RFP: Planning, feasibility and landscape assessment to inform establishment of two regional laboratories for lead in paint testing in Africa

Job Description

Lead Exposure Elimination Project (LEEP) invites qualified consultants, firms, or consortia to submit a proposal for a comprehensive planning, feasibility, and landscape assessment to inform the development of two regional laboratories for lead in paint testing in Sub-Saharan Africa. These labs will provide cross-border testing services to surrounding countries that currently lack in-country lead in paint testing capacity – strengthening enforcement of lead paint regulations and enabling more effective public health protection.

This work represents the first phase of a larger initiative to design, establish, and sustain two regional laboratories. The full project is expected to unfold in two main phases:

• Phase I (planning and landscape analysis): February 2026 – May 2026, landscape analysis, feasibility and sustainability assessment, identification and shortlisting of candidate laboratories, and development of a recommended implementation model
• Phase II (implementation and capacity building): From May 2026, procurement, lab upgrading, personnel training, development of quality assurance systems, regional partnership-building, and full operationalisation of the selected labs

This RFP covers Phase I only, with strong potential for the selected contractor to participate in Phase II implementation based on performance and fit.

Many low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) have introduced or are in the process of introducing legal limits on the use of lead in paint, most commonly adopting the WHO-recommended 90 parts per million (ppm) threshold. However, enforcement of these lead in paint limits is often constrained by the absence of in-country testing capacity. To take regulatory action against non-compliant products, such as issuing fines, mandating product recalls, or banning sales, governments typically require laboratory test results to confirm lead content. Without reliable access to accredited laboratories that can conduct lead in paint analysis, officials are unable to test samples, issue evidence-based enforcement notices, or demonstrate legal proof of violations. As a result, laws may remain on the books but go unenforced, and lead-containing paints continue to be sold.

To address this bottleneck, LEEP is launching a major initiative to build the capacity of two existing laboratories in Sub-Saharan Africa that will serve as regional testing hubs for surrounding countries without functional lab infrastructure. These regional labs will enable cross-border sample testing, support enforcement of national regulations, and provide countries with data on lead paint use. Each lab will ideally already possess some or all of the necessary instrumentation for lead paint testing, including an ICP-OES (Inductively Coupled Plasma – Optical Emission Spectrometer), and will be further supported—through procurement of equipment, training, staffing, and system strengthening—to operate according to international best practices.

LEEP is supporting lead paint elimination programs in over 30 countries and has extensive experience in regulation design, enforcement strategy, and laboratory support. We are now seeking to operationalise regional testing capacity in a way that is both technically robust and politically viable. This will require careful consideration of existing infrastructure, political alignment, technical feasibility, and long-term sustainability. Rather than building capacity from scratch, LEEP expects to work with laboratories that already conduct lead in paint testing and have relatively high technical capacity, positioning them as regional hubs for surrounding countries.

This project is a focused planning and feasibility phase. We are seeking individuals and organisations who can help us lay the groundwork for successful implementation of two regional laboratories for lead paint testing. Proposals should demonstrate a strong understanding of the technical, regulatory, and institutional landscape of laboratory development in Africa, and offer practical, context-appropriate approaches to mapping needs, identifying viable lab partners, and designing implementation pathways.

We are seeking a partner to carry out the following:

Conduct a targeted mapping and analysis of laboratories in Sub-Saharan Africa that perform, or could feasibly perform, environmental and consumer product testing for heavy metals (specifically lead in paint).

The purpose of this work is to assess whether and how a regional laboratory model could function effectively and sustainably.

Specific tasks include:

