. Deliverables:
2. Inception report detailing the evaluation design, sampling methodology & sample frame, evaluation tools, agreed budget and work plan.
3. Copies of original and cleaned data sets with codebook. The raw data, the database which has been cleaned (both qualitative and quantitative, including original field notes for in-depth interviews and focus group discussions, as well as recorded audio material), should be submitted together with the report. A simple inventory of material handed over will be part of the record. KRCS will have sole ownership of all final data and any findings shall only be shared or reproduced with the permission of KRCS.
4. Draft end-term evaluation report that will culminate in the final report with the following elements and as will be guided by KRCS:
   1. Table of contents
   2. Clear executive summary with among others major findings and summary of conclusions and recommendations.
   3. The objectives of the end term, methodology and any challenges encountered in the field.
   4. A presentation of the results and discussion of the same (including analysis) according to evaluation questions.
   5. Conclusions
   6. Recommendations.
   7. Prepare and submit at least 4 new case studies
5. A PowerPoint presentation highlighting key results and discussion from the end-line evaluation will be presented at a feedback meeting with stakeholders to be held after completing the draft report.
6. Final Evaluation report – submit 7 graphically designed and smart-bound hard copies and one electronic copy of the report by the agreed timeline. The specifications for the hard copies will be guided by KRCS M&E team.
7. A PowerPoint presentation highlighting key results, findings, and recommendations to be disseminated to the key stakeholders by the consultant after approval of the end-term evaluation report.
8. An easy-read version of the end-term evaluation report alongside the full end-term evaluation report.
9. Evaluation Management Team

The evaluation management team shall consist of KRCS MEA&L Unit representatives, KRCS program manager and Danish Red Cross Representative. They shall ensure that the deliverables agreed upon and approved in the inception report are achieved on time. KRCS MEA&L representative will be the chair of the team.

Role of KRCS (Project and M&E team)

• Lead the recruitment and evaluation process
• Coordinate the evaluation implementation process
• Review of assessment products, including the inception report tools and reports
• KRCS will organize logistics for the assessment team
• Avail data collectors within the agreed criteria
• Avail all necessary documents for desk review
• KRCS will be the link between the community, stakeholders and the consultant and will organize all the data collection activities (identifying respondents and setting up appointments)
• Will be the custodian of all data generated from the assessment
• Organize dissemination forums as necessary.

Role of Danish Red Cross.

• Participate in the TOR development.
• Participate in the recruitment process
• Review the inception report and data collection tools.
• Participate in the data collection process
• Review and give feedback on all evaluation products.
• Fund the activity budget.
• Final approval of the report.

1. Application Requirements

Application materials shall include:

• A written response to this TOR in terms of a proposal detailing the technical understanding of the task, proposed methodologies of the evaluation, expected activities and deliverables, proposed work plans with schedule, and financial bids. See Annex 1
• Detailed CVs of all professionals who will work on the evaluation. If there is more than one contractor on the proposed evaluation team, please attach a table describing the level of effort (in number of days) of each team member in each of the evaluation activities. See Annex 3
• Professional references: please provide at least three reference letters from your previous clients and full contact details of the referees (working and active email & phone number).
• 2 Sample reports of relevant previously completed assignments.

Please also note that the people whose names appear in the team composition template MUST be the ones to undertake the evaluation. As such, they MUST be the ones to appear in person if the proposal moves to the interview stage.

1. Submission of proposal.

The Technical Proposal MUST be prepared in conformance to the outline provided in Annex 1 while the financial proposal shall conform to the template provided in Annex 2. The team composition should conform to Annex 3.

Bidders should provide softcopy technical and financial proposal in two separate folders clearly marked “Technical Proposal – Name of Consultant” and “Financial Proposal – Name of Consultant”. The subject of your email should read “Tender No. PRF29115 Call for Consultancy for End Term Evaluation for Resilience Health and Rights Sustainable solutions and support to vulnerable displaced and host communities in Northern Kenya*”*

The proposal should be addressed as below to reach the undersigned (by mail) through [email protected]on 20th November 2025 at 1700HRS.

Chairperson, Tender Committee

Kenya Red Cross Society

P.O Box 40712 – 00100

Nairobi, Kenya.

