National Research Consultant on Accessibility of Government Sponsored Applications

Consultant

Contract

This is a National Consultant contract. More about National Consultant contracts.

Background

BACKGROUND

Ukraine has been moving towards rapid digitalization throughout the last several years, alongside other countries of the world. One of the positive trends is that political declarations and priority-setting have been accompanied with practical steps that, oftentimes in an expedited manner, tried to deliver on promises of “Your State in Your Smartphone”. Such actions are extremely welcome and should be continued with the champion agency, the Ministry of Digital Transformation (MDT), at its helm.

At the same time, there is a growing body of both academic research and practical experience in Europe suggesting that even well-considered web-resources, electronic services and applications for citizen use are not immune to blind spots of neglecting rights of people with disabilities or those belonging to vulnerable groups. Based on years of research and practical implementation, the EU adopted its 2016 Directive on the accessibility of the websites and mobile applications of public sector bodies followed by the 2018 Harmonized European Standard EN 301 549 V2.1.2 “Accessibility requirements for ICT products and services”. Yet, even despite this, in 2019, the European Ombudsman took up and investigated a strategic case where a person with a visual impairment was prevented from making a complaint through the OLAF (European Anti-Fraud Office) web portal due to a faulty logic in the portal design.

While there already exist widely-applied standards for verifying accessibility of web content (sites, portals) – through the widely-applied WCAG framework[1] – shared accessibility standards for state-designed and owned mobile applications (hereinafter referred to as “apps”) are not yet in place.

As noted in some of the recent reviews and studies[2], the standards, common guidelines or well-established operational procedures for designing, building and assessing apps as accessible have not yet been established for state-developed apps universally. While main commercial vendors do have basic accessibility guidelines[3], these are broad, offer overall guidance, and are commercial by nature – as opposed to state policy or regulations.

More and more electronic services in the world are offered based on the “mobile-first” principle, and Ukraine is proactively expanding the functionality of its “Diia” state-developed smartphone app. While there currently is a trend for unification and centralization of electronic services under the “Diia” auspices, it would be impossible to have all citizen-related functions in one app. It is, therefore, inevitable that other state-sponsored apps (for instance, for mobile baking through state-owned banks, communication with and services from other state companies) are to appear or will be updated soon.

[1] Please see for more information: https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/. Ukraine currently has WCAG 2.0 as the minimum standard for accessibility of state online resources (web-pages and portals): https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/493-2019-%D0%BF#Text

[2] See, for instance, the paper “Study of Accessibility Guidelines of Mobile Applications” at https://cutt.ly/vl5EYvZ

[3] See, for instance, the app developer kit from Apple (https://cutt.ly/8l5Kj5h) and Android (https://cutt.ly/ql5KJWK)

Duties and Responsibilities

DESCRIPTION OF RESPONSIBILITIES / SCOPE OF WORK

Given the above, and keeping in mind the mandate of the DIA Support Project of integrating the Human Rights Based Approach into the design and operationalization of electronic citizen-oriented services, UNDP is looking for a national consultant to undertake a study of international regulations, practices and business processes for ensuring state-sponsored app design, prototyping, testing, and updating with a view towards accessibility and the Universal Design[1] principles.

While methodologies offered by bidders may vary, it is expected that the final product – the resulting analytical report – will be based on information gathered through desk research (including case-study search and review), interviews with international stakeholders and national issue-area specialists, potentially mini focus-groups with relevant experts, and thorough review of the policy documents in the cases where such regulations exist. The general expectations of the report, as well as its possible structure, are outlined below.

[1] See https://cutt.ly/rl51r0O for more details

DELIVERABLES AND IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE

The research and its resulting report are not academic in nature. Instead, they should be designed and carried out as a policy-oriented exercise aiming at informing Ukraine’s public policy course. As such, it is expected that the core findings, recommendations, lessons learned and cautionary tales are laid out upfront in the form of a policy memo, while supporting arguments, case study descriptions, interview summaries and other relevant materials should be presented in annexes.

The scope should include the following themes (and relevant sources of data):

1. Search, review, and comparison of international good international practices for accessibility requirements (+ Universal Design principles where applicable) to state-funded, designed and deployed apps for use by citizens.
2. Map and review and compare standards that were created based on accessibility requirements.
3. Map and review legal acts (or publicly available drafts of such acts) that adopt such standards or requirements as mandatory / recommended in foreign jurisdictions (priority to be given to EU member-states, G-7 or OECD members but needs not be limited to them), noting the ways such standards\requirements were put into legislation.

In conducting the study, the Consultant is expected to perform tasks that lead to the production of the following Deliverables:

Deliverable #

Task description

Deadline

Deliverable 1

• An expanded and finalized detailed methodology for the research that lists the methods and instruments for the research, preliminary listing of target countries (based on screening of their potential to have such regulations);

• The proposed structure of the report with the relevant volume indicated as approved by UNDP.

