REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP)

RFP N° 2018934

SECTION I: GENERAL INFORMATION

2. Project Background

Catholic Relief Services (CRS), with support from The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (LDS), is implementing the “Healthy Living through Integrated Nutrition Activities” (HELINA) project. Since its inception in 2021, the initiative has aimed to improve the nutritional status of Adolescent Girls and Young Women (AGYW) and their children aged 0–23 months. The project is at the last phase and is currently being implemented in West Point, New Kru Town, and Johnsonville communities in Montserrado County.

CRS is presently supporting 1,100 AGYW and their children through a holistic package of integrated interventions. These include Health and nutrition counseling and education targeting pregnant AGYW (aged 25 years and under), with a strong focus on promoting exclusive breastfeeding and appropriate infant and young child feeding (IYCF) practices to improve infant nutrition. In addition, the project incorporates livelihood support to ensure sustainable nutrition outcomes. Participants are empowered through access to income-generating opportunities, including business and vocational skills training, participation in Savings and Internal Lending Communities (SILC), and engagement in agricultural activities, particularly kitchen gardening, to strengthen household resilience and food security.

3. Purpose of this RFP

The endline evaluation will assess the effectiveness, relevance, impact, coherence and sustainability of the HELINA project. It will measure changes in AGYW infant and young child feeding, WASH knowledge and practice, financial capacity, household decision-making autonomy, and economic stability among participants, and provide evidence-based recommendations for future programming.

4. Procurement Method Justification

This procurement uses Quality and Cost Based Selection (QCBS) with a 70/30 Technical/Financial split. QCBS is used because:

• Consultancy service requires specific expertise
• Quality of methodology and deliverables vary significantly.
• Complex knowledge management and documentation work
• Experience and qualifications are critical

The quality and technical approach are critical factors beyond price alone. This method is consistent with CRS Procurement Policy Procurement Guidelines.

5. Registration Requirement

SECTION II: INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS (ITB)

6. Evaluation Sequence

7. Pre-Proposal Meeting

N/A

8. Method of Submission — Email Only

9. Technical Proposal — Format and Page Requirements

10. Submission Deadline

11. Bid Opening Procedure

Email 1 (Eligibility & MQR & Technical Proposal) is processed in the first place. The Procurement Lead logs all received Email 1 submissions and confirms receipt in the Bid Opening Record.

Technical Proposals are accessed only after Eligibility & MQR evaluation is complete.

Email 2 (Financial) is accessed only after Email 1 evaluation is complete and the minimum technical threshold is confirmed.

Bidders whose proposals are eliminated at any stage will be notified by email and their Financial Proposals submission (Email 2) will remain unread.

12. Price Submission & Tax Provisions

13. Clarification Requests

Written questions must be submitted to liberiarfq@crs.org by August 19, 2026, at 2 PM GMT, with the subject line ‘CLARIFICATION — RFP N° 2018934— [Company Name]’. Responses will be issued as numbered addenda to ALL registered bidders simultaneously. Verbal responses carry no weight.

14. Subcontracting-N/A

Bidders must declare in their technical proposal (Section TP-7) whether they intend to subcontract any part of the works. Major subcontractors (those performing more than 15% of contract value) are subject to the same eligibility checks as the prime contractor. The prime contractor remains fully responsible for all subcontracted work. Subcontractors may not be substituted after award without prior written CRS approval.

15. Sanctions, Anti-Corruption & Prohibited Practices

Bidders represent and warrant that neither the bidder, its affiliates, subsidiaries, subcontractors, nor any of their key personnel are:

• Listed on the U.S. Treasury OFAC Specially Designated Nationals (SDN) list or subject to any OFAC sanctions programme.
• Subject to debarment or suspension by the U.S. Government (SAM.gov exclusions list) or CRS.
• Listed on the UN Security Council Consolidated Sanctions List.
• Subject to EU restrictive measures / sanctions.
• Debarred by the Global Fund or any other public international body.

