Across One Health, human, animal and agri-food systems, AMR is slowed by reducing infectious-disease transmission and ensuring responsible antimicrobial use, operationalised through infection prevention and control (IPC) and antimicrobial stewardship (AMS). IPC prevents infection across healthcare, agricultural and community settings through vaccination, WASH, hand hygiene, environmental cleaning and appropriate precautions, while animal health and agri-food systems rely on biosecurity measures such as improved housing, controlled movement, vaccination and water-quality management. AMS ensures antimicrobials are used only when necessary and appropriately, including eliminating growth-promotion use, restricting prophylaxis and metaphylaxis to high-risk situations, and ensuring justified, targeted treatment.
Identifying priority quality-improvement (QI) needs in IPC/biosecurity and AMS requires quantitative data and qualitative insights, and QI often hinges on behaviour change among health workers, caregivers and farmers. Designing and sustaining QI programmes demands structured, multidisciplinary approaches that integrate behaviour-change strategies with monitoring systems. Yet, frontline implementers rarely receive training in designing, implementing and evaluating QI interventions for AMR mitigation. This RFP aims to close that gap by equipping One Health practitioners across Africa with the skills to develop and sustain effective QI initiatives.
Purpose and scope of the RFP
ICARS seeks proposals to design and deliver a regional training and mentorship programme that enables multidisciplinary teams from hospitals and agri‑food/farm systems to design, implement and measure the impact of QI projects in AMS and IPC.
The programme should encourage frontline personnel to integrate QI approaches into routine IPC and AMS using a team-based, multidisciplinary model. The overall goal is to establish a cascaded training framework through Training of Trainers (ToT), followed by periodic refresher sessions, and supported by structured mentorship after training.
Target Audience
Human health: Multidisciplinary teams from hospitals (or wards) working on AMS and/or IPC. Teams of up to four members spanning roles such as nurses, IPC practitioners, clinicians, infectious disease specialists, pharmacists, epidemiologists, surgeons and microbiologists.
Agri‑food/veterinary: Individuals involved in animal health, disease prevention and food production (e.g., farm personnel, veterinary practices, food production facilities). Profiles may include veterinarians, farm managers, animal health technicians/scientists, livestock specialists, food safety officers and agricultural extension workers.
Geographical eligibility: All participants must work in LMICs within Africa. (Applicants may propose additional reasonable criteria for participant institutions if relevant).
Templates and process
Budget template (please note not all budget lines will be applicable)
The deadline for submissions is 17 December, 2025 at 23:59 CET.
If necessary, interviews for shortlisted applicants will take place before 31 January, 2026.
Questions?
For any specific questions related to the RFP, please email: t_inception@icars-global.org
Q&A responses will be listed below.
Is it mandatory for the applying institution to deliver or support the French-language sessions as part of the project?
The successful candidate will be required to deliver the programme in both English and French, as the target transcends just the country of the grant recipient.
Funding: The RFP states a maximum amount of the project, however, it is not clear as to whether any co-financing is expected from partners
The ceiling indicated in the RFP represents the maximum amount that ICARS can allocate to a single award. Co-financing is not a requirement. However, applicants are welcome to include in-kind contributions or co-financing if these strengthen feasibility, sustainability, or reach. Institutions not eligible for funding must bring their own funding.
Geographic Scope: The RFP is aimed at “LMICs within Africa”. In order to prepare a better suiting proposal, we are interested to learn if the proposed trainings should be tailored for delivery of trainees coming from ongoing/future projects of ICARS in the region, or the applicant/consortium should/ is free to propose the countries to be involved in the training?
The RFP targets LMICs within Africa, we expect that this should be accessible to African Union member states, which could include countries ICARS is currently supporting. We anticipate that there should be a representation of the African Union regions.
Data, IP, Publishing & Knowledge Sharing: What are ICARS’ policies on open access, IP, and sharing of training materials, i.e. after the project ends, who owns the curriculum, ToT materials, and resource packages (IP)? Does ICARS require or support dissemination (e.g., in workshops, conferences, or national meetings) beyond the immediate participants? Does ICARS require or support dissemination (e.g., in workshops, conferences, or national meetings) beyond the immediate participants?
For this question, please see clauses 17 and 18 of our grant agreement:
Intellectual Property
17.1 Each Party will remain the owner of Intellectual Property developed or otherwise acquired by it or on its behalf prior to or independently of this Grant Agreement (“Background IP”). Intellectual Property means any rights in inventions, patents, utility models, registered designs, unregistered design rights, copyright, database rights, rights in respect of Confidential Information, rights under data exclusivity laws, rights under unfair competition laws, property rights in biological or chemical materials, extension of the terms of any such rights, applications for and the right to apply for any of the foregoing registered property and rights, and similar or analogous rights.
