Background

Three groups of islands, namely Redang, Tioman and Sibu-Tinggi, have been chosen for piloting. These three sites comprise a total area of 164,534.2 ha which is 28.89% of the total area of 569,447.7 ha calculated for the 40 Marine Parks gazetted in Malaysia in 1994.
 
Surveys  by Harborne et.al (2000) indicate that the three marine parks, which were chosen as project sites, constitute a globally important area for biodiversity, especially when considering the limited number of reef types (dominated by shallow fringing reefs). A total of 221 coral species have been identified in the project area including 67 species not previously (been) reported from Malaysia (Harborne, et. al., 2000). This figure represents about 80% of the number of species identified in an equivalent area in the ‘Coral Triangle’, which is known to have the greatest coral diversity on earth.
 
The fish fauna of the three project sites is also known to be globally important with at least 298 species identified. There is also evidence that, as with corals, Malaysia has 80% of the number of fish species of the ‘Coral Triangle’. The waters of the three project sites also provide important habitat for four of the seven marine turtle species in the world: the Leatherback, the Green, the Hawksbill and the Olive Ridley. Redang is one of the major nesting areas for Green and Hawksbill turtles in Malaysia. Ten cetacean species have also been documented (Nadarajah, 2000) and resident populations of dugong have been confirmed in the Johor Marine Park (Hiew, pers.comm.).
 
The project responds to the need to address a number of Primary threats to marine biodiversity which are:
  • Declining fish stocks and exploitation of breeding grounds
  • Loss of habitat for marine life and destruction of coral reefs and
  • Habitat degradation and degradation of water quality
Malaysia as a signatory to International Convention on Biodiversity has to achieve the 2010 Targets of 1.1 and 1.2 which relate to improvements in protected area management. The project is executed by Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment and implemented by the Department of Marine Park Malaysia (DMPM).
 
The project’s objective is to achieve enhanced Marine Park Management and Inclusive sustainable island development. In order to achieve this, the project comprises of 7 outcomes as follows:
  • Outcome 1: Adaptive Marine Park management by a mechanism of cross-sectoral information sharing and knowledge transfer into decision-making bodies.
  • Outcome 2: Mechanisms for effective multi-sectoral policy making, development planning and an improved financial sustainability.
  • Outcome 3: Involvement of local communities in Marine Park management and enabling them to benefits of biodiversity conservation by generating alternative livelihoods.
  • Outcome 4: Tourism operators integrated into Protected Area Management and reduction of the direct and indirect impacts of tourism activities on biodiversity.
  • Outcome 5: MPUs follow international standards of protected area management and achieve efficient enforcement and prevention of violations.
  • Outcome 6: Raised awareness of the importance of biodiversity conservation and marine park system in Malaysia among selected target groups.
  • Outcome 7: Framework for strong advocacy from stakeholders for the conservation in the marine parks of Malaysia.
While the project’s field activities are focused on the three project sites, outputs aim to have wider relevance through a series of dissemination and replication activities.
 
The Project Document and other relevant GEF documents can be downloaded from the following weblink:  http://www.thegef.org/gef/project_detail?projID=1201
Information on the UNDP evaluation process and experience from other countries  can be refered to the Evaluation Resource Center  at the following weblink http://erc.undp.org/index.html
 
Any request for clarification must be emailed to procurement@undp.my by 13 March 2013 by 12 noon. (Malaysian time). Please write the Project Code in your e-mail heading (MyIC/2013/002).
 
GEF OBJECTIVES AND PURPOSE OF TERMINAL EVALUATION
 
Monitoring and evaluation in the Global Environment Facility (GEF) projects have the following overarching objectives:
  • To promote accountability for the achievement of GEF objectives through the assessment of results, effectiveness, processes, and performance of the partners involved in GEF activities. GEF results are monitored and evaluated for their contribution to global environmental benefits;
  • To promote learning, feedback, and knowledge sharing on results and lessons learned among the GEF and its partners, as a basis for decision-making on policies, strategies, programme management, and projects, and to improve knowledge and performance.
The purposes of conducting evaluation includes the understanding of why and the extent to which intended and unintended results are achieved, and their impact on stakeholders. Evaluation is an important source of evidence of the achievement of results and institutional performance, and contributes to knowledge and to organisational learning.
 