CRS will conduct Bridger screening on all bidders as part of the Eligibility check. Bidders found on any sanctions list will be immediately disqualified.

SECTION IIA: FINANCIAL CONDITIONS OF CONTRACT

16. Advance Payment

• Issued by a reputable bank licensed to operate in Liberia, acceptable to CRS.
• Amount: Equal to or greater than the advance payment amount.
• Form: Unconditional, irrevocable, and payable on first demand by CRS without proof of default.
• Validity: Must remain valid until the full advance has been recovered through deductions. The vendor must extend the APG if recovery is not complete before the expiry date.
• Currency: Same currency as the advance payment.
• Submission: Original hard copy delivered to CRS Liberia offices before advance is disbursed. Electronic copies are not accepted for this purpose.

Failure to provide a compliant APG will result in the advance request being declined. CRS may proceed to contract execution without the advance payment in such cases.

17. Performance Bond / Guarantee

18. Retention / Retention Guarantee

First Tranche — [50] % of total retention released when:

— All deliverables or works substantially completed and accepted in writing by CRS.

— Practical completion certificate issued by CRS or appointed supervisor.

— No material defects outstanding at completion.

Second Tranche — remaining [50]% released when:

— Defects liability / warranty period has elapsed without outstanding defects.

— Any defects notified during the defects liability period have been rectified to CRS’s satisfaction.

— Written release issued by the CRS Head of Operations.

Defects Liability Period: [12] months from the date of practical completion, unless otherwise stated in the Scope of Work.

CRS reserves the right to use retained amounts to rectify defects not corrected by the vendor within [14] days of written notice.

SECTION III: ADMINISTRATIVE, ELIGIBILITY & MINIMUM QUALIFICATION REQUIREMENTS (MQR)

SECTION IV: EVALUATION CRITERIA

19. Technical Evaluation (Max: 70 Points | Minimum : 45 Points)

See Annex 4 for details technical matrix.

22. Financial Evaluation (Max: 30 Points)

SECTION V: SCOPE OF WORK

Catholic Relief Services (CRS) Liberia is in the process of conducting an Endline Evaluation for the Healthy Living Through Integrated Nutrition Activities (HELINA) Project. This Term of Reference (TOR) provides the description and work required to conduct an endline evaluation of the HELINA Nutrition Project funded by the Latter-Day Saint. The work required by this TOR for the endline evaluation includes the design of the final evaluation approach/methodology, implementation, and reporting of findings. Thus, the aim among other uses of the endline evaluation is to assess HELINA’s contribution to observed changes in nutrition, livelihood, gender, and household wellbeing outcomes and learning for future designing based on the assessment of the implementation outcome results achieved and for final project reporting.

1. Introduction

CRS – Liberia Healthy Living Through Integrated Nutrition Activities (HELINA) Project commissions this external evaluation to assess the implemented activities and whether the interventions, delivered to the selected communities in Montserrado County, led to the achievement of the planned results as well as to the HELINA Objectives. Given that the project is in its final fiscal year, recommendations from the evaluator(s) are expected to improve the quality of future projects.

The study will be conducted from August – September 2026, which is the last month of the project contract period.

The evaluation processes are split into three phases:

1. The preparation,
2. Field data collection and synthesis, follow-up and,
3. Final reporting phase.

The preparation phase consists of inception meetings, review of Activity results and indicators, activity implementation, annual reports, development of evaluation framework/tools, sampling, and methodology and training of enumerators. The field phase involved field data collection in target communities (West Point, New Kru Town and Johnsonville) in Montserrado, data cleaning and analysis, developing a summary of findings, and presented to the Program Manager, Head of Program and Technical Advisor-I. The last phase consists of visual presentation of data validation, incorporating feedback, development of a draft report for Technical Advisor program, Manager and Head of Program review, and finalization of the report. The final report presentation marks the end of the endline evaluation.

