Background

UNDP Global Mission Statement:

UNDP is the UN’s global development network, an organization advocating for change and connecting countries to knowledge, experience and resources to help people build a better life. We are on the ground in 166 countries, working with national counterparts on their own solutions to global and national development challenges.

UNDP Afghanistan Mission Statement:

UNDP supports stabilization, state-building, and governance and development priorities in Afghanistan. UNDP support, in partnership with the Government, the United Nations system, the donor community and other development stakeholders, has contributed to institutional development efforts leading to positive impact on the lives of Afghan citizens. Over the years UNDP support has spanned such milestone efforts as the adoption of the Constitution; Presidential, Parliamentary and Provincial Council elections; institutional development through capacity-building to the legislative, the judicial and executive arms of the state, and key ministries, Government agencies and commissions at the national and subnational levels. UNDP Programmes in Afghanistan have benefited from the very active support of donors. UNDP Afghanistan is committed to the highest standards of transparency and accountability and works in close coordination with the United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan and the UN system as a whole to maximize the impact of its development efforts on the ground.

 GEP-II is a collaborative effort between the Government of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan and UNDP Afghanistan. It aims to improve the social and economic status of vulnerable Afghan women and girls by adopting a two-pronged approach: build on the good practices and lessons learned of the first phase of the UNDP Gender Project (GEP-I) and implement innovative initiatives for mainstreaming gender.

To this end, the project is partnered with the Ministry of Women’s Affairs (MoWA), Ministry of Finance (MoF), Ministry of Hajj and Religious Affairs (MoHRA), Ministry of Health (MoH) and Department of Women Affair (DoWAs) and it is in line with the goals set out in the National Action Plan for Women of Afghanistan (NAPWA) and consistent with the Millennium Development Goals (MDG) of gender equality and empowerment of women. Furthermore, it contributes to key outcomes of the UNDP Country Programme Action Plan (CPAP) and UNDAF.

Building on its Phase I track record of successful pilots in Kabul and four provinces and while carefully incorporating improvements on previous  weaknesses, the project consists of three pillars:

• Policy Review and Support, aiming to support gender-related policy and strategy formulation and implementation;
• Women’s Economic Empowerment: to enable improved access to and control of productive resources resulting in the empowerment of women and girls; and
• Justice and Human Rights: to support greater demand for and access to justice and human rights.

The project is implemented under the Direct Implementation modality of UNDP. The goal of capacity building will be achieved through a strategy based on the principles of 1) improving the Capacity of National and Sub-national Partners and CSO Implementing Partners to deliver the activities of GEP-II; 2) promoting and contributing to the coordination of gender-related activities and program coherence within the UN system; 3) enhancing the capacity of emerging civil society in support of GEP-II’s goal and objectives; 4) harnessing potential of the UNDP Gender cluster in support of Women's Empowerment and Gender Equality Enhancing partnerships and synergies.

The project is now in the second year of its implementation which is a critical juncture for the project to ensure that it not only achieves the commitments, in line with project document but also to establish strong foundation for the coming years and next phase project formulation.    

Duties and Responsibilities

Scope of Work

The purpose of this mid-term evaluation is two-fold:

• To assess internal processes as well as progress against expected results in the past one and half years and provide evidence-based recommendations and guidance if adjustments are necessary to ensure achievement of project objectives within the project timeline;
• To review the GEP-II’s theory of change vis-à-vis the project achievements, prevailing gender equality issues in Afghanistan in the context of the National Action Plan for Women in Afghanistan, and UNDP’s Gender Strategy 2014-2107 in order to provide insights and recommendations for consideration in designing the next phase of the project or future gender programming.

The Mid- Term Evaluation International Consultant, who will be the team leader, will assess the strategies, implementation mechanisms and programmatic results, at both national and subnational levels,  based on the 2013 GEP-II Project Document and 2013-2014 Annual Work Plans; Monitoring and Evaluation Plan; Procurement Plan; Human Resources Plan. The evaluation will include an analysis of synergies between GEP II and other key UNDP, UN and other partners’ interventions, which help support the achievement of GEP II objectives. The evaluation will highlight strengths, weaknesses/gaps, good practices and provide forward looking recommendations for future assistance on gender equality and women empowerment to Afghan institutions.

The main objective of the mid-term independent evaluation is to assess the efficacy of the project design and governance structure, relevance of the project outputs, specific contributions and impact, efficiency and effectiveness of technical assistance, and sustainability of interventions.  The evaluation must include an analysis of how GEP II interventions address conflict sensitivity and Human Rights-based Approaches.

