Application Guidelines for Regional Health Partnerships

Contents
SECTION 1: BACKGROUND AND INTRODUCTION ................................................................. 2
SECTION 2: OPERATIONAL OBJECTIVES................................................................................ 6
SECTION 3: ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA ........................................................................................... 7
3.1 ORGANISATION ELIGIBILITY ______________________________________________________ 7
3.2 COUNTRY ELIGIBILITY __________________________________________________________ 8
3.3 PROPOSAL ELIGIBILITY AND ELIGIBLE EXPENSES _________________________________________ 8
SECTION 4: APPLICATION PROCESS AND INDICATIVE TIMELINE .................................. 10
4.1 INDICATIVE TIMELINE _________________________________________________________ 10
4.2 APPLICANT INFORMATION SESSION ________________________________________________ 11
4.3 DEADLINE FOR PROPOSAL SUBMISSION _____________________________________________ 11
4.4 CONFORMANCE CHECK ________________________________________________________ 12
4.5 SHORTLISTING AND ASSESSMENT PROCESS ___________________________________________ 12
4.6 DEBRIEFING OF APPLICANTS ____________________________________________________ 13
4.7 COMPLAINTS ______________________________________________________________ 13
SECTION 5: ASSESSMENT ........................................................................................................ 13
5.1 ASSESSMENT OUTCOME _______________________________________________________ 13
5.2 EVALUATION CRITERIA ________________________________________________________ 13
SECTION 6: DUE DILIGENCE, RISK AND SAFEGUARDS..................................................... 16
SECTION 7: CONTRACTUAL, REPORTING AND ACQUITTAL REQUIREMENTS ............. 17
SECTION 8: CONTACT................................................................................................................ 17
ATTACHMENT A: RATING SCALE TABLE .............................................................................. 18

Version Control Table

Last review March Overview of • Partnerships for a Healthy Version 2.0
date 15 2023 changes Region Program logic and number
made associated references updated
during last • Nomenclature around proposed
review broad categories of work
clarified with particular focus on
references included in Table 2

1
Section 1: Background and Introduction
1.1 The Australian Government, through the Indo-Pacific Centre for Health
Security (CHS or Centre) which sits within the Department of Foreign Affairs
and Trade’s Global Health Division, is seeking proposals for Regional Health
Partnerships for the Pacific and Southeast Asia (RHP) under the
Partnerships for a Healthy Region initiative (PHR) (2022-23 to 2026-27).
1.2 The predecessor to the PHR, the $300 million Health Security Initiative for the
Indo-Pacific Region (HSI), 2017-2022, aimed to reduce risks associated with
emerging and endemic infectious diseases with the potential to cause social or
economic harm on a national, regional or global scale. The HSI supported
projects and partnerships in the Pacific and Southeast Asia, mainly
implemented by flagship Australian institutions, to build the “core capacities”
identified in WHO’s International Health Regulations (2005). The Initiative’s
investments pivoted rapidly to support partner governments’ COVID-19
prevention and response strategies.
1.3 The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the capacity deficits that the HSI
was established to address. At the same time, the pandemic’s impact on all
aspects of health service delivery has been devastating. In many of our
partner countries, non-communicable diseases (NCDs) are on the rise and
vaccination coverage for communicable diseases, such as measles, has
declined. In response to the priorities of partner countries, the portfolio of
investments in RHP will address both communicable and non-communicable
diseases.
1.4 The RHP budget is up to $160 million over five years (2022-27) to support
strategic partnerships and projects that deliver practical support to the region
for both communicable and non-communicable disease prevention and
control. Indicatively, funding will be allocated as follows with flexibility to adjust
allocations to individual pillars in response to requirements and opportunities.
A cap of $5 million will apply for projects. Strategic partnerships will be
capped at $15 million, subject to the scope of activities to be delivered and
geographic reach.
Table 1: Description of strategic partnerships and projects
Strategic partnerships Projects
Indicative allocation $100 million Indicative allocation $60 million
Will be awarded to highly capable Will be awarded to organisations
and well-established organisations that:
that can demonstrate: • have a smaller thematic or
• a strong track record of geographical footprint than
delivering public health projects strategic partners; or
in the Pacific and Southeast • are first-time recipients of
Asia in line with partner DFAT public health funding;
governments’ health priorities; or
• a commitment to working in a • are delivering an activity in a
flexible, responsive and single and relatively narrow
collegiate way with other DFAT area in one of the areas noted
partner organisations; and in the Broad Categories of
• a breadth of expertise that Work in Table 2.
spans at least 2 or 3 of DFAT’s
Broad Categories of Work