1. Background

Catholic Relief Services (CRS), with support from The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (LDS), is implementing the “Healthy Living through Integrated Nutrition Activities” (HELINA) project. Since its inception in 2021, the initiative has aimed to improve the nutritional status of Adolescent Girls and Young Women (AGYW) and their children aged 0–23 months. The project is at the last phase and is currently being implemented in West Point, New Kru Town, and Johnsonville communities in Montserrado County.

CRS is presently supporting 1,100 AGYW and their children through a holistic package of integrated interventions. These include Health and nutrition counseling and education targeting pregnant AGYW (aged 25 years and under), with a strong focus on promoting exclusive breastfeeding and appropriate infant and young child feeding (IYCF) practices to improve infant nutrition. In addition, the project incorporates livelihood support to ensure sustainable nutrition outcomes. Participants are empowered through access to income-generating opportunities, including business and vocational skills training, participation in Savings and Internal Lending Communities (SILC), and engagement in agricultural activities, particularly kitchen gardening, to strengthen household resilience and food security.

Theory of Change

IF AGYW, along with key family members, adopt optimal IYCF practices, maintain proper hygiene, and consistently access and utilize available health services, then household care practices will improve, leading to better nutritional outcomes for children. IF AGYW are empowered to increase their income and gain access to nutritious foods, then they will be better equipped to provide adequate complementary feeding for their children. Because extensive evidence demonstrates that appropriate infant feeding, handwashing, and access to healthcare

significantly enhances child nutrition and health outcomes. Furthermore, increased household income improves food security by enabling families to purchase a wider variety of nutritious foods—critical for healthy child growth and development.

GOAL: Adolescent girls and young women live healthy, productive lives and break the cycle of intergenerational malnutrition

Strategic Objective 1: Increased adoption of key core behaviors and feeding practices among adolescent girls and young women (AGYW) under 25 with children under 2 years old, to improve child nutrition outcomes.

Strategic Objective 2: Young mothers under 25 years of age with children under 2 years can afford to provide nutritionally adequate and safe complementary food and have increased access to resources to support their children

Justification for Endline Evaluation

This endline evaluation is to be carried out as one of the required evaluation activities in the approved project Activity Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning plan, for assessing the relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, coherence, and sustainability of the project results and approaches. Similarly, the CRS’ MEAL Policies and Procedures require the conduct of a utilization-focused evaluation that satisfies information needs of the donor, government, as well as CRS and its partners. This information needs, amongst others, to include providing accountability for the Later- Day Saint investments, identifying lessons learned (to improve future interventions), and promising and sustainable practices and results that can be scaled up by CRS and/or the Government

Overall Goal of the Endline Evaluation

The endline evaluation will assess the effectiveness, relevance, impact, coherence and sustainability of the HELINA project. It will measure changes in AGYW infant and young child feeding, WASH knowledge and practice, financial capacity, household decision-making autonomy, and economic stability among participants, and provide evidence-based recommendations for future programming.

• Objective of the Endline Assessment

The HELINA V Endline Evaluation will serve as a summative assessment of the overall HELINA model implemented between 2021 and 2026.

The evaluation will examine the extent to which integrated nutrition, health, gender-transformative, livelihood, and graduation interventions contributed to sustained improvements in nutritional status, household wellbeing, economic resilience, and self-reliance among participating AGYW and their households.

The evaluation will move beyond assessing indicator achievement to answer the strategic question:

Did the HELINA model work, why did it work, for whom did it work, under what conditions, and should CRS and LDS scale or replicate it in other settings?

The evaluation findings will inform:

• Future nutrition programming in Liberia.
• Replication and scale-up of the HELINA model.
• CRS urban nutrition and resilience programming strategies.
• Graduation and self-reliance approaches targeting vulnerable AGYW populations.
• Potential development of a HELINA Implementation or “How-To” Guide.
• LDS Charities and CRS global learning on integrated nutrition and livelihoods programming.

