Background
UNDP’s 2014-2017 Strategic Plan commits the organization to lift the quality of programmes and projects by introducing clear quality standards and processes for which managers will be accountable. The Development Impact Group (DI Group) in the Bureau for Policy and Programme Support is responsible to develop these quality standards and processes in consultation with relevant units and steer their implementation throughout the organization. BPPS/DI Group is developing programming quality standards, with an accompanying rating tool at both the programme/CPD and project levels, to enable managers and appraisal bodies to objectively assess the quality of the CPDs in an evidence-based manner. The quality standards draw on the Programme Alignment Handbooks I + II, the UNDG programming principles, the Social and Environmental Standards, and the revised Country Programme Document (CPD) guidance and template approved in early 2014, among others.
At the same time, BPPS/DI Group is preparing a number of additional policies and procedures to support improved quality programming, covering monitoring, decentralized evaluation, and an end-to-end re-write of all Programme and Project Management prescriptive content to simplify and consolidate existing content, and reduce unnecessary administrative burden.
These standards and policies are being developed in consultation with the Executive Office, Regional Bureaus, Central Bureaus and Country Offices.
UNDP’s 2014-2017 Strategic Plan commits the organization to lift the quality of programmes and projects by introducing clear quality standards and processes for which managers will be accountable. The Development Impact Group (DI Group) in the Bureau for Policy and Programme Support is responsible to develop these quality standards and processes in consultation with relevant units and steer their implementation throughout the organization.
BPPS/DI Group is developing programming quality standards, with an accompanying rating tool at both the programme/CPD and project levels, to enable managers and appraisal bodies to objectively assess the quality of the CPDs in an evidence-based manner. The quality standards draw on the Programme Alignment Handbooks I + II, the UNDG programming principles, the Social and Environmental Standards, and the revised Country Programme Document (CPD) guidance and template approved in early 2014, among others.
At the same time, BPPS/DI Group is preparing a number of additional policies and procedures to support improved quality programming, covering monitoring, decentralized evaluation, and an end-to-end re-write of all Programme and Project Management prescriptive content to simplify and consolidate existing content, and reduce unnecessary administrative burden.
These standards and policies are being developed in consultation with the Executive Office, Regional Bureaus, Central Bureaus and Country Offices.
Duties and Responsibilities
Expected Outputs and Deliverables:
The Programme Quality Advisor will help the DI Group to:
- Develop and finalize the prescriptive content for Programme Quality Standards;
- Develop and finalize the monitoring policy;
- Prepare an options paper for the future of the Country Programme Action Plan (CPAP); and
- Prepare documents for management decision making on the Programme and Project Management (PPM) prescriptive content re-write, in close collaboration with the team writing the decentralized evaluation policy.
- Prepare a mapping of capacity assessment methodologies used by UN agencies, to support QCPR and inter-agency requirements.
The overall purpose, objectives and scope for all areas has been developed; the Advisor will work with the team to finalize a first draft of the prescriptive content in preparation for organization-wide consultation.
This will involve reviewing feedback from pilot exercises and tools, drafting outlines and briefs for consultation and management decision making, consulting with key stakeholders, and drafting prescriptive content for wider consultation. Other related tasks may be requested as needed.
Key background documents that will be provided to facilitate this work include:
- Project Quality background document and rating tool (3 stages: Design, Implementation, Closure);
- Latest version of the Programme Quality rating tool, with revised CPD guidance and template;
- Programme Alignment Handbooks I and II;
- PPM re-write: Introduction, Principles and Style (with annexes);
- Transition to the new version of the Programme and Operations Policies and Procedures (POPP 3) (with annexes);
- Future of the CPAP Power Point.
Deliverables:
- Prepare draft prescriptive content (policy and procedures) on programming quality standards, drawing from existing resources, to operationalize the standards and rating tools at both the programme and project levels. Estimated duration to complete; 15 days Target due date; 1 September.
Review and approvals required: Team leader, a.i., Quality Programming, DI Group; Chief, BPPS/DI Group:
- Draft brief on options for the CPAP, drawing on information provided by COs in the CPAP survey,estimated duration to complete 7 days. Target due date: 9 October.
Review and approvals required: Team leader, a.i., Quality Programming, DI Group; Chief, BPPS/DI Group:
- Prepare draft prescriptive content (policy and procedures) for monitoring in programmes and projects, drawing from existing resources and discussions with key stakeholders ,estimated duration to complete: 20 days. Target due date: 6 November.