• Analyse existing laboratory capacity in Sub-Saharan Africa, focusing on environmental and consumer product laboratories with analytical capability for lead in paint testing (at minimum, labs must already have an ICP-OES). The mapping should summarise each laboratory’s technical readiness, accreditation status, and potential to serve as a regional hub.
• Identify and assess candidate countries and laboratory institutions for potential regional hubs, targeting a shortlist of 4–6 laboratories across at least two distinct sub-regions of Sub-Saharan Africa. At minimum, 2–4 candidates should be identified in West Africa, and 2–4 in East and/or Southern Africa, based on feasibility, accessibility, and regional demand.
• Assess the feasibility of cross-border testing arrangements, including the regulatory, logistical, financial, and political factors that would affect how countries could send paint samples to a regional laboratory and accept results for enforcement purposes. This should cover sample transport and customs processes, mutual recognition of test results, potential data-sharing mechanisms, and willingness of governments and laboratories to participate in a regional model.
• Recommend models for regional coordination and governance, outlining how participating countries, laboratories, and regional or sub-regional bodies could collaborate to manage cross-border testing. This should include options for how results could be mutually recognised, how quality assurance could be maintained across countries, and what entity (e.g. host government, regional standards organisation, or network secretariat) could provide ongoing oversight and coordination.
• Explore potential models for regional collaboration and incentives. This should include analysis of:
• Incentive structures for governments, laboratories, and manufacturers to participate in or use regional testing services
• Hub-and-spoke models or other networked approaches for servicing multiple countries from a central accredited laboratory
• Ownership and partnership options, including public, private, and hybrid arrangements, and implications for governance and accountability
• Opportunities for collective action among countries or institutions to sustain shared infrastructure and financing
• Expected demand from surrounding countries, and how that demand could be aggregated, priced, or managed over time
• Based on the above, assess overall feasibility and present evidence-based recommendations on whether LEEP should proceed with implementation of the regional laboratory model, justifying the findings and proposing alternative options if full feasibility is low.

Building on the shortlisted laboratories identified through the feasibility analysis, assess their technical readiness and operational requirements to function as regional testing hubs for lead in paint.

Specific tasks include:

• Assess the technical capacity of shortlisted laboratories — including existing infrastructure, analytical instruments, facility layout, staff competencies, and data management systems. Laboratories considered viable must already possess a functioning ICP-OES suitable for lead-in-paint analysis, as this represents the gold-standard analytical method.
• Identify critical gaps and investment needs in equipment, consumables, infrastructure, and human resources.
• Detail equipment and consumables requirements, specifying what is missing or inadequate, how these can be sourced, and indicative costs. This should include identification of potential global or regional suppliers, calibration and maintenance service providers, importation requirements, and anticipated lead times.
• Outline practical procurement pathways and timelines for key analytical equipment, laboratory supplies and consumables, noting any regulatory or logistical constraints (e.g. import permits, customs procedures).
• Assess and recommend staffing structures and hiring pathways — for example, embedded government staff, direct recruitment, or secondments — ensuring that technical expertise is sufficient and sustainable beyond initial implementation.
• Define both existing and required Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs), Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) systems, and accreditation pathways to ensure laboratories meet international standards for lead in paint testing. This should include:
• an assessment of current documentation and QA/QC practices
• recommendations to achieve or strengthen ISO/IEC 17025 accreditation
• guidance to ensure that the scope of accreditation explicitly includes testing for lead in paint using validated analytical methods (using ICP-OES)
• any preparatory steps needed to participate in inter-laboratory comparisons or proficiency testing relevant to lead in paint
• Provide indicative costs and timelines for all technical and operational components, including equipment procurement, infrastructure upgrades, staffing, training, and accreditation activities.

Assess the legal and regulatory frameworks relevant to establishing and operating regional laboratories for lead in paint testing, focusing on both national and cross-border considerations, and considering the implications for public, private, or hybrid laboratory models.

Specific tasks include:

• Review national regulations and standards governing environmental and consumer product laboratories, including requirements for accreditation, licensing, hazardous materials handling, and importation of analytical equipment and consumables.
• Analyse national lead paint regulations and specifications in both potential host countries and surrounding user countries, to ensure that laboratories can test for lead in paint in accordance with these standards. Identify any differences in test methods, permissible lead content limits, or product coverage that may affect regional usability of results.
• Assess regulatory and institutional pathways for public and private laboratories to be formally recognised for enforcement purposes — including any requirements for government designation, memoranda of understanding, or legal authorisation to issue results used in regulatory actions.
• Examine cross-border legal and administrative procedures for sample shipment, customs clearance, and recognition of analytical results between countries.
• Highlight any legal or institutional constraints that could affect implementation, such as data-sharing restrictions, intellectual property, or differing national standards for lead in paint.
• Recommend practical pathways to address or mitigate barriers, such as regional agreements, recognition frameworks, or model partnership templates that could facilitate mutual recognition of results and sustained operation of the labs.
• Compare trade-offs between public, private, and hybrid laboratory models, considering implications for regulatory recognition, financial sustainability, accessibility, and independence.

Develop a detailed financial analysis to inform the establishment and long-term viability of regional laboratories for lead in paint testing.

