Civil Society Analysis in The Philippines

Yes. Independent researchers or independent research teams may submit a proposal, provided they meet the requirements set out in the procurement documents. Proposals may also be submitted by bidding consortia.

Regardless of the legal form of the bidder, the successful contractor must be able to issue a valid invoice in accordance with the applicable legal and tax requirements, as payment can only be made against a proper invoice. An Acknowledgement Receipt alone is therefore not sufficient for payment purposes.

The ToR does not prescribe a fixed minimum geographic split across Luzon, Visayas, Mindanao, and BARMM. Regional focus areas may be determined during Phase 1, based on the findings of initial context mapping (Layer 1), provided that the final selection ensures representation of all main regions Luzon, Visayas, Mindanao, and BARMM.

Regarding actor mapping, we expect a broad national long-list complemented by targeted in-depth profiles for the most relevant, influential, or emerging actors identified through analysis — not detailed profiles for every organisation on the long-list.

Further questions: Will a confidential list of active BfdW Philippine partners be provided to assist our team in screening for conflict-of-interest boundaries?
In addition, is consulting umbrella networks/coalitions permissible if some of their member organizations are BfdW partners, provided discussions focus on sector-widedynamics rather than BfdW-funded projects?

Answers: During inception, we will make available BfdW's current country strategy documents and general programme documentation relevant to the Philippines.

We will provide a confidential list of BfdW's active partner organisations in the Philippines to support your team's conflict-of-interest screening. This list will be shared upon contract signature and must be treated as strictly confidential.

Consulting umbrella networks or coalitions is permissible even where some member organisations are BfdW partners, provided that discussions focus on sector-wide dynamics rather than BfdW-funded projects specifically. Any such contact must nonetheless be disclosed in line with the declaration requirements outlined in the ToR (Section 1.7.2).

Further questions: May local community rapporteurs or translators be engaged to support regional/vernacular consultations under expert oversight?

Answers: 

Should risks arise at specific field sites, please flag this promptly during our monthly coordination meetings so that remote or digital consultations can be agreed as an alternative to in-person presence. We support adaptive approaches where security conditions warrant it but also beyond that reason if deemed sufficient.

The engagement of local community rapporteurs or translators is possible under expert oversight from the core team, provided this is disclosed in your proposal in line with the subcontracting provisions of the ToR (Section 2.1.5).

Further questions: Does the 50-page limit apply strictly to the main report, excluding annexes?
Given national coverage within a fixed budget framework, does BfdW support a virtual/hybrid national validation workshop in Phase 4?
Are final outputs intended strictly for BfdW’s internal planning, or should public-facing/popularized summary briefs also be planned?

Answers: 

Anonymised synthesis notes and structured interview protocols are sufficient for the qualitative consultation annexes; full transcripts are not required.

To clarify the wording in the ToR: the 50-page limit applies to the main report only. Annexes (e.g. interview protocols, actor mapping database) are excluded from this limit.

A virtual or hybrid validation workshop is acceptable.

The final outputs are intended for BfdW's internal strategic planning. Public-facing or popularised summary briefs (although a summary yes) are not part of the current scope of this assignment.

We anticipate contract signature around mid-September 2026, with the project start following shortly thereafter.