2
 Strategic partnerships
consistent with partner
government priorities and
demand.
It is anticipated that around $70
million or 70% of the funding would
be allocated to communicable
disease control activities, with the
balance applied to non-
communicable disease control
activities. Some activities may span
both disease areas.
Projects
It is anticipated that around $30
million or 50% of the funding
would be allocated to
communicable disease control
activities, with the balance applied
to non-communicable disease
control activities ($20 million) and
cross-cutting priorities ($10
million). Some activities might
span both disease areas.

1.5 Through the course of a partnership, a strategic partner may need to modify
their delivery by changing scope or direction or taking on further activities
under the partnership, which may include supporting a public health
emergency response. Strategic partners are expected to engage proactively
and at the organisational level with DFAT to oversee implementation of the
portfolio of projects, including through a consistent and comprehensive
approach to risk management, performance assessment, and reporting.
Funding decisions for strategic partnerships will be subject to the successful
negotiation of a robust framework agreement, including an appropriate
performance assessment framework (PAF) and gender equality, disability and
social inclusion (GEDSI) strategy.
1.6 Proposals that do not meet the definition and eligibility criteria for a strategic
partnership will be assessed for possible project funding. Funding decisions
for projects will be subject to the development of a sufficiently robust workplan,
including an appropriate performance assessment framework (PAF) and
GEDSI strategy. Successful project partnerships may be offered advisory
support by DFAT to strengthen workplans and GEDSI strategies, if required.
1.7 These Application Guidelines outline the application and assessment
processes for selecting successful organisations to design and implement
activities under RHP. Applicants must complete and submit their proposals
through the SmartyGrants electronic system at
https://health.smartygrants.com.au/.
1.8 All investments under RHP are expected to address partner country priorities
across one or more of the Broad Categories of Work and disease areas in
Table 2. The table also includes indicative funding allocations. Actual funding
allocations will be determined after proposals are received.
Table 2: Priorities for Regional Health Partnerships

Communicable diseases Non-communicable Cross-cutting

diseases priorities
Indicative allocation of $100 Indicative allocation of Indicative allocation of
million ($70 million in $50 million ($30 million $10 million (in projects)
strategic partnerships and in strategic partnerships
$30 million in projects) and $20 million in
projects)
Broad Categories Broad Categories Broad Categories

3
 Communicable diseases
of Work:
Ongoing communicable
disease control priorities are
as follows:
• infection prevention and
control;
• disease surveillance and
modelling;
• vector surveillance and
control;
• emergency operations;
• laboratory strengthening;
and
• field epidemiology
workforce development.
Building on pandemic-
related programming, higher
priority will also be accorded
to:
• data for decision-making
through improved health
information systems;
• community-based
disease prevention and
preparedness; and
• workforce development
beyond field
epidemiology.
Noting recent declines in
routine vaccine coverage
and the increased risk of
outbreaks of vaccine-
preventable diseases, very
high priority will be accorded
to:
• immunisation policy and
planning assistance;
• support for catch-up
immunisation campaigns;
and/or
• vaccine risk
communication.
RHP will also address other
infectious disease
challenges of high priority to
partner governments,
particularly:
Non-communicable Cross-cutting
diseases priorities
of Work: of Work:
Non-communicable All strategic partnership
disease control priorities and project proponents
are as follows: are expected to explain
• health promotion for how they would address
non-communicable One Health, climate and
disease prevention environmental change,
and treatment community
service awareness; engagement, gender
and equality, disability and
• support for non- social inclusion
communicable (GEDSI), and how they
disease screening, might incorporate First
detection and early Nations perspectives
treatment. into their work.
In the health promotion DFAT will additionally
category, specific set aside funding for
priorities include: projects that directly
• tobacco, alcohol and pursue and support
drug control; gender equality and
• diet and physical inclusive development
exercise; and outcomes, in addition to
• mental health and projects which will
suicide prevention. reflect and embed
Australia’s approach to
In the screening, First Nations
detection and treatment engagement. This
category, specific funding could be used to
priorities include: support:
• cervical cancer; • organisations
• hypertension; and developing or
• diabetes. implementing
innovative
approaches to
delivery of services
and information;
data collection and
analysis; workforce
development and
leadership; and
advocacy efforts;
• organisations in our
region, including
representative and
rights organisations,
that provide
specialised advisory
and/or brokering
services;
4
 Communicable diseases Non-communicable Cross-cutting
diseases priorities
• TB, malaria and • initiatives which will
HIV/AIDs contribute to the
• dengue; evidence base on
• antimicrobial resistance; issues of inclusion
• sexually transmitted and equality and
diseases (STDs); and/or support translation
• neglected tropical of evidence into
diseases. practice; or
• initiatives that
connect Australian
and regional
organisations
working on similar
challenges for
mutual benefit, with
a particular focus on
First Nations
engagement.