Evaluation should serve as an agent of change and play a critical role in supporting accountability.
In accordance, all full and medium-size projects supported by GEF are subject to a final evaluation upon completion of implementation. In addition to providing an independent in-depth review of implementation progress, this type of evaluation is responsive to GEF Councils’ decisions on transparency and better access to information during implementation and on completion of a project.
 
Specifically, the Terminal Evaluation (TE) must provide a comprehensive and systematic account of the performance of a completed project by assessing its project design, process of implementation and results vis-à-vis project objectives endorsed by the GEF including the agreed changes in the objectives during project implementation. TEs have four complementary purposes as follows:
  • To promote accountability and transparency, and to assess and disclose levels of project accomplishments;
  • To synthesize lessons that may help improve the selection, design and implementation of future GEF activities;
  • To provide feedback on issues that are recurrent across the portfolio and need attention, and on improvements regarding previously identified issues; and,
  • To contribute to the GEF Evaluation Office databases for aggregation, analysis and reporting on effectiveness of GEF operations in achieving global environmental benefits and on quality of monitoring and evaluation across the GEF system.
A mix of tools is used to ensure effective project M&E. These can be applied continuously throughout the lifetime of the project – e.g. periodic monitoring of indicators, or as specific time-bound exercises such as mid-term reviews, audit reports and independent evaluations.
 
OBJECTIVES OF THIS TERMINAL EVALUATION
This terminal evaluation (TE) is being carried out to provide a comprehensive and systematic account of the performance of the project by assessing its project design, the process of implementation, and results and outputs as they relate to project objectives endorsed by the GEF and other partners (UNDP, NRE, DMPM) including the agreed changes in the objectives during project implementation. Specifically, the Terminal Evaluation will undertake the following tasks:
  • Assess overall performance and review progress towards attaining the project’s objectives and results including relevancy, efficiency and effectiveness of the actions taken given the available funding and capacities for implementation;
  • Review and evaluate the extent to which the project outputs and outcomes have been achieved and provide rating employing the six-point rating scale (HS to HU) (see Annex 2 ); 
  • Assess the project results and determine the extent to which the project objectives were achieved, or are expected to be achieved, and assess if the project has led to any positive or negative consequences and provide a rating of project objective achievement on the six-point rating scale; 
  • Assess the extent to which the project impacts have reached or have the potential to reach the intended beneficiaries;
  • Critically analyse the implementation arrangements and identify strengths and weaknesses in the project design and implementation and provide a rating of the project implementation, employing the six-point rating scale;
  • Describe the project’s adaptive management strategy – how have project activities changed in response to new conditions and have the changes been appropriate;
  • Review the clarity of roles and responsibilities of the various agencies and institutions and the level of coordination between relevant players;
  • Assess the level of stakeholder involvement in the project from community to higher Government levels and recommend on whether this involvement has been appropriate to the goals of the project;
  • Describe and assess efforts of UNDP in support of implementation;
  • Review donor partnership processes, and the contribution of co-finance;
  • Describe key factors that will require attention in order to improve prospects for sustainability of project results achieved; and,
  • Identify and document the main successes, challenges and lessons that have emerged.

Duties and Responsibilities

Three main elements to be evaluated are Delivery, Implementation and Finances. Each component will be evaluated using three criteria: effectiveness, efficiency and timeliness. 

PROJECT DELIVERY:  The TE will assess to what extent the project has achieved its immediate objectives. It will also identify what outputs, impacts and results have been produced and how they have enabled the project to achieve its objectives.  