Specific objectives:

1: Assess Program Performance

Assess the relevance, effectiveness, coherence, impact, and sustainability of HELINA V using OECD-DAC evaluation criteria. Measure overall project achievement, comparing results to baseline data and project targets where applicable as well as the effectiveness of the Activity intervention in achieving its expected outcomes (planned versus achieved).

2: Assess Effectiveness of the HELINA Graduation Model

Determine the effectiveness of the HELINA Graduation Model in supporting participating households to achieve and sustain self-reliance and nutrition outcomes.

Specifically assess:

• Income growth and stability.
• Diversification of livelihoods.
• Household food security.
• Savings accumulation and financial inclusion.
• Dietary diversity improvements.
• Household resilience to shocks.
• Sustainability of nutrition and caregiving practices.
• Progress toward established graduation benchmarks and thresholds.

3: Validate HELINA Theory of Change

Assess whether the assumptions and pathways underpinning the HELINA Theory of Change were valid and determine which interventions or combinations of interventions contributed most significantly to observed outcomes.

4: Assess HELINA’s Contribution to Observed Changes

Using a contribution analysis approach, assess HELINA’s contribution to observed changes in nutrition, livelihoods, gender equality, self-reliance, and household wellbeing outcomes.

5: Examine Gender-Transformative Outcomes

Assess the extent to which HELINA contributed to positive gender norm transformation, agency, male engagement, and equitable household decision-making.

6: Assess Sustainability and Scalability

Determine the likelihood that results and systems established under HELINA will continue beyond project support and evaluate the feasibility of replicating or scaling the model in other contexts.

7: Generate Learning

Document lessons learned, promising practices, implementation challenges, and strategic recommendations to strengthen future programming.

HELINA V Measurable Outcomes:

• 275 women/girls in union reporting increased input in household decision-making
• 50% increase in household income among vocational training and SILC participants
• 75% of male partners and 85% of female caregivers of key family members (disaggregated by gender)
• % Household member or spouse demonstrating understanding and support for young mothers and their children under 2 years
• 80% of targeted AGYW practice appropriate care-seeking behavior for their children (e.g., for diarrhea, pneumonia, fever)
• 80% of AGYW (Adolescent and Young Women) practicing exclusive breastfeeding
• 45 % of children aged 6–23 months receiving a minimum acceptable diet (MAD)
• 80 % of AGYW demonstrated improved knowledge of key IYCF (Infant and Young Child Feeding) practices
• 90% of Community Health Providers (CHPs) demonstrate improved competency in delivering nutrition counselling

Graduation Measurement Framework

Table 1: Indicative Graduation Framework for the evaluation

Sustainability Components of the project implemented

• Community Help Promotors (CHP) transition to Private Service Providers (PSPs)
• Saving Internal Lending Community (SILC) continuation
• MSG businesses
• Community gardens
• Government ownership
• MoH integration

The Evaluation will use the following Criteria:

Endline Evaluation Design

The Endline Evaluation should be conducted in a very transparent way and consultation with a broad range of relevant stakeholders including AGYW, CHPs, SILC Supervisor, SILC field agent, GTA facilitators, spouses/household members, Ministry of Health, Ministry of Agriculture and CRS staff. All project activities implemented in West Point, New Kru Town, and Johnsonville, Montserrado County should be assessed.

Overall, the evaluation methodology will detail a comparison of both the endline results to baseline results and assess the impact level of the Activity implementation. The methodology for the Endline evaluation study must comply with CRS’ MEAL Policies and Procedures. The evaluation will involve a literature and desk review, and the use of mixed-methods field research combining quantitative and qualitative data collection approaches.

The Consultant(s) should work closely with the CRS MEAL, and Programming team to ensure a joint understanding of the evaluation study approach, data collection, analysis, and reporting. This will be achieved using inception meetings, the development of a common Evaluation Matrix, data collection tools, and an evidence assessment framework as well as periodic check-ins during the study.