We are also interested in proposals that seek to strengthen public health policy
leadership.

1.9 The following principles will guide funding decisions for projects and strategic
partnerships:
• there must be demonstrated demand for the activity/activities from partner
governments;
• the proposed body of work should be informed by robust analysis and in
an area of national or regional public health significance;
• the applicant should have a strong track record of delivering health sector
projects in the region;
• the applicant should have a strong in-country presence and networks
including evidence of working with local actors;
• there should be sound consideration of gender equality, disability and
social inclusion with attention to addressing climate change and
incorporating First Nations perspectives in overall approach and project
development; and
• the proposal must demonstrate value-for-money.

1.10 RHP will not support investments:

• without strong potential to have a positive impact on health systems and/or
health policy and, in turn, public health outcomes in the region;
• which are duplicative of current programs and projects;
• focused primarily on the provision of infrastructure;
• proposing complex treatment services for non-communicable diseases that
are not currently available in recipient countries;

5
 • including salary replacement or supplementation for in-country partners
(where they continue to draw their regular salary); or
• involving social research that is primarily investigator driven (operational or
implementation research activities will be considered where there is judged
to be strong potential for policy and/or human development impacts).

Section 2: Operational objectives

2.1 As represented in the Program Logic included with the documentation for this
call for proposals, the goal of the Partnerships for a Healthy Region initiative is
Pacific and Southeast Asian countries deliver better health outcomes for all.
The development objective of the PHR is that Pacific and Southeast Asian
countries have more resilient and equitable public health systems with greater
capability to respond to health emergencies. The goal and objective of
Regional Health Partnerships are aligned with the PHR’s Program Logic
Applicants must outline in their proposals how they would implement the
outcomes applicable to Regional Health Partnerships.
2.2 The PHR End-of-Program Outcomes (EOPOs) and Intermediate Outcomes
(IOs) that apply to Regional Health Partnerships are as follows:
• EOPO1: Australian assistance contributes to improved ability of
partner countries to anticipate, prevent, detect and control
communicable disease threats and to address equity in the delivery
of these functions
- IO 1.1: Strengthened capacity and systems to respond to epidemic
and endemic communicable disease threats.
- IO 1.2: Strengthened pandemic preparedness and outbreak
response systems and capacity.
• EOPO2: Australian assistance contributes to improved capacity of
partner countries to prevent and control non-communicable disease
in an equitable way
- IO 2.1: Effective health promotion, policy and regulatory reform
focused on NCD risk factors resulting in changes in behaviour.
- IO 2.2: Strengthened screening, early detection and management
of NCDs.
- IO 2.3: Effective models of care are supported which promote
physical and psychosocial wellbeing.
• EOPO4: Australian assistance contributes to partner countries’
improved regulatory mechanisms, data systems, and capabilities to
deliver equitable public health action
- IO 4.2: Strengthened data systems, with quality data increasingly
informing evidence-based decision-making to enhance health
policy and programming.
- IO 4.3: Workforce skills enhanced across key areas, addressing
partner government priority needs.
- IO 4.4: High quality advice made available to meet partner needs,
including by deployees.
• Cross-cutting themes

6
 - IO CCI: Greater adoption of One Health approaches and
integration of climate change considerations.
- IO CC2: Stronger GEDSI integration and outcomes across PHR
investments.
- IO CC3: Increased community engagement across PHR
investments.