The consultants are required to make assessment of the following issues under each priority area outlined below:
 
Institutional arrangement
  • Preparatory work and implementation strategies
  • Consultative processes
  • Technical support
  • Capacity building initiatives
  • Project outputs
  • Assumptions and risks
  • Project related complementary activities
Outcome, results and impacts
  • Efficiency of all project activities under the five major components
  • Progress in the achievement of the immediate objectives (include level of indicator achievement when available)
Partnerships
  • Assessment of national level involvement and perception
  • Assessment of local partnerships, and involvement of stakeholders
  • Assessment of collaboration between government, intergovernmental and non-governmental organisations
Assessment of national level involvement and perception

Risk management

  • Were problems/constraints, which impacted on successful delivery of the project identified at the project design stage and subsequently as part of the Mid Term Evaluation (MTE)?
  • Were there new threats/risks to project success that emerged during project implementation?
  • Were both kinds of risk appropriately dealt with?
  • Were recommendations arising from the MTE addressed?
Monitoring and Evaluation
  • Assess the extent, appropriateness and effectiveness of adaptive management at all levels of the project implementation
  • Has there been a monitoring and evaluation framework for the project and how was this developed?
  • Is the reporting framework effective/appropriate?
  • Is this framework suitable for replication/continuation for any future project support?
Assess the extent, appropriateness and effectiveness of adaptive management at all levels of the project implementation

PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION: The TE will review the project management and implementation arrangements at all levels, in order to provide an opinion on its efficiency and cost effectiveness.  This includes:

Processes and administration:
  • Project related administration procedures
  • Milestones (Log-frame matrix)
  • Key decisions and outputs,
  • Major project implementation documents prepared with an indication of how the documents and reports have been useful
Project oversight and active engagement by: UNDP and National steering committee
Project execution: Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment (NRE)
Project implementation: Department of Marine Park Malaysia (DMPM)
 
PROJECT FINANCES: How well and cost effectively have financial arrangements of the project worked?  This section will focus on the following three priority areas:
 
Project disbursements
  • Provide an overview of actual spending against budget expectations
  • Critically analyse disbursements to determine if funds have been applied effectively and efficiently.
Budget procedures
  • Did the Project Document provide adequate guidance on how to allocate the budget?
  • Review of audits and any issues raised in audits and subsequent adjustments to accommodate audit recommendations;
  • Review the changes to fund allocations as a result of budget revisions and provide an opinion on the appropriateness and relevancy of such revisions
Coordination mechanisms
  • Evaluate appropriateness and efficiency of coordinating mechanisms between executing  agencies and UNDP
  • Does the approach represent an effective means of achieving the objectives?
  • How can the approach be improved?
METHODOLOGY OF EVALUATION APPROACH 
The evaluation will be conducted in a participatory manner through a combination of processes. It is anticipated that the methodology to be used for the TE will include the following:
 
Review of documentation including but not limited to:-
  • Project Document and Project Appraisal Document;
  • Project implementation reports (APR/PIR’s);
  • Quarterly progress reports and work plans of the various implementation task teams;
  • Audit reports;
  • Mid Term Evaluation report;
  • Biodiversity Tracking Tools;
  • M & E Operational Guidelines, all monitoring reports prepared by the project; and
  • Financial and Administration guidelines.
  • NIM/NGO Audit reports
  • Other Malaysia’s UNDP/GEF evaluation reports for biodiversity projects
The following documents will also be available:
  • Project operational guidelines, manuals and systems;
  • Minutes of the National Steering Committee, Technical Working Committee and other project management meetings;
  • Maps;
  • List of project publications;
  • The GEF and UNDP Implementation Completion Report guidelines; and
  • The UNDP Monitoring and Evaluation Frameworks.

Site visits and interviews in the field with stakeholders shall include:

  • UNDP staff who have project responsibilities;
  • Executing agencies (including but not limited to senior officials and task team/ component leaders: NRE, DMPM;
  • The Chair of the National Steering Committee;
  • Project stakeholders, to be determined at the inception meeting; and
  • Relevant staff of the Department of Marine Park Malaysia
The evaluation will start with an opening meeting with the Project Support Unit, executing agency and UNDP, and a review of the key project documentation including key reports and correspondence. It will include presentations from the various project components, visits to executing and implementing agency offices, interviews with key individuals both within the project, the government, and independent observers of the project and its activities, as well as project personnel.  Field visits to project sites will be conducted to view activities first hand. There will be an closing meeting to discuss the findings of the evaluation prior to the submission of the draft final report.