The literature and desk review will be the consultancy team’s first step to properly understanding the HELINA Project. CRS team will provide the:

• Activity result framework/ IPTT
• Baseline report
• Project description (proposal),
• Detailed implementation plan,
• MEAL Plan,
• Project Learning Questions,
• All progress reports submitted to the donor.
• CRS’ MEAL Policies and Procedures
• Other relevant project documents requested by the consultant
• Other publications by stakeholders

Data collection methods could include structured interviews, focus group discussions, key informant interviews, discussions with organizations supported by the Activity, groups and individuals who have benefited directly and indirectly from the project as well as CRS staff and the implementing partners as well as direct observation by visiting supported groups in the communities. The consultant(s) should propose the best suite of data collection approaches to answer the stated evaluation questions. The data collection process must ensure that:

• Respondents’ privacy and confidentiality are protected
• Informed consent and/or assets are obtained from all respondents in accordance with extant laws, ethics, and guidelines for human subject research standard research ethics.
• Minimize risk and do no harm to the Activity participants and respondents of the evaluation.
• Only required data/information will be sought from the respondents and analysis restricted to the purpose of this evaluation.
• Uphold the highest standard of research/evaluation participants’ protection approaches and duty of care.

Field Research

A one-on-one interview using a digitized structured questionnaire. The consultant should develop a suitable sampling approach necessary to detect an effect size of 10% using a 95% confidence level and 90% statistical power. The questionnaire may also repeat questions asked in the baseline, where necessary, and feature several new questions developed in consultation with CRS Program team.

• This study should employ both qualitative and quantitative methods for data collection. Conduct Key informant interviews (KIIs) with key stakeholders, community leaders, government staff and survey with beneficiaries etc…., using semi-structured questionnaires and Focus Group Discussion (FGDs) using open-ended questions.

Presentation of the report and documentation of conclusions and recommendations

The Consultant will jointly validate the main conclusions and recommendations of the evaluation with support from the Program Manager. A final report will be published following the reflection meeting to capitalize on the lessons learned and best practices of the experience.

The report will be structured as follows:

• A table of contents
• Executive summary: this summary will address the main conclusions, with a maximum of two paragraphs describing the program, a summary of objectives and expected results; recommendations for the design / implementation of future programs; key findings (1. relevance and appropriateness of project design, 2. Effectiveness of the Activity intervention strategies, 3. Activity efficiency and 4. Sustainability)
• Background to Evaluation: This is inclusive of the Theory of Change, Strategies, and key activities.
• Evaluation Design and Conduct: Purpose and the scope of the evaluation, evaluation approach and methods

• Evaluation Findings

1. Findings on Graduation Model

• Achievement against graduation thresholds
• Success factors
• Risks and barriers

2. Findings on Gender Transformation
3. Findings on Sustainability
4. Theory of Change Validation
5. Scale-up

• Reflection on Findings
• Key lessons and good practices
• Recommendations should include
• Programmatic
• Technical
• MEAL
• Sustainability
• Scale-up

• Appendices
• Notes and References

Evaluation roles and responsibilities:

Consultancy Main Activities

Evaluation timeline and deliverables:

Evaluation Timelines

Consultancy Deliverables

Data Quality Assurance and Escalation Protocol

The Consultant is responsible for implementing day-to-day data quality assurance measures throughout the evaluation process. CRS will provide independent oversight through spot checks, back-checks, and periodic review of data quality reports. Any suspected data fabrication, falsification, sampling deviation, safeguarding concern, or material data quality issue must be reported to CRS within 24 hours of identification. The CRS MEAL Manager (or designated representative) will determine required corrective actions, including re-training, re-interviewing respondents, supplemental verification, or suspension of data collection activities where necessary. Final approval of datasets for analysis and reporting rests with CRS.