Section 3: Eligibility criteria

3.1 Organisation eligibility

3.1.1 Applications under RHP are open to all Australian and regional
organisations - public, private, non-government, inter-governmental,
academic and research institutions. Organisations submitting proposals
must have existing networks in recipient countries and must not have any
barriers that would prevent them from operating in the Indo-Pacific region.
3.1.2 Public sector partners and multilateral organisations that have been, or are
in negotiations to be, engaged by DFAT directly under the PHR are
ineligible to apply for or receive any Regional Health Partnership funding,
but may join or support a consortium bid as a non-Lead, non-funded
Organisation (see below).
3.1.3 When submitting your proposal, you must decide whether you are applying
for funding or a strategic partnership, in line with the guidance above. The
application form in SmartyGrants will help you to choose the best option.
Organisations awarded a strategic partnership are not eligible for
additional project funding but may join or support a consortium bid for
project funding as a non-Lead, non-funded Organisation (see below).
3.1.4 Where two or more organisations wish to enter into a consortium
arrangement, one partner must be nominated as the Lead Organisation
that will sign the agreement with DFAT, if successful. The Lead
Organisation will be accountable to DFAT for financial management and
the performance of the consortium in achieving activity objectives.
Consortiums that include partnerships between Lead Organisations and
organisations within eligible countries in the Indo-Pacific region are
encouraged. Entities within eligible countries and regional organisations
are also eligible to apply as Lead Organisations. There is no requirement
to include an Australian partner.
3.1.5 Consortium proposals must be supported by a separate letter of
association from each partner providing information about itself, noting the
relationship between the Lead Organisation and partner organisation(s),
and expressing the intent to collaborate. This letter should outline the
contribution the partner will make to the proposed project or Strategic
Partnership and should be signed at CEO or equivalent level.
3.1.6 There are no restrictions on consortium membership and organisations
may be involved in several consortiums for the purpose of responding to
this call for proposals, subject to the restrictions above applying to strategic
partners, multilateral and public sector partners.
3.1.7 DFAT reserves the right to reassess any proposal if, following submission,
the membership of a consortium changes, including through the withdrawal
of a consortium member.

7
 3.1.8 Individuals can appear as key personnel on a maximum of two (2)
proposals for RHP.
3.1.9 Individuals with conflicting commitments and current and recent DFAT
employees (see clause 10 below) must not be included in the proposal or
as individuals who may be engaged by the applicant if selected through
the assessment process described in these Guidelines. DFAT may reject
any proposal which does not disclose the fact that a person listed in the
application as key personnel has an existing and continuing commitment to
another project or activity.
3.1.10 Proposals compiled with the assistance of current or recent DFAT
employees will be excluded from consideration. Recent DFAT employees
are those whose employment ceased within the nine months prior to the
submission of the proposal and who were substantially involved in the
design, preparation, appraisal, review and/or daily management of this or
substantially related programs, including activities under the Health
Security Initiative (HSI) and/or other DFAT-funded health programming.
3.1.11 Applicants must ensure that proposals meet all eligibility requirements at
the time of submission and for the duration of the period of assessment
and review.
3.1.12 Proposals that do not meet eligibility requirements will be ruled ineligible
and excluded from assessment.
3.1.13 An eligibility ruling may be made by DFAT at any stage following the close
of applications, including during review. Where an eligibility ruling is being
considered, DFAT may request further information to assess whether
eligibility requirements have been met. Organisations will be notified in
writing of ineligible proposals and are responsible for advising consortium
partners (where relevant).
3.1.14 A proposal may be excluded from further consideration if it contravenes an
eligibility rule or other requirement as set out in these Guidelines or if
organisations and/or people named in the proposal contravene an
applicable law or code.
3.2 Country eligibility
3.2.1 RHP will be implemented in the Pacific (Federated States of Micronesia,
Fiji, Kiribati, Nauru, Niue, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Republic of the
Marshall Islands, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu and Vanuatu)
and Southeast Asia (Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, the
Philippines, Thailand, Timor-Leste and Vietnam).
3.2.2 Funding decisions will ensure an appropriate balance of support across the
relevant countries. Proposals involving activities across the Pacific or
Southeast Asian regions, or several eligible countries, are encouraged.
Single country project proposals will also be considered if sufficiently high
impact. Strategic partners are required to deliver activities in at least two
eligible countries.
3.3 Proposal eligibility and eligible expenses
3.3.1 Proposals must be submitted through SmartyGrants using the Regional
Health Partnerships application form provided. Significant detail, within the
prescribed word limits, should be included in your proposal. Your proposal
will require:

8
 • Applicant Details
• Project Team Details
• Proposal Summary
• Responses to Evaluation Criteria
• Due Diligence, Risk and Safeguards
• Funding: Proposed Budget
• Referee Information
• Completed Organisation Certification forms
• Program Logic
• Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning (MEL) framework.
3.3.2 In developing your proposal, please familiarise yourself with all
documentation for this applications process, including these Guidelines,
Invitation, guidance notes on GEDSI and First Nations Engagement, One
Health, Climate Change, and Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning (MEL)
and any addenda. All addenda, including frequently asked questions
(FAQs) and any changes to timeframes, will be posted on the CHS
website only at Regional Health Partnerships Call for Proposals. Please
visit this webpage regularly to check for any updates.
3.3.3 To be eligible for assessment, proposals must include:

a. A description of how the applicant will ensure compliance with DFAT

requirements on due diligence, risk and safeguards as outlined in
Section 6.
b. A budget – your proposal should include a budget envelope and
indicative information, as outlined below, on how the budget will be
utilised. The indicative budget must be submitted using the budget
spreadsheet template provided with the Invitation and Application
Guidelines, and uploaded to SmartyGrants. Certain headline figures
must also be included in your proposal and are to be completed in the
application form in SmartyGrants.

The indicative budget may include costs for:

• Activity and project fieldwork costs – in-country fieldwork expenses,

including costs associated with establishing the project in-country.
• Personnel – proposed salaries for each member of the team and/or
associated staff should be based on operational requirements. The
inclusion of project personnel from Pacific and Southeast Asian
countries is encouraged. Personnel support packages requested for
personnel from eligible countries should reflect the rate of pay relevant
to that country.
• Travel – costs for domestic and/or international economy class
airfares and modest accommodation and per diems that are essential
for the delivery of the project.
• Training and capacity development activities – costs of capacity
development activities in these areas can include, inter alia,
specialised training, mentoring, seminars and workshops.
• Procurement costs for small equipment – DFAT will only fund ‘small
equipment’ or software specific to the proposal. ‘Small equipment’ is
defined as equipment under a total of $10,000 that is used
collaboratively. DFAT will not fund general equipment or software that
would normally be provided by institutions, such as standard

9
 computers or the Microsoft software suite. Computing equipment
should be specialised and required for the completion of the project.
• Indirect costs, including overheads and administrative support costs.
Indirect costs of Projects and Strategic Partnerships must be kept to a
maximum of 10% of direct costs.
• GEDSI – a budget allocation for GEDSI is mandatory to meet DFAT’s
requirements.
• Monitoring, evaluation and learning (MEL) – as a key component of
RHP, costs associated with MEL processes and activities to inform
reporting and learning should be identified separately.
• Other associated costs – budget items that cannot be appropriately
allocated to other categories.

i. References – Proposals must attach letters of support from two

referees for the Lead Organisation and, where relevant, each of
the consortium partners. These should address the organisation’s
experience and capacity to achieve the objectives of the RHP.
ii. Organisation’s Certification – an Organisation’s Certification for
each applicant organisation, including consortium partners, must
be uploaded to SmartyGrants.
iii. A letter of association for each consortium partner providing
information about itself, noting the relationship between the Lead
Organisation and partner organisation(s) and expressing the intent
to collaborate, must be uploaded to SmartyGrants. This letter
should outline the contribution the partner will make to one or more
Broad Categories of Work and be signed at CEO or equivalent
level.
iv. A program logic setting out what the project(s) aims to achieve
and how it will realise its outcomes. Refer to the DFAT Explanatory
Note for Program Logic for details on designing a program logic.
v. A description of the organisation’s monitoring, evaluation and
learning (MEL) system. DFAT has provided a guidance note with
the Invitation and Application Guidelines which outlines good
practices in designing and implementing MEL systems.

Section 4: Application process and indicative timeline

4.1 Indicative timeline

4.1.1 The indicative timeline for this application process is summarised in the
table below. DFAT reserves the right to adjust timeframes, if required.

