Business opportunities
This addendum to the Pacific Research Program - Call for Proposals was issued 16 May 2017.
Tenderers are advised of the following:
Clarifications to the RFT Proposal Raised in Writing by Interested Tenderers
Q1: DFAT wishes to clarify that the proposal suggests that the Team Leader will be expected to have weekly contact with DFAT. Normally the title 'Team Leader' implies a strategic level leader. Is that DFAT's expectation here?
A1. DFAT advises that The Team Leader should be pitched at the operational level.
Questions Raised in Writing by Interested Tenderers
Q1: Can the applicants adjust margins, font, orientation and other formatting details in the application template to aid readability?
A1. Yes, but font should be no smaller than 12.
Q2: Can you please clarify what is meant in Template section 3.4.2: If one program is the Grant program - what is the definition of the other 'program'? What is the question asking? Is it to show how this proposal fits with the PRP, or with other DFAT schemes/programs, or the broader DFAT investment in other portfolios?
A2. It is be both how the program fits with other DFAT programs in the region and how the program would coordinate with other research programs (not necessarily funded by DFAT) in the region.
Q3: Would it be acceptable to present our costings in a separate spreadsheet attachment (or output from same as a PDF)?
A3. Yes that is acceptable.
Q4: What is an appropriate level of sign off for letters of support?
A4. They should be signed off by the head of the supporting Organisation.
Q5: What is an appropriate level of sign off for referee reports? Are these on behalf of an individual or an organisation?
A5. They are on behalf of the individuals and must be signed by the individual.
Q6: Can you please confirm that for Referee reports: with a consortium of 6 institutions (1 lead, plus 5 partners) 12 referees would be required?
A6. Yes this is correct. as stated in section 3.6 "Referee Information".
Q7: What is the definition of an "actual or potential Conflict of Interest" in terms of eligible referees?
A7. DFAT's approach to managing "Conflicts of Interest" for its own staff is available here: Conflict of Interest Case Studies and Possible Remedies. Applicants should adopt the same approach.
Q8: Can one individual provide referee report for multiple institutions within a consortium?
A8. Yes if that person has been involved with those personnel in prior Programs.
Q9: Can one individual provide referee report for multiple organisation across multiple consortium applications?
A9. Yes as per Q8 above.
Q10: Are investigator (personnel) salaries an eligible expense under this program?
A10. Personnel salaries are eligible.
Q11: Does DFAT require the referee letters for only the person leading the application from each institution involved?
A11. Yes that is correct.
Q12: Within the referee letters (refer Q 11 above) there is to be comment on the institution's experience and capacity to achieve the Pacific Research Program objectives?
A12. Yes that is correct
Q13: Are references required for the proposal for the total bid consortium?
A13. Yes.
Q14: Are references required for the Institutions involved in the proposal/consortium, i.e. a reference for a University, think tank, or other party?
A14. Yes, refer to Q8 and Q9 above.
Q15: Are references required for any individuals nominated within the proposal?
A15. Only if they are classified as lead personnel and are vital to the Program.
Q16: Can DFAT please clarify whether in Table 3.1 "Applicant Details" this person should be the main administrative contact at each organisation (e.g. Research Office Director or equivalent) or the main academic contact for the research program?
A16. DFAT requires this Table 3.1 "Applicant Details" to list all Consortia partners and provide a 1 page letter that provides brief information about itself, the relationship with other consortium members and expresses the intention to collaborate. The Contact person should be the lead person of that organisation.