17.2 Each Party is entitled to exercise the Background IP of the other Party only as strictly necessary for the performance of this Grant Agreement.
17.3 All Intellectual Property generated by or on behalf of a Party in relation to this Grant Agreement (“Foreground IP”) shall be owned by that Party.
17.4 Foreground IP will be made freely available in accordance with ICARS Principles on the Management of Intellectual Assets and Open Access to Research Products.
17.5 Each Party hereby irrevocably waives the right to claim Foreground IP to the extent it can be exercised without infringing the Party’s Background IP. Neither Party is permitted to dispose of Foreground IP by assignment, license or otherwise to a third-party before it has obtained a waiver as set out in this clause 17.5 from such third-party for the benefit of the other Party. The waiver must be signed by such third-party and delivered to the other Party prior to any disposition of Foreground IP.
17.6 The grant recipient warrants that it will take all reasonable steps to ensure that its implementation of the Project under this Grant Agreement will not infringe any third-party Intellectual Property.
- Publicity & Acknowledgement of Funding
18.1 Each Party is entitled to publish the Results of the Project. Results means tangible and intangible work products arising under this Grant Agreement, including [raw data or data generated in connection with the project on a general level], charts, formulas, reports, technical drawings, articles, etc.
18.2 The grant recipient must submit an electronic copy of all Results to ICARS no later than 30 days after completion of the Project (as part of the completion report).
18.3 For a period of [10] calendar years starting 8 months after termination of the Project, the grant recipient must make the completion report freely available to the public online on a website agreed between the Parties.
18.4 A Party wishing to publish Results that contains the Confidential Information of the other Party or information regarding Background IP of the other Party delivers to the other Party a copy of the proposed written publication or presentation at least 30 days prior to submission for publication or presentation. The reviewing Party will have the right to:
- propose modifications to the publication or presentation for patent reasons or trade secret reasons or to remove Confidential Information of the reviewing Party, and the publishing Party will remove all Confidential Information of the other Party if requested by the reviewing Party and otherwise reflect such Party’s reasonable comments into consideration, or
- request a reasonable delay in publication or presentation in order to protect patentable information. If the reviewing Party requests a delay, the publishing Party will delay submission or presentation for a period of 90 days to enable the non-publishing Party to file patent applications protecting such Party’s rights in such information.
18.5 All documents and other material produced and/or published as a result of ICARS’s contribution within the framework of this Agreement should bear visible and specific acknowledgement thereof as agreed by the Parties. Abstracts, policy briefs and manuscripts must be approved by ICARS prior to submission to confirm they (1) reflect Results of the Project and ICARS policies and (2) comply with authorship criteria provided for under the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors criteria for authorship (ICMJE | Recommendations | Defining the Role of Authors and Contributors. ICARS has the right to demand the insertion of an approved disclaimer text.
18.6 The grant recipient acknowledges the grant funding at project related public events, unless ICARS directs otherwise.
18.7 The Parties must consult each other regarding the content of any promotion or publicity regarding the Project, particularly if a Party proposes to use any partner branding or logos, and a Party is obliged to obtain written consent from the other Party before using any such content on a case-by-case basis.
Letters of support: Will supporting letters from participating institutions or government departments be required by the deadline?
The letters would not be required at this time.
Can the same organisation apply to both advertised RFP opportunities?
Yes, you can apply for both if you believe you are able to deliver on both. The review panels for the two RFPs are different.
The call states that the proposed project will be awarded $300,000 for 36 months. However, the section on “Modality of the training” provides for training sessions for year 1 and year 2 only. What activities will be performed in year 3 to complete the 36 months?
Please note that the activities should be planned for 36 months which will include development of materials and training modules, translation, and the actual training. So, kindly plan according to this.
Please clarify what is meant by course in the following statement: "At least one in-person event/training session is required for each course."
In this RFP, a “course” refers to each distinct training activity outlined in the modality section. Accordingly, the requirement that “at least one in-person event/training session is required for each course” applies to both Years 1 and 2.
This means that:
- In Year 1, each Training of Trainers (English and French) is considered a separate course, and each must include at least one in-person training event.
- In Year 2, each cascade training (English and French) is also considered a separate course, and each must likewise include at least one in-person training event.