Table 3: Indicative timeline for application process

Event Time / Date

Call for proposals issued Thursday 23 February 2023

Registration to attend virtual information By Wednesday 1 March at 5pm

session AEDT

10
 Event Time / Date

Information session for registered applicants Thursday 2 March at 10am-

(virtual) 12pm AEDT

Thursday 23 March at 5pm

Cut-off date for additional questions
AEDT

Cut-off date for DFAT to post additional Thursday 30 March at 5pm

information and answers to questions AEDT

Proposal submission deadline Thursday 20 April at 5pm AEST

Assessment processes Mid-April to June

Funding decisions by DFAT Delegate June to August

Offers made to successful applications June to August

Indicatively from June until all

Agreement negotiations
negotiations are complete

Agreements enter into force and Indicatively from June until all
implementation commences agreements enter into force

Actual timing for the payment of the first

tranche of funding will be subject to negotiation Indicatively from June to August
under individual agreements

4.2 Applicant information session

4.2.1 DFAT will hold a virtual information session for registered applicants only
on Thursday 2 March 2023 at 10am-12pm AEDT. Please click here to
register. Registration will remain open until Wednesday 1 March at 5pm
AEDT.
4.2.2 DFAT reserves the right to cancel the applicant information session if
fewer than three organisations register to attend the session.
4.2.3 The applicant information session will provide an opportunity for interested
organisations to ask questions about Regional Health Partnerships, the
applications process and implementation.
4.2.4 All questions, answers, and presentations from the information session will
be published on the Regional Health Partnerships Call for Proposals
webpage after the event, ensuring any organisation unable to attend has
equal access to information.
4.2.5 Applicants may also email any additional questions to chs@dfat.gov.au by
no later than Thursday 23 March 2023 at 5pm AEDT. All questions
received and DFAT’s responses will be published on the CHS website by
Thursday 30 March 2023 at 5pm AEDT. Enquiries received through other
means will be re-directed to the nominated email address.
4.3 Deadline for proposal submission

11
 4.3.1 Completed proposals, with required attachments, must be submitted
through SmartyGrants no later than Thursday 20 April at 5pm AEST.
4.3.2 Applicants must ensure they allow sufficient time to address any technical
issues with their applications. Late applications will not be accepted.
4.4 Conformance check
4.4.1 Proposals received by the deadline will be checked by DFAT for conformity
with the requirements set out in these Guidelines and the Invitation to
Submit an Activity Proposal. At the discretion of DFAT, those proposals
deemed non-conforming will be excluded from assessment and applicants
will be advised by DFAT.
4.5 Shortlisting and assessment process
4.5.1 Following conformity checks, there will be a two-stage assessment and
selection process. Stage One will involve a technical assessment of
conforming proposals by a Technical Assessment Committee (TAC) of
DFAT health and development specialists and at least one external (non-
DFAT) subject-matter expert. The TAC will operate in an advisory capacity
and will assess, score and shortlist proposals for further evaluation by the
Evaluation Committee (EC).
4.5.2 The TAC will score proposals against each of the four evaluation criteria in
accordance with the assigned weightings (see Section 5.2 below and the
Rating Scale Table at Attachment A).
4.5.3 During Stage Two, ratings from the TAC will be moderated by an
Evaluation Committee comprising senior DFAT health and development
specialists and one external independent consultant. The EC will
collectively review and rank shortlisted projects and strategic partnerships
to be recommended to the DFAT Delegate for funding, taking into account
the following factors:
a. the evaluation criteria
b. advice and ratings from the technical assessment
c. feedback from DFAT geographic desks, posts and partner
governments
d. appropriate balance of disease areas, Broad Categories of Work and
geographic spread
e. whether proposals focus on HIV, TB, malaria and health system
strengthening and/or support Global Fund grants and objectives. Note:
This call for proposals is also a mechanism through which to apply for
Australia’s Global Fund Set Aside funding (2024 to 2026).
4.5.4 After moderation, the top-ranking proposals would generally be
recommended for funding, subject to budget considerations and portfolio
balance. Lower ranking proposals of adequate quality may be
recommended if needed to address a critical gap in the portfolio.
4.5.5 The Evaluation Committee may also consider other factors relevant to the
suitability, capacity and qualifications of an applicant organisation including
but not limited to:
a. checking with nominated referees and with other persons or
organisations at DFAT’s discretion, the accuracy of information and
quality of previous work performed including the resourcing of previous
work;