Specific tasks include:

• Estimate one-time set-up and ongoing operational costs, including infrastructure, equipment, staffing, consumables, accreditation, maintenance, and QA/QC systems.
• Assess affordability and accessibility of testing services for both governments and manufacturers in surrounding countries, with the objective of ensuring that testing for enforcement agencies can be provided at minimal or no cost, while manufacturers may be charged a reasonable fee that supports sustainability.
• Identify and evaluate financial models and mechanisms that could support a dual-pricing approach — for example, donor or government subsidies for enforcement testing, combined with cost recovery from manufacturer testing or other laboratory services.
• Evaluate long-term financing and sustainability pathways under different ownership and governance models (public, private, or hybrid), analysing trade-offs in financial stability, equity, and scalability.
• Recommend a long-term financing and sustainability model, outlining key assumptions, potential funding partners, and risk mitigation strategies.

Engage with key national and regional stakeholders to assess interest, alignment, and feasibility of the regional laboratory model, and to identify strategies for securing sustained government and institutional support.

Specific tasks include:

• Assess stakeholder perspectives and readiness — conduct interviews or consultations with relevant government agencies, standards bodies, and laboratory institutions in both potential host countries and participating user countries to understand incentives, barriers, and conditions for participation in a regional testing model.
• Research analogous regional testing networks or initiatives in Africa (e.g. in environmental, food safety, or water testing) to identify lessons on how regional buy-in and coordination were achieved.
• Recommend practical strategies for securing buy-in and alignment, including actions that could be taken by LEEP, governments, and other partners to build ownership and momentum at national and regional levels.
• Propose engagement pathways and communication mechanisms between host and participant countries, including approaches for ongoing coordination, data-sharing, and mutual recognition of results.

LEEP will work closely with the selected firm throughout this project. While the firm will lead the analytical and planning work, LEEP will provide active support, including introductions to government and laboratory stakeholders, contextual information from its program team, and technical input on laboratory capacity and standards. LEEP will also provide strategic oversight and guidance, reviewing and approving key milestones and deliverables. Final decisions on methodology, scope adjustments, and recommendations will rest with LEEP. The firm should therefore design its approach to reflect this collaborative and guided model, engaging regularly with LEEP to review emerging findings, refine approaches, and ensure alignment with project priorities.

This project is expected to be completed within three months, from February to May 2026.

Please propose a detailed work plan and timeline that align with this duration. If you believe a different timeframe is more appropriate based on your proposed methodology or anticipated level of effort, please clearly justify and explain any adjustments in your proposal. This explanation should include how these changes would enhance the quality, feasibility, or comprehensiveness of the assessment.

Phase l will culminate in a comprehensive feasibility assessment and actionable implementation model that enables LEEP to make an informed decision on whether and how to proceed with Phase ll. The outputs should move beyond high-level strategy to provide evidence-based, operational recommendations grounded in regional realities.

Expected deliverables include:

• A regional landscape and feasibility assessment of laboratory capacity in Sub-Saharan Africa, focusing on environmental and consumer product laboratories with capability for lead in paint testing (minimum: ICP-OES). The assessment should summarise each lab’s technical readiness, accreditation status, and potential to serve as a regional hub.
• A shortlist of 4–6 candidate laboratories that already possess ICP-OES instrumentation across at least two sub-regions (West Africa and East/Southern Africa), with detailed assessments of infrastructure, staffing, equipment, and accreditation needs.
• An analysis of cross-border testing feasibility, including sample transport, customs processes, mutual recognition of test results, data-sharing mechanisms, and government willingness to participate.
• Recommendations for regional coordination and governance models, outlining options for how participating countries, laboratories, and regional bodies could collaborate on oversight, QA/QC, and result recognition.
• Exploration of participation and incentive structures, including:
• comparative analysis of public, private, and hybrid ownership or partnership models
• assessment of hub-and-spoke or networked approaches
• strategies for collective action and shared infrastructure
• analysis of expected demand from surrounding countries and pricing options
• A feasibility conclusion and recommendation on whether and under what conditions to proceed with Phase II implementation. This should include justification, risk analysis, and — where full implementation is not recommended — alternative models (e.g. hybrid,
• national-first, or phased approaches) with comparative assessment of impact, cost, and sustainability.
• Costing and sustainability models for laboratory establishment and operations, including potential funding pathways, cost-sharing or subsidy options, and long-term maintenance considerations.
• A roadmap for implementation, outlining sequencing, indicative timelines, governance structures, and steps for securing government and regional buy-in.
• A final report and presentation summarising all findings, with supporting data tables, lab profiles, and actionable next steps for decision-making by LEEP.