ANNEX 1: TECHNICAL PROPOSAL FORMAT

1. Introduction: description of the firm, the firm’s qualifications, and statutory compliance (2 pages)
2. Background: Understanding of the project, context and requirements for services, Key questions (2 pages)
3. Proposed methodology – Indicate methods to be used for each indicator and highlight any areas where indicators may need adjustment. The targeted respondents should be indicated for each indicator. Proposed detailed questions should be indicated. Detailed sampling procedure and sample size determination needs to be described and provided. (5 pages)
4. Firms experience in undertaking assignments of similar nature and experience from the geographical area for other major clients (Table with: Name of organization, name of assignment, duration of assignment (Dates), reference person contacts (2 pages)
5. Proposed team composition (As per annex 3) – 1 page
6. Work plan (Gantt chart of activity and week of implementation) – 1 page

ANNEX 2: BUDGET TEMPLATE

The consultant shall only quote for the items below as KRCS will manage all other related costs (logistics and payment of enumerators)

Item

Unit

# of Units

Unit Cost

Total Cost (Ksh.)

Consultancy Fee (for the whole assessment period)

Per day

Consultancy logistics (cost of travel to and from the field, upkeep during data collection) Note that; movement during data collection in the field will be facilitated by KRCS

Lumpsum

Office expenses (Printing, photocopy, binding, communication costs etc.)

Lumpsum

Grand Total

ANNEX 3: PROPOSED TEAM COMPOSITION TEMPLATE

Name of Team Member

Highest Level of

Qualification

General Years of Experience related to the task at hand

Roles under this assignment

ANNEX 4: TENDER ASSESSMENT CRITERIA

A three-stage assessment procedure will be used to evaluate all proposals from bidders. The total number of points which each bidder may obtain for its proposal is:

• Technical Proposal 50 marks
• Oral presentation 40 marks
• Financial Proposal 10 marks

1. Mandatory Requirements.

The proposal shall ONLY be evaluated on the basis of its adherence to the following compulsory requirements, this applies to both local and international firms or individuals.

Document/ Requirements

Yes/No

Tax compliance certificate

Certificate of incorporation/registration (only applicable for firms)

Proceed to next stage (Yes/No)

1. Assessment of the Technical Proposal

The technical proposal shall be evaluated on the basis of its responsiveness to the TOR. Specifically, the following criteria shall apply:

Evaluation Criteria

Maximum Points

Bidder’s score

Remarks

1. Background: Description of the consultant/Firm’s Qualifications, Understanding of the project, context and requirements for services

10

1. Proposed Methodology: The proposed methodology MUST provide an indication of its effectiveness and added value in the proposed assignment.

20

1. Firms Experience in undertaking assignments of similar nature and experience from related geographical area for other major clients:

• Provide a summary and supporting information on overall years of experience, and related technical and geographic coverage experience.

10

1. Proposed Team Composition: Tabulate the team composition to include the general qualifications, suitability for the specific task to be assigned and overall years of relevant experience to the proposed assignment.

• The proposed team composition should balance effectively with the necessary skills and competencies required to undertake the proposed assignment.
• Lead Consultant Qualifications – should be as per the TOR
• Provide CVs for key Consulting team including Statistician/Data Analyst.

5

1. Work Plan: A Detailed logical, weekly work plan for the assignment MUST be provided.

5

TOTAL SCORE

50

Note: The firms/consultants that attains a score of 35 and above out of 50 in the technical evaluation will be invited to proceed to oral presentation.

1. Oral Phase Assessment

At the oral phase, the following criteria shall apply:

Criteria

Maximum points

Bidder’s Score

Remarks

Understanding of the assignment.

5

Clear and scientific methodology: samplings, data collection, understanding indicators, respondents, tools, data analysis etc.

15

Presentation of previous similar assignment (Consultant will be required to show/present at least 2 previous completed assignment reports at the oral stage and at least two reference letters)

10

Preparedness and participation of teams. Attendance of team members listed in the bid and whose CVs are availed.

10

Total Score out of 40

40

Note: From this stage, the technical and oral assessment scores are combined. The firms/consultants that attains a combined score of 70% in the technical & oral presentations will be invited to proceed to the financial stage.

1. Assessment of the Financial Proposal

The Financial Proposal shall be prepared in accordance to Annex 2. The maximum number of points for the Financial Proposal shall be 10% (10 points). This maximum number of points will be allocated to the lowest Financial Proposal. All other Financial Proposals will receive points in inverse proportion according to the below formula:

Points for the Financial Proposal being evaluated =

(Maximum number of points for the financial proposal) x (Lowest price)

Price of proposal being evaluated

A total score obtained including Technical, Oral and Financial Proposals is calculated for each proposal. The bid obtaining the overall highest score shall be awarded to undertake the assignment – subject to budget allocated.

GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

Please read carefully the method of tender submission and comply accordingly.