The scope of the evaluation will focus around the objectives[1] of the three pillars of GEP-II. These objectives are:

MoWA’s capacity for policy-making oversight of NAPWA implementation improved.  This output covers activities that include the following:

• Technical support to the Ministry of Women’s Affairs, managing and leading the process with 6 pilot ministries (Ministry of Higher Education, Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Agriculture, Irrigation and Livestock, Ministry of Rural Reconstruction and Development, Ministry of Haj and Religious Affairs and Ministry of Counter Narcotics);
• Technical support to the Ministry of Finance on gender responsive budgeting;
• Strengthening of gender units in the pilot ministries;
• Strengthening the capacity of MoWA’s Monitoring and Evaluation Unit to monitor, evaluate and report or NAPWA;
• Strengthening the Gender Studies Institute and establishing the foundation for the Master’s Degree in Gender and Development Studies at Kabul University.

Women’s entrepreneurship skills developed for women entrepreneurs and cooperatives. Activities within the second component of the project are:

• Economic empowerment of women through income generation activities;
• Provision of business development strategies and training centers;
• Strengthening of women entrepreneurs’ capacity to manage women’s cooperatives;
• Establishing clean and green technology based enterprises and product demonstration centers;
• Strengthening capacity of Provincial Women’s Development Councils for socio-economic empowerment of women.

Access to justice for women including awareness of rights among men and women improved.  The following are the activities designed within this pillar.

• Support to advocacy campaigns at the national and sub-national level sensitization of formal and informal justice sector on the rights of women and girls in the context of Islam;
• Institutionalizing Legal Help Centers;
• Strengthening the capacity of religious leaders to advocate form women’s rights;
• Enhancing women’s participation in policy formulation and the peace process.

The evaluation will mainly focus to assess the relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, results, impact, coordination and sustainability of GEP-II efforts and will be applied to all three components of the project. The following are guiding questions within the framework of the evaluation criterions (to be reviewed/ elaborated in the evaluation inception report). 

Relevance:

• Is GEP’s theory of change clearly articulated?
• What specific methods and tools were used to assess the needs of the project beneficiaries? Have the interventions match the capacities needs for the institutions and individuals?
• Is GEP-II selecting the right beneficiaries and participants in the training activities?
• Is there a change needed in the project design or implementation strategy so that the desired objectives/results are achieved?
• How well does GEP-II react to changing work environment and how well has the design able to adjust to changing external circumstances?
• How did UNDP/GEP-II contribute towards, and advance gender equality aspirations of the Government of Afghanistan; UNDAF outcomes; and CPAP outcomes?

Effectiveness & Results:

• To what extent is GEP successful in achieving the expected results?
• To what extent are target institutions (MoWA and MoF primarily) engaged in the implementation of the project?
• How effectively is GEP developing institutional capacity especially in preparing MoWA in policy review and monitoring NAPWA and MoF in gender responsive budgeting?
• To what extent are GEP II interventions been implemented/ coordinated with appropriate and effective partnership and strategies? What has been the nature and added value of these partnerships
• What results are evident in the short-term and what results can be foreseen in the medium and long term that can be directly or indirectly attributed to the project?
• What factors contribute or influence GEP-II’s ability to positively contribute to policy change from a gender perspective, women’s economic empowerment, and access to justice and human rights?

Efficiency:

• To what extent are funding, staff, and other resources used to achieving the expected results of the project?
• Based on cost-benefit analysis what conclusions can be drawn regarding ‘value for money’ and cost related efficiencies or inefficiencies in implementing GEP-II?
• Were there any unanticipated events, opportunities or constraints contributed to or hindered the delivery of the interventions on timely manner.
• Have associated risks at the national and local level been anticipated and addressed?

Potential Impact:

• What impact did the GEP-II project have on women’s economic status in targeted provinces?
• What impact did the GEP-II project have on women’s access to justice in targeted provinces?
• What impact did the GEP-II project have in the line ministries in improving women’s status?

Coordination:

• To what extent the project adopted a coordinated and participatory approach in mainstreaming gender into policies and programms.
• To what extent the project used UNDP’s internal expertise and adopted joint planning and programming with other UNDP projects?
• To what extent the project was effective in coordinating its activities with UN agencies, relevant development partners, donors, CSO, NGOs and academic institution?
• To what extent the gender cluster contributed to GEP-II planning and programming?