12
 b. information obtained from any legitimate, verifiable source, which is
relevant to the capacity of the applicants.
Information received through these checks may be raised with the
applicant, if needed.
4.5.6 Previous performance information may only be provided to Evaluation
Committee members where it is considered relevant. Panel members may
not introduce irrelevant issues or hearsay into the assessment or base
their assessment on information that is hearsay and cannot be
substantiated.
4.5.7 The TAC and EC will be conducted on a confidential basis and Committee
members are not permitted to discuss matters relating to the assessment
of any proposal with any external party. Applicants must not seek contact
with any members of the TAC or EC, and any such contact will be
considered a breach of confidentiality and may result in DFAT rejecting the
proposal of the applicant concerned.
4.6 Debriefing of applicants
4.6.1 Unsuccessful applicants will be notified by DFAT that they have not been
approved for funding. A consolidated set of generic feedback highlighting
the strengths of successful proposals and the weaknesses/gaps in
unsuccessful proposals will be posted on the CHS website at Regional
Health Partnerships Call for Proposals at the conclusion of the applications
process. No individual feedback will be provided.
4.6.2 DFAT will not enter into discussion or communications on the content of
the feedback once it has been issued.
4.7 Complaints
4.7.1 DFAT’s complaints handling procedures for procurements will also apply to
this applications process. Details at DFAT Guideline: Complaints Handling
in Procurement.

Section 5: Assessment

5.1 Assessment outcome

5.1.1 DFAT reserves the right to make final funding decisions. Interim funding
decisions will be subject to successful agreement negotiations, including
the development of a sufficiently robust workplan (projects) and framework
agreement (strategic partnerships).
5.2 Evaluation criteria
5.1.2 Applications will be assessed in accordance with the Evaluation Criteria in
the tables below.

Table 4: Evaluation criteria for compliance and eligibility

EVALUATION CRITERIA WEIGHTING

Mandatory compliance
• Minimum conditions for participation and minimum Pass/Fail
format and content.
Conformity and eligibility checks Yes/No

13
 EVALUATION CRITERIA WEIGHTING
• Applicant is eligible for funding as defined in these
Application Guidelines.
• Target countries are eligible for support under RHP.
• Proposed activities are eligible for support under
RHP.
• Proposed Broad Categories of Work are in scope.
• Disease(s) targeted are in scope (if applicable).
Eligibility requirements for Strategic Partnership
category
For strategic partnerships only: Proposal meets the
definition of a strategic partnership as defined in these
Application Guidelines and satisfies the following
eligibility criteria:
• a strong track record of delivering public health
projects in the Pacific and Southeast Asia in line Project/Strategic
with partner governments’ health priorities; partnership
• a commitment to working in a flexible, responsive
and collegiate way with other DFAT partner Yes/No
organisations; and
• a breadth of expertise that spans at least 2 or 3 of
DFAT’s Broad Categories of Work consistent with
partner government priorities and demand;
• projects in at least 2 eligible countries.
If a proposal does not meet the definition or eligibility
criteria for a strategic partnership, it will be assessed for
possible project funding.

Table 5: Selection Criteria for the assessment of proposals

SELECTION CRITERIA WEIGHTING

1. Organisational capability
a) Demonstrate your organisational capability to
deliver the proposed activities successfully, including
relevant experience in communicable and/or non-
communicable disease prevention, preparedness,
detection and response in the target geographic
region.
b) Demonstrate previous effective capacity building
30%
and change in policy, function or capacity in the
relevant country, countries or region, including
previous constructive engagement and communication
with key in-country partners and stakeholders.
c) Demonstrate expertise and influence of key
personnel in health security and/or public health
strategies relevant to the proposed Broad Categories
of Work.

14
SELECTION CRITERIA WEIGHTING
d) Describe your governance and administrative
structures including established and robust financial
systems; monitoring, evaluation and learning (MEL)
frameworks; and risk profile, register and mitigation
strategies. Describe how your organisation(s) will
support the transparent, fair and effective
management of claims related to inappropriate
workforce behaviour.
e) For strategic partnerships only. Demonstrate your
capacity to adapt to changes (for example, supporting
public health emergency responses), administer
additional inputs (for example, response funds or
support advisory deployments), and demonstrate how
you would approach working with new or different
partners during the implementation period of the
strategic partnership.
f) For strategic partnerships only. Demonstrate how
you would approach strategic and continuous dialogue
with DFAT during the implementation period.

2. Quality of the broad concept

Demonstrate how the proposal will:
a) contribute to the PHR initiative Program Logic
included with the RHP documentation for this call.
b) incorporate the current regional and country
context, including an analysis of needs and gaps.
c) build on pre-existing relationships and/or
partnerships between the applicant organisation(s) 30%
and in-country partner(s), drawing on local expertise
and networks.
d) For consortia only: describe the role and value-add
of each implementing partner and outline your plan for
governance and management arrangements.
e) plan for sustainability of outcomes and an
increasing reliance on working with local partners.