1. KRCS reserves the right to accept or to reject any bid, and to annul the bidding process and reject all bids at any time prior to the award of the contract, without thereby incurring any liability to any Bidder or any obligation to inform the Bidder of the grounds for its action.
2. Cost of bidding

The Bidder shall bear all costs associated with the preparation and submission of its bid, and the Organization will in no case be responsible or liable for those costs, regardless of the conduct or outcome of the bidding process.

1. Clarification of Bidding Document

All correspondence related to the contract shall be made in English. Any clarification sought by the bidder in respect of the consultancy shall be addressed at least five (5) days before the deadline for submission of bids, in writing to the Administration Coordinator.

The queries and replies thereto shall then be circulated to all other prospective bidders (without divulging the name of the bidder raising the queries) in the form of an addendum, which shall be acknowledged in writing by the prospective bidders.

Enquiries for clarifications should be sent by e-mail to [email protected]

1. Amendment of Bidding Document

At any time prior to the deadline for submission of bids, KRCS, for any reason, whether at its own initiative or in response to a clarification requested by a prospective Bidder, may modify the bidding documents by amendment.

All prospective Bidders that have received the bidding documents will be notified of the amendment in writing, and it will be binding on them. It is therefore important that bidders give the correct details in the format given on page 1 at the time of collecting/receiving the bid document.

To allow prospective Bidders reasonable time to take any amendments into account in preparing their bids, KRCS may at its sole discretion extend the deadline for the submission of bids based on the nature of the amendments.

1. Deadline for Submission of Bids

Bids should reach [email protected] on or before 20th November, 2025 at 1700HRS. Bids received after the above-specified date and time shall not be considered.

Bidders should provide softcopy technical and financial proposal in two separate folders clearly marked “Technical Proposal – Name of Consultant” and “Financial Proposal – Name of Consultant”. The subject of your email should read “Tender No. PRF29115 Call for Consultancy for End Term Evaluation for Resilience Health and Rights Sustainable solutions and support to vulnerable displaced and host communities in Northern Kenya”

The proposal should be addressed as indicated above to reach the under-signed by 20th November, 2025 at 1700HRS for the tender to be opened at 1200HRS on 21st November 2025:

Any bid received by KRCS after this deadline will be rejected.

1. Cost Structure and Non-escalation

The bidder shall, in their offer (Financial Proposal), detail the proposed costs as per the template provided above.

No price escalation under this contract shall be allowed. KRCS shall not compensate any bidder for costs incurred in the preparation and submission of this RFP or any subsequent pre-contract process.

1. Taxes and Incidental Costs

The prices and rates in the financial offer will be deemed to include all taxes and any other incidental costs.

1. Responsiveness of Proposals

The responsiveness of the proposals to the requirements of this RFP will be determined. A responsive proposal is deemed to contain all documents or information specifically called for in this RFP document. A bid determined not responsive will be rejected and may not subsequently be made responsive by the Bidder by correction of the non-conforming item(s).

1. Currency for Pricing of Tender

All bids in response to this RFP should be expressed in Kenya Shillings. Expressions in other currencies shall not be permitted.

1. Correction of Errors.

Bids determined to be substantially responsive will be checked by KRCS for any arithmetical errors. Errors will be corrected by KRCS as below:

1. Where there is a discrepancy between the amounts in figures and in words, the amount in words will govern, and
2. Where there is a discrepancy between the unit rate and the line total resulting from multiplying the unit rate by the quantity, the unit rate as quoted will govern.

The price amount stated in the Bid will be adjusted by KRCS in accordance with the above procedure for the correction of errors.

1. Evaluation and Comparison of Bids

Technical proposals will be evaluated prior to the evaluation of the financial bids. Financial bids of firms whose technical proposals are found to be non-qualifying in whatever respect may be returned unopened.

1. Confidentiality

The Bidder shall treat the existence and contents of this RFP, and all information made available in relation to this RFP, as confidential and shall only use the same for the purpose for which it was provided.

The Bidder shall not publish or disclose the same or any particulars thereof to any third party without the written permission of KRCS, unless it is to Bidder’s Contractors for assistance in preparation of this Tender. In any case, the same confidentiality must be entered into between Bidder and his Contractors.

1. Corrupt or Fraudulent Practices

KRCS requires that tenderers observe the highest standard of ethics during the procurement process and execution of contracts. A tenderer shall sign a declaration that he has not and will not be involved in corrupt or fraudulent practices.

KRCS will reject a proposal for award if it determines that the tenderer recommended for award has engaged in corrupt or fraudulent practices in competing for the contract in question.

Further a tenderer who is found to have indulged in corrupt or fraudulent practices risks being debarred from participating, please report any malpractices to [email protected]

Tagged as: Kenya, Kenya Red Cross Society