10 working days after signing the Contract

Deliverable 2

• Draft section of the report addressing theme 1 above based on desk research (up to 12 pages, Times New Roman 11, single-spaced);

25 working days after approval of Deliverable 1

Deliverable 3

• The first draft of the completed report for UNDP and MDT comments. The draft should include but shall not be limited to:

• all core textual sections of the report in their draft form, including all themes listed above;

• tables, statistics, graphs and other elements of the report submitted for UNDP comments and feedback in relevant *.docx, *.xlsx or other suitable formats;

15 working days after approval of Deliverable 2

Deliverable 4

• The finalized version of the full report, including but not limited to:

• all textual sections of the report with comments from UNDP and MDT fully addressed in *docx format;

• tables, statistics, graphs, raw data (Excel) and other elements of the report with comments from UNDP fully addressed in *.docx, *.xlsx or other suitable formats;

• Finalized presentation in *.pptx or another relevant format for presenting the study to the public and presentation of the study throughout an online or offline event.

• Talking points and public presentation (closed or public, as UNDP requires) of the report core findings.

10 working days after approval of Deliverable 3

The research’s proposed structure is presented below (note: the structure may be altered based on feedback from UNDP and MDT, as well as in the course of the research, responding to the findings made. The core research questions listed above are supposed to be depicted in the report regardless of the final structure):

• Report’s executive summary highlighting the contents, main findings, explaining the research limitations and presenting the report structure for ease of navigation (1 page);
• Report’s code body, shaped up as a policy memo[1] for a clear, concise, structured depiction of the results of the research and a brief listing of recommendations (up to 12 pages);
• Annexes:
  • Description of the methodology used to complete the research (up to 5 pages);
  • At least 2 cases studies of countries that underwent detailed analysis (up to 10 pages in total);
  • Extended explanations or background considerations for recommendations given.

[1] Please see as one of the possible ways to present the information here: https://twp.duke.edu/sites/twp.duke.edu/files/file-attachments/policy-memo.original.pdf

The payment shall be arranged in stages in accordance with the proposed payment scheme below and upon acceptance of the deliverables based on quality control and acceptance of recommendations. UNDP will be the ultimate authority to control the quality of work results and assess the Consultant’s performance during the assignment. The Consultant shall comply with the quality assurance system of UNDP, and provide the necessary information, reports and statistics according to a preliminary determined schedule or as soon as possible (within a reasonable period of time).

In particular, the payment schedule will be as follows:

• Deliverable 1 – 10%
• Deliverable 2 – 20%
• Deliverable 3 – 30%
• Deliverable 4 – 40%

MONITORING/REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

The Consultant shall report to the DIA Support Project Manager. Day-to-day supervision may be delegated to a different staff member or a different UNDP consultant. The payment shall be arranged in stages in accordance with the proposed payment scheme below and upon acceptance of the deliverables based on quality control and recommendations. The final report shall be submitted to UNDP no later than 30 June 2021 or as indicated in the relevant Contract.

All reports should be transmitted to UNDP electronically (formats of * .docx, * .xlsx, * .pptx, * .pdf or others specified in the Deliverables section above) on the electronic source or in the form of electronic communication with the attached final product in the Ukrainian language. UNDP will provide payments upon provision of deliverables duly certified by UNDP per the table above.

Competencies

CORPORATE COMPETENCIES

• Demonstrates integrity by modelling the UN’s values and ethical standards;
• Promotes the vision, mission, and strategic goals of UNDP;
• Displays cultural, gender, religion, race, nationality and age sensitivity and adaptability;
• Treats all people fairly without favouritism;
• Fulfils all obligations to gender sensitivity and zero tolerance for sexual harassment.

Required Skills and Experience

EXPERIENCE AND MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS REQUIREMENTS

• Master’s / Specialist’s degree in Public Policy / Administration, IT or other relevant social sciences / information technology field;
• At least 2 year of experience in issues of accessibility of information technology (web-based resources, software, mobile-based accessible software);
• Demonstrated track record in academic research, civil society advocacy, or advice to international organizations / national government institutions / CSOs on issues of accessibility of public services and ICT products. First-hand experience in problems with accessibility of government online resources considered as an asset;
• Demonstrated experience in producing advisory notes and reports in the past. Experience of working with international technical development projects would be an asset;
• Fluent Ukrainian, working-level English.