Proposal Submission Guidelines

• Cover letter (maximum one page)
• Technical Proposal (maximum seven pages, to be elaborated into a work plan in the inception phase):

1. Relevant experience of the consultants/consultancy firm
2. Understanding of the assignment/objectives of the evaluation

• Proposal for the methodology, including sampling and approaches to be used

1. Proposed timeline for completing the evaluation
2. A plan for analysis and sense-making of the data
3. A proposed outline of the report

• Team composition and roles, including profiles/resumes of the personnel to be involved in the assignment (in annex).
• Financial Proposal (maximum one page): breakdown of cost estimates for services rendered. This should include daily consultancy fees and all labor costs.

1. Sample copies of three previous related work completed

Required Qualifications

Proposals will be accepted from independent consultant/firms with verified previous experiences in conducting evaluations in the field of Nutrition, Health and Livelihood with a focus on Adolescent Girls and Young women programming. The consultants should possess the following combination of skills and expertise:

• Health, social sciences, development studies, etc., and with formal research skills.
• At least 5 years of advanced experience in conducting evaluations of complex program design with a clear understanding of various social research methodologies.
• Demonstrated research and analytical report writing skills with sound experience in participatory review and evaluation methodologies.
• Experience in multi-sector, and youth empowerment programming.
• Ability to conduct interviews and discussions in English and local language desirable.
• Ability to analyze and synthesize data from different sources relating to the scope of the evaluation.
• Ability to clean, analyze and synthesize data using survey data management packages such as Commcare, kobo , and Excel as well as SPSS, STATA, and or other appropriate software to analyze and report large datasets.
• Good eye for detail, adherence to logic, and capacity for inductive reasoning
• Strong presentation, facilitating, communication and team working skills.
• Strong computer skills and knowledge of ICT4D.
• Good interpersonal skills, including the ability to conduct discussions with a diversity of people ranging from senior management to project participants.
• Willingness and ability to travel to congested project community in the county.

Assigned Roles:

1. Project Team

The project team will be responsible for providing the existing documents related to the project, supporting Enumerators training, spot-check data collection and any necessary logistics support to the consultant during the field data collection, and final evaluation presentation to CRS.

2. Evaluation Consultant

The role of the evaluation consultant is to work closely with the project team to develop the evaluation design; and its implementation – outlining the methodology, and key evaluation questions, identifying appropriate evaluation tools, developing the data collection instruments, carrying out data collection, data analysis and writing the draft and final evaluation report. The consultant will present the evaluation plan and findings to the project team. The consultant is expected to make a formal presentation of the report to the project team.

3. Supervision

CRS MEAL team will be involved in all the phases of the final evaluation survey and will take a supervisory role in ensuring quality and data integrity.

Consultancy Terms of Payment

Payment will be made to the consultant on a tranche basis. The first payment tranche is 60% of the agreed cost for the consultancy will be paid upon the signing of contract, submission of the inception report, which covers field preparation. The final tranche of 40% will be paid upon the approval of the final evaluation report submitted.

Timeline

The evaluation is expected to be finalized within a period of not more than 30 days, commencing on August 25, 2026. The consultant will work with the team to assess the Lessons learned and recommendations of the HELINA Project.

SECTION VI: POST-QUALIFICATION ACTIONS

CRS will verify the accuracy and authenticity of information submitted by the recommended bidder before contract execution. This includes: reference checks (minimum 2), document authentication, site visits (if applicable), and financial capacity verification.

If the recommended bidder fails post-qualification, CRS reserves the right to offer the contract to the next-ranked bidder subject to the same post-qualification process.

SECTION VII: BID FORMS & ANNEXES

ANNEX 1 — BID SUBMISSION / APPLICATION FORM (Submit in Email 1)

We, the undersigned, declare that:

• We have examined and have no reservations to the Scope of Work, Specifications, and all Addenda for this contract.
• We offer to carry out the contract in accordance with the RFP requirements.
• Our bid shall remain valid for ninety (90) calendar days from the submission deadline.
• We have no conflict of interest in this procurement process.
• Neither we nor our affiliates, subcontractors, or key personnel are listed on any sanctions list referenced in Section 15.
• We have not been suspended or debarred by CRS, the Global Fund, or any public international body.
• We understand CRS may cancel the RFP process at any time and is not bound to accept any bid.
• All information in this proposal is true, correct, and complete to the best of our knowledge.
• We agree to the standstill notification process described in Section 16.
• If an advance payment is requested: we understand that an Advance Payment Guarantee is required before disbursement.
• If a performance bond applies we commit to providing a compliant Performance Bond within 14 days of contract signature.
• If retention applies we acknowledge that retention will be deducted per Section 20 and released under the stated conditions.