Sustainability:

• To what extent are the capacity building activities under each of the pillars producing lasting results?
• To what extent is GEP-II taking the necessary steps to transfer capacities and skills to MoWA and MoF and other institutional partners?
• How, and to what extent did UNDP/GEP-II’s design, implementation strategy/ partnership, and governance foster national ownership and capacity development?

Methodology:

The consultant will propose an evaluation methodology and agree on a detailed plan for the assignment as part of the evaluation inception report. However, in general, the evaluation team should adopt an integrated approach involving a combination of data collection and analysis tools to capture both the tangible and the unquantifiable impacts of UNDP/GEP-II project, and generate concrete evidence to substantiate all findings.  The methodology should be robust enough to ensure high quality, triangulation of data sources, and verifiability of information.

It is expected that the evaluation methodology will comprise of the following elements:

• Document review (desk study);
• Interviews with key stakeholders;
• Field visits meet and consult with beneficiaries and province level stakeholders (security permitting);
• Focused discussions with small groups.

 The evaluation process will include:

• Desk review: Review all available material related to the project, such as project progress reports, Project Document, Annual Work Plans, Monitoring and Evaluation Plan, Procurement Plan, and others;
• Planning, data collection and consultations: Consult key stakeholders, including UNDP staff, MoWA and MoF officials including the six pilot ministries, donors, and NGO/CSO implementing partners. UNDP/GEP-II will assist in setting up appointments and to organize local transportation and logistics in support of the mission’s data collection and consultative activities;
• Debriefing session: Debrief the relevant stakeholders including UNDP management and donors, about the initial findings including key observations and recommendations based on verifiable facts and figures;
• Final Report:  Compile and submit a comprehensive final evaluation report to UNDP in accordance with a format to be agreed.  It is expected that the evaluation team will consider any management responses and comments to the draft, while completing the final report.

Expected Results:

The Mid-Term Evaluation International Consultant is expected to deliver the following products as part of the assignment.

• Inception Report detailing the evaluationmethodology andincludes evaluation matrix with methodology, data collection tools, and data sources for evaluation;
• De-brief to UNDP Country Office (CO), project management and key staff of GEP to present the preliminary findings and tentative conclusions of the evaluation;
• Draft Evaluation Report to be submitted to UNDP CO;
• Final Evaluation Report (using UNDP Evaluation Report Template[2]) should be submitted to UNDP/GEP, CO and donors no later than two weeks after receiving feedback. All evaluation tools and summary should be annexed to the evaluation report and all stakeholders should be de-briefed on the findings and recommendations.

Deliverables/Outputs, Estimated Duration to Complete:

• Inception Report highlighting inter alia, description of the methodology, data collection tools, data analysis methods, key informants/respondents, work plan with timing of activities and deliverables, and development of questionnaires for each component: (maximum 7 days);
• Field visits (two regions): (Maximum 6days);
• Draft Mid-Term Evaluation Report (format to be agreed): (Maximum 10 days);
• De-briefing senior management, programme and project team: (Maximum 1 day);
• De-briefing programme and operations unit heads: (Maximum 1 day);
• Incorporation of inputs complied from above de-briefings and submission of finalized report: (Maximum 2 days);
• De-briefing donors and government counterparts and other development partners: (Maximum 1 day);
• Initial desk/document review: (maximum 4days) (home based);
• Submission of final report: (Maximum 2  days Home-based).

Review and Approvals Required:

Review by GEP  M&E Specialist and to be approved by  Program Unit Program Officer (Gender Portfolio).

[1] GEP II Results and Resources Framework (RRF) -annexed to the ToR- provides the starting point for the evaluation. The results and indicators in the RRF are central for the assessment methodology, yet the evaluation is expected to assess their suitability so as to measure progress towards the achievement of the project’s results.

Competencies

Corporate Competencies:

• Demonstrates integrity by modeling the UN’s values and ethical standards;
• Displays cultural, gender, religion, race, nationality and age sensitivity and adaptability;
• Treats all people fairly without favoritism.

Functional Competencies:

Knowledge Management and Learning

• Extensive knowledge of qualitative and quantitative evaluation methods;
• Good analytical and strategic thinking skills;
• Deep knowledge of the political, cultural, and economic contexts of Afghanistan including prior working experience in the country.

Development and Operational Effectiveness

• Good knowledge and awareness of gender issues and how they impact upon men and women’s roles in governance and community development;
• Proven knowledge of evaluation methods;
• Ability to lead strategic planning, change processes, results-based management and reporting;
• Ability to conduct evaluation considering the specific country context and to identify creative, practical approaches to overcome challenging situations;
• Excellent writing skills;
• Ability to meet tight deadlines.