LEEP expects the work to combine desk-based research, stakeholder consultations, and comparative analysis of technical, financial, and regulatory feasibility. Key stakeholders should include laboratory staff, government enforcement agencies, standards bodies, and regional organisations.

The approach should be primarily desk-based, with any in-country travel proposed only where clearly justified. Associated travel costs should be reflected in the budget.

Bidders should outline a clear, structured, and evidence-based approach that ensures findings are validated with relevant stakeholders and integrated into decision-making. Proposals should demonstrate feasibility within the three-month baseline timeline, with justification if an extended duration is proposed.

This project will establish two regional laboratories in Sub-Saharan Africa to provide lead-in-paint testing services to countries without in-country capacity. The work should take a multi-country, regional perspective, assessing cross-border accessibility, regulatory compatibility, and demand for regional testing. However, research and stakeholder engagement should focus on two core sub-regions:

• West Africa, serving the ECOWAS region and neighbouring countries
• East and Southern Africa, also extending coverage to Central Africa where appropriate

Each regional hub should be designed to ensure accessibility based on geography, language, political relationships, trade linkages, and existing coordination mechanisms.

• West Africa: Senegal (preferred as Francophone) and Ghana — both countries where LEEP already has government partnerships and early insights into lab capacity.
• East and Southern Africa: Kenya and South Africa — both countries where LEEP already has government partnerships and early insights into lab capacity.

Contractors may propose additional countries within each sub-region where strong feasibility indicators, networks, or existing laboratory capacity suggest potential (e.g. Nigeria, Côte d’Ivoire, Zambia, Tanzania, Malawi).

For reference, LEEP already has active government engagement in the following Sub-Saharan African countries:

Angola, Benin, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cameroon, Côte d’Ivoire, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Ghana, Kenya, Liberia, Madagascar, Malawi, Mozambique, Niger, Nigeria, Senegal, Sierra Leone, South Africa, Tanzania, Uganda, and Zimbabwe.

• Demonstrated experience in designing and implementing technical projects in low- and middle-income countries, ideally in Africa
• Proven ability to engage effectively with government stakeholders, laboratories, and international partners
• Experience supporting laboratory systems, public health infrastructure, or related technical fields (e.g. diagnostics, testing, accreditation)
• Strong project management capacity to coordinate complex, multi-country implementation efforts
• Track record of translating strategic or technical plans into operational execution (e.g. procurement, training, systems building)

• Understanding of laboratory accreditation, international testing standards, and/or regional regulatory frameworks
• Experience with cross-border or regional coordination in Africa
• Familiarity with government-led public health or environmental programs
• Previous collaboration with development organisations, donors, or technical agencies
• Ability to deliver work in both English and French is an asset

We welcome proposals from:

• Consulting firms with experience in laboratory systems, public health, or infrastructure delivery
• Technical organisations or academic institutions with implementation capacity
• Implementation-focused NGOs or social enterprises
• Consortiums combining technical, institutional, and regional expertise
• Individual consultants with strong experience in government engagement, lab systems, or testing infrastructure

LEEP values practical experience, responsiveness, and contextual understanding over academic credentials alone. We seek partners who can balance ambition with pragmatism and work collaboratively to achieve results.

While we are unable to accommodate full commercial consulting rates, we offer an opportunity to contribute to a high-impact, multi-country initiative with meaningful real-world outcomes.

Please submit one PDF document in Calibri or Arial, font size 11, with line spacing of 1.15. The document should not exceed 19 pages.

Proposals should include the following sections:

• Interpretation of the problem and rationale for regional lab capacity
• Proposed approach to conducting the landscape and feasibility assessment
• Early thinking on geographic strategy and how candidate labs/countries will be identified
• Consideration of sustainability and long-term viability in shaping recommendations

• Proposed methodology for each core activity (e.g. lab mapping, feasibility analysis, stakeholder engagement)
• Timeline with key milestones, decision points, and any dependencies
• Proposed deliverables and outputs, including draft structure or formats if applicable
• Approach to cross-border considerations (e.g. how to assess regional buy-in, sample referral feasibility, etc.)
• Plans for adapting to uncertainties or changes in government timelines

• Organisational track record with relevant project examples and outcomes and referee details
• Key personnel qualifications with specific role assignments
• Description of any local partners, collaborators, or networks that will be engaged

Risk and quality management (max 1 pages)

