Eligibility

1.Who is eligible to apply? 

Any registered legal entity (private organisation, CSO, academic institution etc.) is eligible to apply as long as they can sign up to our contract conditions (see here for more information on the contractual arrangement). 

2.Can global or regional organisations apply?

Global or regional organisations are eligible to apply if it is not possible for a national partner to administer the contract. However, we would expect the vast majority of the funding (and ideally its entirety) to be directed to the local partner working at the national level. We would also want a clear justification in the proposal for why the national partner is not being appointed as the administering organisation. Documentation establishing the link between the global entity and the local office may be required.

Deliverables

3. What is meant by “successful integration” of mental health into climate policy? 

For the current project, we are defining “successful integration” broadly, conscious that it is not possible to predict different levels of integration in policies at the onset of the project. Overall, we aim to ensure that mental health considerations are strengthened in the context of climate policies and vice-versa. The specific modalities through which this happens will be dependent on the local contexts. Examples of successful integration can include:  

• Formal incorporation of mental health into relevant climate policies (e.g., specific mention of mental health in climate policies), and vice versa 
• Increased awareness among policymakers (e.g., a policymaker mentioning mental health and climate change in a formal speech),
• Commitment to implementing policies and responses aimed to address the mental health impacts of climate change,
• Production of technical work (e.g., a report) by the government on climate change and mental health 

These are not comprehensive examples and ultimately, we would defer to the supplier to describe what successful integration looks like in their local context. 

4. Would evidence of integration into province/state-level climate or mental health policies fulfil the deliverable requirements if national timing is less feasible?

Yes. For larger countries like India, Pakistan, and Brazil, regional or state-level policy engagement is acceptable.

5. For landscaping reports, is secondary review/knowledge synthesis sufficient? Or primary data collection a must?

Secondary review and knowledge synthesis are sufficient for the landscaping report. No primary data collection is expected.

6. If, after submission of all required evidence and reports, the Government declines to implement suggested policy changes, does the responsibility for further advocacy or follow-up reporting remain with the CSO, or does the accountability conclude with submission?

CSOs are expected to engage with government stakeholders, but they are assessed only on the advocacy progress and efforts they undertake, not on government response.

7. Will UnitedGMH provide technical guidance or review drafts of key deliverables (e.g., ToC, policy brief), or is the supplier fully autonomous?

UnitedGMH will conduct one round of reviews for key deliverables and will provide technical support as needed by the partner. We however, expect the project to be led by the supplier. 

8. In cases where policy integration does not occur at the expected level due to external circumstances beyond the control of civil society organisations (CSOs), how is their performance evaluated?

CSOs are expected to engage with policy stakeholders, but they are assessed only on the advocacy progress and efforts they undertake, not on policy and government response.

Expenses, overheads, and budgets

9. The RFP states that lived-experience members should be remunerated. Is there a recommended remuneration structure or a standard rate UnitedGMH expects suppliers to follow? 

Suppliers are free to determine remuneration based on the local context. Compensation for individuals with lived experience (PWLE) can include financial remuneration, travel reimbursement, or other benefits, with amounts varying by project and context.

10. Are travel, meeting, and event-related expenses (e.g., Advisory Board meetings or high-level policy discussion roundtables) expected to be reimbursed separately?

No. The approved budget is final and should cover all such expenses.

11. Are there prescribed overhead or out-of-pocket expenses?

No. The approved budget is final and should cover all such expenses.

12. Do suppliers need to provide a separate budget? 

No. We don’t expect organisations to provide a budget at the application stage given the budget is already specified in the RfP. However, you must ensure you are comfortable conducting the activities described in the RfP, within the proposed budget and the payment schedule outlined in the RfP. 

13. Will currency conversion losses be borne by the supplier or UnitedGMH?

We will aim to pay contractors in their local currency and to absorb any bank charges.

Advisory Board and Lived Experience

14. Is it mandatory to include individuals with lived experience of mental health problems as members of the Advisory Board, and what kind of evidence or documentation is required to demonstrate their “lived experience”? Is direct disclosure from the advisors necessary, or can their professional/voluntary engagement in relevant fields be good enough if direct experience is sensitive to share?

Inclusion of individuals with lived experience is strongly encouraged as per the RfP and United for Global Mental Health’s organisational policy. The involvement of people with lived experience will be considered when evaluating the competitiveness of a proposal. 

Lived experience is the knowledge, insight and expertise that comes from having first-hand experience of mental health challenges, either now or in the past. 

Lived experience experts should self-identify as having lived experience. They do not need to have been diagnosed by professionals or have accessed formal mental health services, and we recognise it may not always be safe or possible to do so. 

Contracting

15. Is there any flexibility or provision to receive contract (not grant) funding directly under this RFP? 

Please note that the current funding is a contract, not a grant. This will be the case for applicants in all six countries.