EXPECTED OUTPUTS:
The TE evaluators will be expected to produce:
 
a) An evaluation report, of approximately 30-40 pages, structured along the outline indicated in Annex 1.
  • A detailed record of consultations with stakeholders will need to be kept and provided (as part of the information gathered by the evaluators), as an annex to the main report.
  • If there are any significant discrepancies between the impressions and findings of the evaluation team and stakeholders, these should be explained in an annex attached to the final report.
b) A Power Point presentation (circa 15-20 slides) covering the key points of the TE.
 
c) A exit presentation to the executing agency, Project Support Unit and UNDP (precise date to be agreed as part of evaluators contract).
 
A draft of both a) and b) above should be submitted within two weeks of the end of the in-country component of the evaluators’ mission, and a final copy within two weeks after receiving written comments on the drafts.
 
The draft and final versions of the products should be submitted to the Project Support Unit, who will be responsible for circulating it to key stakeholders.

DURATION
The evaluation is proposed to take place from 8th April to 19th April 2013. The expected number of working days per consultant is 20 days including 10 working days mission to Malaysia for the international consultant.
 
DELIVERABLES AND TIMELINE
The TE Team will consist of one International Consultant and one National Consultant. The International Consultant will be the Team Leader. The Team Leader, in close collaboration with the National Consultant, will have the overall responsibility for the quality and timely submission of the deliverables. Specifically, the team of consultants is responsible for submitting the following deliverables to the UNDP Country Office and Project Support Unit: 

Deliverables Timeline

  • Draft detailed workplan reflecting the work of the international and national consultants To be submitted within 5 days of the signing of the contracts
  • Draft Evaluation Report To be submitted within 14 days after the completion of the mission in Malaysia
  • Final Evaluation Report  To be submitted within 14 days after reception of the draft final report with comments
TERMS OF PAYMENT
20% upon submission of the draft detailed workplan
40% upon submission of the draft evaluation report
40% upon satisfactory completion of the final evaluation report

Competencies

The team should ideally have the following competencies and attributes:

  • Results orientated and accountability
  • Capacity in planning and organizing
  • Communication and trust
  • Client orientation
  • Organizational development and innovation

Corporate Competencies:
  • Demonstrates integrity by modeling 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 favoritism;
  • Fulfills all obligations to gender sensitivity and zero tolerance for sexual harassment

 

Required Skills and Experience

The consultants will be responsible for the delivery, content, technical quality and accuracy of the evaluation, as well as the recommendations. He/she must not have previous involvement with any of the project activities except evaluation exercise. 
Education:
  • Have tertiary education in environmental economics, marine protected areas, natural resource management, biodiversity management or ecology. Post-graduate or with relevant professional qualification is preferred;
Experience:
  • More than 10 years of working experience in the environment and marine protected area management and with a good knowledge of the state-of-the-art approaches and international best practices;
  • Prior knowledge of GEF and UNDP reporting frameworks, GEF principles and expected impacts in terms of global benefits, and the policy, legal and institutional environment of Malaysia would be an advantage;
  • Demonstrated experience in donor-funded project evaluation, specifically undertaking complex programmatic reviews;
  • Familiar with project management and financial framework including output/outcome and impact analysis;
  • Demonstrated ability to assess complex situations in order to succinctly and clearly distil critical issues and draw forward looking conclusions;
  • Ability to assess complex situations in order to succinctly and clearly distil critical issues and draw forward looking conclusions; and,
  • The International Consultant is expected to lead to evaluation mission.
  • The Local consultant is expected to be well versed with both English and Bahasa Malaysia and able to facilitate discussions among the local stakeholders.
  • Excellent facilitation skills.

Language Requirements:

  • Excellent English writing and communication skills.

Personal CV including past experience in similar projects and P11 Form (Please download P11 form at http://www.undp.org.my/files/editor_files/files/About%20Us_Key%20Documents/P11_Personal_history_form%20Jul%202012.doc) 

Please download the Terms of Reference with Annex 1 & 2 for more detailed information:

http://www.undp.org.my/files/editor_files/files/MyIC_2013_003%20and%20004_Annex%201%20and%202%20-%20Consultants%20CMBEMP%20Terminal%20Evaluation%20final%20AK%20%285%29.pdf

NOTE
Please upload and save all the documents (proposals, CVs and P11 Form into ONE PDF file).
 
FC: 62000