DOCUMENTS TO BE INCLUDED WHEN SUBMITTING THE PROPOSALS

Applicants shall submit the following documents:

• Personal CV, including information about experience in similar projects / assignments as well as the email and telephone contacts of at least three (3) professional references;

• Financial proposal as per information resented in Section 3. Deliverables and Implementation Schedule of this TOR;

• Duly accomplished Letter of Confirmation of Interest and Availability (template may be found at https://cutt.ly/Bzs6D4A);

• Brief outline of the methodology proposed for the research (no more than 4 pages, Times New Roman, 12 font, single-space, Ukrainian or English). The proposed draft methodology needs to outline (a) the proposed approach to seeking out the most promising countries through rapid scan analysis, (b) proposed approach to identifying which country-cases are worthy of deeper analysis, (c) overview of the tools for gathering information, (d) preliminary work-schedule;

• Writing sample (in DOC or PDF) of a previously-commissioned advisory note, report or publication similar in its topic to the one requested under this assignment produced by the incumbent in Ukraininan or English. The sample may have up to 10 pages in length and should be authored by the incumbent.

FINANCIAL PROPOSAL

Lump sum contract

The financial proposal shall specify a total lump sum amount and sums pertinent to specific and measurable (qualitative and quantitative) deliverables as per information resented in Section 3. Deliverables and Implementation Schedule of this TOR. Payments are based upon output, i.e. upon delivery of the services specified in the TOR. In order to assist the requesting unit in the comparison of financial proposals, the financial proposal will include a breakdown of this lump sum amount.

EVALUATION CRITERIA

Educational background – 5 points max

• 5 pts – PhD in Public Policy/Administration, IT or other relevant social sciences / information technology field;
• 3 pts – Master’s / Specialist’s degree in Law, Public Policy/Administration, IT or other relevant social sciences / information technology field;

?Experience in issues of accessibility of information technology (web-based resources, software, mobile-based accessible software) – 10 points max

• 10 pts – over 4 years of relevant experience;
• 9 pts – between 3 and 4 years of relevant experience;
• 8 pts – at least 2 years of relevant experience.

?Track record in academic research, civil society advocacy, or advice to international organizations / national government institutions on issues of accessibility of public services and ICT products – 12 points max

• 12 pts – over 5 relevant examples demonstrated;
• 10 pts – 3-4 relevant examples demonstrated;
• 8 pts – at least 2 relevant examples demonstrated;

First-hand experience in problems with accessibility of government online resources – 3pts max

• 3 pts – the candidate has first-hand experience;
• 0 pts – the candidate does not have first-hand experience.

Quality of the methodology outline proposed for the research (no more than 4 pages, Times New Roman, 12 font, single-space) – 20 points max

• 20 pts – the proposed methodology outline is clear, concise but rich in content, and is fully in alignment with the TOR’s tasks; the proposed techniques and approaches to conducting the research and proposed presentation of the material are relevant and show Consultant’s understanding of the ultimate need of the research exercise. All noted themes are adequately covered;
• 16 pts – the proposed methodology is wordy, has some irrelevant or inapplicable pieces of information, and shows general understanding of the TOR and the tasks to be undertaken. The language is either verbose or not precise enough and some themes as indicated in this TOR are left out. The text requires some re-working and clarification;
• 0 pts – the proposed methodology is barely relevant to the TOR and the tasks therein and would need significant re-working.

Quality of the writing sample – 15 points max

• 15 pts – the extract presents a top-quality, cogent, well-articulated practical assessment of an issue at hand with practical advice on the way forwards;
• 13 pts – a generally well-developed, well-grounded assessment of an issue at hand with meaning conveyed clearly;
• 11 pts - presents the assessment of an issue at hand with acceptable clarity with a trend to academism or unnecessary vagueness, generally demonstrates control of the conventions of standard written language;

Language Skills – 5 points max

• 5 pts – Fluency in both Ukrainian and English;
• 3 pts – Fluent Ukrainian and working-level English knowledge.

Maximum available technical score - 70 points.

EVALUATION METHOD

Cumulative analysis

Contract award shall be made to the incumbent whose offer has been evaluated and determined as:

a) responsive/compliant/acceptable, and

b) having received the cumulative highest score out of a pre-determined set of weighted technical and financial criteria specific to the solicitation.

* Technical Criteria weight: 70%

* Financial Criteria weight: 30%

Only candidates obtaining a minimum 70% from the maximum available technical score (49 points) would be considered for the Financial Evaluation

The maximum number of points assigned to the financial proposal is allocated to the lowest price proposal and will equal to 30. All other price proposals will be evaluated and assigned points, as per below formula:

30 points [max points available for financial part] x [lowest of all evaluated offered prices among responsive offers] / [evaluated price].

The proposal obtaining the overall cumulatively highest score after adding the score of the technical proposal and the financial proposal will be considered as the most compliant offer. After successful completion of the validation interview the offeror will be awarded a contract.

Apply now

Added 3 years ago - Updated 3 years ago - Source: jobs.undp.org