• Identification of potential risks or implementation challenges
• Mitigation strategies to ensure timely, high-quality delivery

• Key activities and milestones, including planning, data collection, analysis, and synthesis
• Critical decision points or dependencies (e.g. stakeholder interviews, coordination with LEEP)
• Delivery dates for interim and final outputs
• Any anticipated bottlenecks or periods of limited availability

• Detailed budget spreadsheet, broken down by phase, activity, geography, personnel, and other expense and taxes as may be applicable
• Where relevant, ensure any travel costs are highlighted
• Narrative to explain the budget. We value reasoning and transparency around cost calculations and estimates, and encourage firms to provide detailed narratives of cost categories
• Where relevant, please include pricing options (e.g. different scopes, team configurations, or levels of involvement)

Additional guidance

• Proposals must be submitted in English
• All figures should be quoted in USD
• Validity of the proposal shall be 90 days from the date of bid closure

Proposals will be evaluated based on the following weighted criteria:

Understanding of problem context- 15%

Clear understanding of the problem, technical and political challenges of regional lab implementation in Africa. Alignment between proposed approach and LEEP’s strategic vision.

Methodology and feasibility - 25%

Quality, clarity, and practicality of the proposed methodology. Demonstrated ability to deliver meaningful landscape and feasibility analysis, actionable insights, and adaptable plans suitable for low-resource, multi-country contexts. Includes a sound strategy for how recommendations will be grounded in evidence and local realities.

Planning capacity and partnerships - 35%

Feasibility of the proposed work plan and timeline; approach to managing stakeholder relationships across multiple countries and institutions; risk management strategy; and prior experience with regional coordination, policy planning, or lab systems work in LMIC contexts. Strong local partnerships and cross-border perspectives are encouraged.

Cost effectiveness and value proposition - 10%

Budget is well justified, with efficient allocation of resources and strong rationale for cost estimates. Proposal demonstrates good value for the level of effort, expected outputs, and potential impact. Alternative pricing options or scalable approaches are welcome.

Team qualifications and organisational capacity - 15%

Relevant expertise of proposed personnel, including experience in laboratory systems, government engagement, feasibility or landscape assessments, and project management. Organisational track record in similar initiatives, particularly in Africa or other LMIC regions. Partnerships or sub-contracting arrangements should be clearly described.

Issue Date: 7 November 2025

Deadline for submitting questions: 17 November 2025, 17:00 GMT.

• For any inquiries regarding this RFP, please contact procurement@leadelimination.org no later than 17 November 2025. All submitted questions will be addressed and compiled into a Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) document, which will be shared with all recipients of the RFP and published across the platforms where the RFP was originally posted to ensure transparency and equal access to information. The answers will be provided within one week after the submission of questions has closed

Proposal Submission Deadline: 5 December 2025, 17:00 GMT

Presentations: Shortlisted candidates invited for detailed presentations (45-60 minutes each): January 2026

Anticipated Contract Award: January 2026

Please submit proposals electronically to LEEP’s procurement team at procurement@leadelimination.org by 5 December 2025. Mark your email with the subject line “LEEP Feasibility Assessment for Regional Laboratories RFP”.

Late submissions will not be reviewed.

• This RFP does not constitute an offer or commitment to purchase or contract for services
• LEEP reserves the right to reject any proposal at its sole discretion, including but not limited to proposals that are incomplete, late, non-compliant, or otherwise fail to meet LEEP’s requirements.
• Respondents bear all costs associated with proposal preparation and submission
• No payment will be made for proposal preparation, regardless of selection outcome
• LEEP will notify only those applicants who have been shortlisted
• LEEP reserves the right to refine the scope and deliverables in collaboration with the selected contractor following award, to ensure optimal alignment with project objectives.

• Information marked as confidential will be protected according to LEEP’s data protection protocols
• Selected contractor will be subject to LEEP’s Standard terms

• All applicants must declare any actual or potential conflicts of interest at the time of submission. LEEP reserves the right to disqualify proposals where conflicts of interest are deemed to compromise the integrity or independence of the research.

About the Organization

LEEP is an impact-driven, evidence-based nonprofit that aims to eliminate childhood lead poisoning, which affects an estimated one in three children worldwide. We primarily focus on one important source of exposure: lead paint. Our paint programs involve generating data, supporting governments with the introduction and enforcement of regulation, and assisting manufacturers in switching to lead-free paints. Beyond our paint programs, we are piloting interventions to address other sources of lead exposure, such as spices and cosmetics.

More information