Value AD
CAN BE
ALTERNATIVE
INVESTMENT
RFI - Regional Support for Post-Pandemic Equitable Education
REQ-LAC-000059
Hannah Weatherford Grantor
Funding Opportunity Number: REQ-LAC-000059
Opportunity Category: Other
Category Explanation: For Market Research purposes
CFDA Number(s): 98.001 -- USAID Foreign Assistance for Programs Overseas
Cost Sharing or Matching Requirement: No
Posted Date: Sep 29, 2023 12:00:00 AM EDT
Closing Date: N/A
Eligible Applicants: Unrestricted (i.e., open to any type of entity above), subject to any clarification in text field entitled "Additional Information on Eligibility"
Description:
This RFI offers the opportunity for individuals and organizations to provide the USAID/LAC Bureau with context, data, and recommendations specific to the questions asked in this RFI. This RFI is open for comments from any interested U.S. and/or Non-U.S. organizations and universities. We especially encourage responses from organizations that are either run by or have direct experience working with one or more of the marginalized groups described below. USAID reserves the right to (or not to) incorporate any and all comments into a funding opportunity or ultimately an award. Additional information, if any, on this RFI will be posted on both SAM.Gov and Grants.Gov. Submitting a response to this RFI does not give respondents any advantage in applying for any future funding opportunities with USAID.
USAID/LAC is interested in learning what gaps and promising interventions are identified by local and international donors, non-governmental organizations, private sector entities, universities, and think tanks to ensure inclusive and equitable access to quality education, especially for those marginalized and vulnerable groups described (Table 1, above).
USAID seeks interested parties’ responses to one or more of the questions that address gaps and promising interventions for one or more of the above groups. USAID also asks that interested parties respond based on the countries and contexts in which they have direct experience and in relation to populations with which they have direct experience.
1. Missing groups: Which, if any, distinct groups, or demographics might have been excluded from (and not necessarily encompassed by) the list of marginalized groups (Table 1) in the LAC region that do not have equitable access to quality education? Please explain.
1. Gaps in access: What promising work have you observed in LAC or other regions to help address gaps in inclusive and equitable access to pre-primary, primary, and secondary education for marginalized and vulnerable groups?
2. Gaps in learning quality: What promising work have you observed to help address gaps in the inclusive and equitable quality (demonstrable learning levels) of pre-primary, primary, and secondary education for marginalized and vulnerable groups?
3. Promising interventions: What positive or promising models of inclusive and equitable education, both in terms of access and quality of education, have you observed in particular schools, communities, and/or countries that might be scaled or replicated? What additional comments do you have regarding promising interventions for addressing gaps in access and quality of education for marginalized and vulnerable groups?
4. Donor landscape: What other (non-USAID) donors, such as multilateral organizations and private or philanthropic foundations, are leading the way in the inclusive and equitable education space? What interesting/promising work are they doing, for what levels of education, and where?
5. Local organizations landscape: What local nonprofit, private, and/or government organizations do you think are doing interesting work in the inclusive and equitable education space? What promising work are they doing? What capacity gaps/needs do local organizations have that might limit the impact of their work?
6. Role of technology: What role should technology play in ensuring inclusive and equitable access to quality education, particularly for marginalized and vulnerable groups? What promising technologies or technological interventions have you seen working in the inclusive and equitable education space?
7. Prioritization: Given limited resources, what gaps/barriers to inclusive and quality education for particular groups would you prioritize and why (please share your criteria for prioritization such as need, easy wins, existing momentum, etc.)? Please be sure to list the context(s)/country(ies) you are referencing in your response.