Management and Leadership

• Excellent inter-personal skills;
• Builds strong relationships with clients, focuses on impact and result for the client and responds positively to feedback;
• Consistently approaches work with energy and a positive, constructive attitude;
• Demonstrates openness to change and ability to manage complexities;
• Ability to lead effectively, mentoring as well as conflict resolution skills;
• Remains calm, in control and good humored even under pressure;
• Proven networking, team-building, organizational and communication skills.

Required Skills and Experience

The Mid-Term Evaluation International Consultant (Team Lead) should have;

Education:

• At least a master’s degree in any of the following fields: Gender and Development Studies, Evaluation, Social Sciences;
• Relevant training in monitoring and evaluation.

Experience:

• At least 15 years work experience;
• Experience in results based management;
• Proven experience in evaluation gender projects and previous working experience in Afghanistan;
• Experience in evaluating gender projects highly desirable;
• Knowledge of UNDP processes;
• Knowledge about Afghan government mechanisms.

Language:

• Fluent in English.

Note:

In addition to the above criteria, the mid-term evaluation international consultant should be aware of and conduct the evaluation in accordance to the UNEG ethical guideline for evaluation to ensure the credibility and integrity of the evaluation process and products. This is available at (http://www.uneval.org/search/index.jsp?q=ethical+guidelines).

Institutional Arrangement:

While the evaluation will remain fully independent, UNDP Cross-Practice Unit together with GEP-II M&E Unit will serve as the focal point for providing both substantive and logistical support to the evaluation team. In close cooperation and consultation with UNDP Afghanistan, the evaluation team will develop the plan, identify key interview partners; organize meetings; and conduct field visits (if necessary and if security permits).

This TOR shall be the basis upon which compliance with assignment requirements and overall quality of services provided by the consultants will be assessed by UNDP.

The International Consultant will be the team leader and supervise and ensure the quality of work of two national evaluation consultants.

Price proposal and schedule of payments:

• The lump sum amount must be “all-inclusive”. It will include consultancy fees based on a six day working week, and it will include per diem fees, food incidental and other expenses related to the execution of the assignment. The lump sum amount shall also incorporate the cost of medical insurance and evacuation during the assignment period;
• The contract price is fixed regardless of changes in the cost components.

The schedule and percentage payments will follow the timelines of the below-mentioned deliverables:

• Completion of first and second deliverables, 30% of the installment;
• Completion of third and fourth deliverables, 30% of the installment;
• Completion of fifth deliverables, 40% of the installment.

Notes:

The term “All inclusive” implies that all costs (professional fees, travel costs, living allowances, communications, consumables, etc.) that could possibly be incurred by the Consultant are already factored into the final amounts submitted in the proposal.

Evaluation method and criteria:

Individual consultants will be evaluated based on the following methodology:

The Gender Equality Project (GEP) will develop monitoring tools and methods to monitor performance of IC regularly and update CO on findings, gaps and challenges.

• The selection shall be made on a combined scoring method, based on a 70%-30% distribution on the technical and financial offers, respectively;
• Only candidates obtaining a minimum of 49 points (=70 % of the technical score weight) on technical evaluation only would be considered for the financial evaluation and further selection process.

Evaluation shall be based on the following criteria:

Technical assessment: 70 % (maximum 70 points)

• Education (Master Degree): 20 points;
• Minimum 15 years of related experience (i.e. evaluating gender projects, result-based management): 30 points;
• Knowledge of English and local languages (Dari/Pashto for nationals): 10 points;
• Each additional year of relevant experience: Maximum 10 points (2 points for each additional years of relevant experience exceeding minimum above required experience).

Financial: 30 % (Maximum 30 points)

Monitoring and reporting arrangements:

• The consultant shall be supervised by an assigned supervisor and s/he will report progress on a periodical basis.

The review and approval of payments will be made by the assigned supervisor (s).

Documents to be included when submtting the proposals:

Interested individual consultants must submit the following documents/information to demonstrate their qualifications in one single PDF document:

• Duly accomplished Letter of Confirmation of Interest and Availability using the template provided by UNDP (Annex II);

• Personal CV or P11, indicating all past experience from similar projects, as well as the contact details (email and telephone number) of the Candidate and at least three (3) professional references.

Technical proposal:

• Brief description of why the individual considers him/herself as the most suitable for the assignment;

• A methodology, on how they will approach and complete the assignment.

Financial proposal: that indicates the all-inclusive fixed total contract price, supported by a breakdown of costs, as per template provided (Annex II).