ANNEX 2 — DECLARATION OF ABSENCE OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST (Submit in Email 1)

(Print on company letterhead)

Date: ____________________
To: Evaluation Committee

Declare that:

• Neither our company nor our staff have any conflict of interest in any activity that would place us, if selected, in conflict of interest with CRS.
• We confirm we have not been associated, directly or indirectly, in the preparation of the design, terms of reference, or other documents used in this procurement.
• Neither our company nor its affiliates have been declared ineligible by CRS or under any Global Fund / donor project.
• We have not offered and will not offer gifts, payments, or favours in exchange for this tender.
• We are participating independently, not as part of a joint venture (unless explicitly disclosed in Annex 11).
• I authorize CRS to verify this information and accept consequences of any breach.

ANNEX 3 — ADMINISTRATIVE & ELIGIBILITY & MQR COMPLIANCE CHECKLIST (Bidder Self-Audit) (Submit in Email 1)

Complete and include as the first page of Email 1. Tick each item to confirm inclusion.

ANNEX 4 — TECHNICAL EVALUATION MATRIX

ANNEX 5: PAST CLIENT REFERENCE INFORMATION FORM (Submit in Email 1)

• Complete the reference form below for each project (minimum 3 references).
• Attach client reference letters on official letterhead if available.
• Ensure contact information is current — the evaluation committee WILL contact references.

• Quality, relevance, and verification of references directly impact your technical score.
• False or unverifiable references will result in disqualification.
• References that cannot be contacted may not be counted toward your score.

1. Client organization name and contact details
2. Project title and contract value
3. Scope of work description
4. Contract duration (start and end dates)
5. Statement of completion — on time, on budget, quality delivered
6. Your company’s role and performance on the contract
7. Any notable achievements or challenges overcome
8. Contact person name, title, signature, and date

ANNEX 6 — KEY PERSONNEL CVs – Submit in Email 1 (Technical Proposal)

• Use the CV template provided in this annex (or a similar professional format).
• Maximum 3 pages per CV — focus on relevant experience only.
• Each CV must be SIGNED and DATED by the individual.
• Attach copies of relevant certificates and qualifications.
• Focus experience descriptions on aspects relevant to this RFP.

• Qualifications and experience of key personnel directly impact your technical score.
• CVs without signatures or dates may not be counted toward your score.
• Personnel changes after contract award require prior written CRS approval.

1. Prior written approval from CRS Liberia must be obtained BEFORE any change.
2. Justification for the substitution must be provided.
3. A replacement CV demonstrating equal or superior qualifications must be submitted.
4. CRS will evaluate the replacement before acceptance.
5. Unauthorized personnel substitution may constitute a material breach of contract and result in penalties.

ANNEX 7 — LETTER OF TENDER (Submit in Email 2)

We have examined the RFP and all Addenda. We offer to execute and complete the contract in conformity with the RFP requirements.

Our financial proposal totaling [AMOUNT IN CURRENCY] (all-inclusive) is submitted separately in Email 2.

We agree to abide by this Tender for 90 calendar days from the submission deadline.

We understand CRS is not bound to accept the lowest or any bid.

We acknowledge the financial conditions set out in Sections 18–20 (Advance Payment / Performance Bond / Retention) and commit to complying with whichever are marked applicable.

This Tender, together with the written acceptance by CRS, shall constitute a binding contract between our organizations.

ANNEX 8 — FINANCIAL PROPOSAL / BILL OF QUANTITIES (Submit in Email 2)

CONTRACT TEMPLATE