3. National and regional public health significance of

the development needs to be addressed by proposed
activities
a) Describe the relevance of proposed actions in
increasing country engagement with (i) the
International Health Regulations (2005); (ii) the World
30%
Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH) Performance
of Veterinary Services (PVS) Pathway; (iii) National
Action Plans for Health Security; or contributes
towards the achievement of relevant health-related
targets under the Sustainable Development Goals
(SDGs).

15
 SELECTION CRITERIA WEIGHTING
b) Describe how activities act on lessons learned from
the COVID-19 pandemic, where relevant.
c) For strategic partnerships only. Describe the
benefits of the strategic partnership for multiple
geographic locations, including through replicability,
scalability or multi-country scope.

4. Applicant’s approach to gender equality, disability

and social inclusion (GEDSI), including First Nations
engagement, and social safeguards
a) Describe how you will advance GEDSI, seek
opportunities to support First Nations engagement,
and support inclusive community engagement efforts.
b) Describe how you will conduct and/or utilise GEDSI
analysis and seek technical expertise, as required, to
inform design and implementation.
c) Provide details of:
i) your approach to meeting DFAT's expectations on
good practice outlined in the ‘GEDSI and First
Nations Engagement’ guidance document;
ii) a clear and inclusive community engagement plan; 10%
and
iii) how the activities will contribute to GEDSI and
community engagement outcomes for the Initiative.
d) Describe how the resources for GEDSI allocated in
your budget will be used.
e) Identify risks and safeguarding concerns on GEDSI,
First Nations engagement and inclusive community
engagement efforts for your proposal and describe
your approach to 'do no harm'.
f) Describe your organisational capability and cultural
competency relative to GEDSI and First Nations
engagement and outline how you will continue to grow
capacity.

5. Budget
Value-for-money principles considered in budget provided
Unweighted
by applicant, in accordance with DFAT’s requirements as
outlined at the following link Value for Money principles.

Section 6: Due diligence, risk and safeguards

6.1 Applicants must outline how they will ensure compliance with Australian
requirements, including due diligence, transparency, accountability and fraud
control.

16
6.2 Applicants must also explain how they will comply with DFAT’s risk and
safeguards policies including:
a) preventing sexual exploitation, abuse and harassment (PSEAH);
b) child protection; and
c) environmental and social safeguards.
6.3 Where organisations have policies in place that meet DFAT’s requirements,
applicants are encouraged to include a link to these policies in their proposal.
6.4 All organisations (including all partners in a consortium) must comply with DFAT’s
risk and safeguards policies.
6.5 Detailed information about DFAT’s safeguards and risk management policies can
be found on the DFAT website at the following link: Development risk
management.

Section 7: Contractual, reporting and acquittal requirements

7.1 Successful applicants will be engaged under an agreement between the

organisation and DFAT. Agreements will set out agreed implementation,
accountability, funding, reporting and acquittal requirements. Applicants may be
requested to adjust or strengthen elements of their proposals, such as project
plans, budgets, risk management approaches and GEDSI strategies, during
agreement negotiations.

7.2 A sample DFAT standard Agreement has been included with the RHP
documentation for this call.

Section 8: Contact

8.1 All enquiries in relation to this applications process must be directed to

chs@dfat.gov.au. All questions and answers will be posted on the CHS website.

17
Attachment A: Rating Scale Table

Table 6: Regional Health Partnerships

Evaluation Process – Rating Scale Table

Score Evaluation Rating Scale Rating

Individual Criteria requirements have
been exceeded in most areas and
relevant value-adding services or
86-100 High quality
products have been offered. Most claims
are fully substantiated with highly
relevant examples.
Individual criteria requirements are
exceeded in some areas and addressed
70-85 to a high standard in others. Most claims High quality
are substantiated with relevant
examples.
Individual Criteria requirements have
been met to the standard expected in
60-69 Adequate quality
most areas. Most claims are
substantiated with relevant examples.
Individual Criteria requirements have
been met but to a low standard. Some
claims are substantiated with relevant
50-59 Adequate quality
examples. The response is passable, but
there are major shortcomings or
deficiencies.
Individual Criteria requirements have
been inadequately dealt with in most or
40-49 Not fundable
all areas. Claims are inadequately
substantiated.
Individual Criteria requirements have
been not addressed or have been
0-39 Not fundable
inadequately dealt with in most or all
areas. Claims are not substantiated.

18