Other components of the courses may be delivered through hybrid or online modalities, as appropriate, but the in-person requirement applies to each course delivered under the project.
What is the minimum number of countries the lead organization is expected to work with under this RFP.
ICARS does not specify a minimum number of countries that the lead organisation must work with under this call. Applicants may propose implementation in one country or multiple countries, provided the proposal meets the objectives and delivery requirements set out in the RFP (including delivery of both an English-track and a French-track course, and the in-person training requirement), and all participating institutions and participants are based in LMICs within Africa.
What is the minimum number of institutions required to constitute an eligible consortium?
There is no minimum number of institutions required to constitute an eligible consortium under this call. Proposals may be submitted by a single institution or by a consortium of institutions. Where a consortium is proposed, one organisation must be designated as the lead institution, responsible for overall coordination and financial management, and the lead institution must submit one application on behalf of all partners, in line with the RFP eligibility requirements.
Is there an expectation for an even split of participants between human health and agri-food/veterinary sectors within each course, or is a mixed cohort acceptable as long as One Health principles are addressed overall? Would it be acceptable for different courses to emphasise different sectors, provided the overall project maintains a One Health approach?
ICARS does not require a strict numerical split between human health and agri-food/veterinary participants within each course. Mixed cohorts are acceptable, as long as the training design meaningfully integrates One Health principles and facilitates cross-sectoral learning. It is also acceptable for different courses to place greater emphasis on different sectors, provided the overall programme maintains a balanced and coherent One Health approach across all activities.
Beyond the requirement for at least one in-person session per course, would ICARS consider hybrid or blended delivery models acceptable (e.g. online modules combined with a shorter in-person session)? Could some course components (e.g. theory, pre-work, or follow-up mentoring) be delivered fully online, with the in-person component focused on practical application?
Hybrid or blended delivery models are acceptable and encouraged where appropriate. Course components such as theoretical content, preparatory work, and post-training mentorship may be delivered online. The in-person component should focus on interactive, practical, and applied elements, including group work and the development of quality improvement projects, in line with the objectives of the RFP.
Beyond the requirement for at least one in-person session per course, would ICARS consider hybrid or blended delivery models acceptable (e.g. online modules combined with a shorter in-person session)? Could some course components (e.g. theory, pre-work, or follow-up mentoring) be delivered fully online, with the in-person component focused on practical application?
Hybrid or blended delivery models are acceptable and encouraged where appropriate. Course components such as theoretical content, preparatory work, and post-training mentorship may be delivered online. The in-person component should focus on interactive, practical, and applied elements, including group work and the development of quality improvement projects, in line with the objectives of the RFP.
We plan to use some of our existing e-learning and workshop materials as “Background IP.” Could you confirm that, under the RFP and grant agreement, we would retain ownership of these materials post-grant, with only newly developed content (“Foreground IP”) subject to ICARS’ IP and open-access requirements?
In principle, applicants may use pre-existing materials as Background IP. Ownership of Background IP remains with the originating organisation. However, any new or adapted materials developed under the grant will be expected to comply with ICARS’ open-access and grant agreement requirements. The specific IP terms will be confirmed in the grant agreement.
Would it be acceptable for the organisation leading and coordinating the project to retain costs associated with content development, and to pay SMEs for virtual workshop delivery, given that these activities may be undertaken outside the LMIC implementation countries but directly support the project?
As stated in the RFP, funding is limited to project components conducted in LMICs in the African region, and an LMIC partner must be responsible for implementation. That said, we recognise that certain support functions (e.g., curriculum development, remote technical inputs, and virtual facilitation) may be delivered from outside the implementation countries where clearly justified and directly linked to the LMIC-based activities and deliverables. Please ensure these costs are transparently described, proportionate, and aligned with the budget guidance and SME provisions (including the cap for SMEs from high-income countries, where applicable).
Do we need a team of published and qualified researchers? If yes, what are the qualifications of the researcher (s)? Since it is three components, does it mean each component (animal, human and environment) should have a researcher?
As stated in the RFP, funding is limited to project components conducted in LMICs in the African region, and an LMIC partner must be responsible for implementation. That said, we recognise that certain support functions (e.g., curriculum development, remote technical inputs, and virtual facilitation) may be delivered from outside the implementation countries where clearly justified and directly linked to the LMIC-based activities and deliverables. Please ensure these costs are transparently described, proportionate, and aligned with the budget guidance and SME provisions (including the cap for SMEs from high-income countries, where applicable).