Review and approvals required: Team leader, a.i., Quality Programming, DI Group; Chief, BPPS/DI Group:
- Facilitate consultations on the PPM architecture and prepare an OPG action brief and background note on the proposed architecture re-design estimated duration to complete; 18 days. Target due date: 4 December.
Review and approvals required Team leader, a.i., Quality Programming, DI Group; Chief, BPPS/DI Group:
- Prepare a mapping of Capacity Development methodologies used by UN agencies to support QCPR and inter-agency requirements Estimated duration to complete; 10 days. Target due date; 18 December.
Review and approvals required: Senior Advisor, Development Effectiveness, BPPS/DI Group:
Institutional Arrangement:
- The consultant will report to, seek approval/acceptance of outputs from the task team leader (UNDP).The contractor is expected to have her/his own office space, laptop and access to internet and a printer during the assignment (the cost of this facilities should be included in the financial proposals, if required).
Duration of the Work: 70 days.
Competencies
- Demonstrated capacity for strategic thinking, and expertise in global strategies;
- Proven capacity to produce high quality qualitative research and ability to absorb, analyze and synthesize large amounts of complex information within tight deadlines;
- Demonstrated ability and willingness to work with people of different cultural, ethnic and religious background, different gender, and diverse political views.
- Demonstrated ability to communicate complex issues in a concise and clear manner:
- Highly organized with strong analytical, synthesis, and research skills.
Required Skills and Experience
Education:
- Master’s Degree or higher in a related field.
Experience:
- At least 10 years’ experience in development programming, preferably in UNDP. Both country office and HQ/Regional Bureau experience is a plus;
- Demonstrated understanding of the inter-relations between operations and programming;
- Familiarity with the UN System and working arrangements. Experience in programming at both HQ and country levels would be desirable.
Language:
- Proficiency in written and spoken English;
- Good working knowledge of another official UN language is an asset.
Recommended Presentation of Offer:
The application is a two-step process. Failing to comply with the submission process may result in disqualifying the applications:
Step 1: Interested individual consultants must include the following documents when submitting the applications in UNDP job shop (Please note that only 1 (one) file can be uploaded therefore please include all docs in one file):
- Personal History Form (P11) or CV, 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 (the template can be downloaded from this linkhttp://europeandcis.undp.org/files/hrforms/P11_modified_for_SCs_and_ICs.doc). Alternatively, an updated CV indicating 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 can be submitted however UNDP may later request a P11 form to be completed.
Step 2: Submission of Financial Proposal
Applicants are instructed to submit their daily rate financial proposals in US Dollars for this consultancy to bpps.procurement@undp.org, using the financial proposal template available here: http://procurement-notices.undp.org/view_file.cfm?doc_id=45780. The proposals should be sent via email with the following subject heading: “Financial Proposal for Consultant, Programme Quality Advisor" by the deadline for this vacancy. Proposals to be received after the deadline may be rejected. In order to assist the requesting unit in the comparison of financial proposals, the financial proposal should be all-inclusive and include a breakdown. The term ‘all-inclusive” implies that all costs (professional fees, travel related expenses, communications, utilities, consumables, insurance, etc.) that could possibly be incurred by the Contractor are already factored into the financial proposal.
Travel
It is expected that the expert will undertake the following missions to New York, USA:
- Mission one: two days duration in the month of August;
- Mission two: two days duration in the month of September;
- Mission three: two days duration in the month of October;
- Mission four: two days duration in the month of November;
- Mission five: two days duration in the month of December.
The applicants are expected to reflect the cost of the above travel in their financial proposals.
Schedule of Payments:
- Payment will be made upon monthly submission of a certificate of payment request, indicating outputs achieved and days worked to be verified and cleared for payment by the supervisor.
Criteria for Selection of the Best Offer:
Only those candidates that meet the minimum level of education and relevant years of experience requirements will be considered for the technical evaluation. The technical evaluation will include a desk review to select the shortlisted candidates (those that score at least 49 out of total 70 obtainable scores). The technical evaluation may also include interviews with shortlisted candidate(s).
The selection of the best offer from the shortlisted candidates will be based on a Combined Scoring method – where the technical evaluation (desk review and interview) will be weighted a maximum of 70%, and combined with the price offer which will be weighted a maximum of 30%. The 70% rating shall be based on how well the Offer or meets the minimum qualifications/competencies described above.
The technical evaluation will be based on the following criteria with the corresponding points (out of a total 70 points):
- Criteria 1:Years of relevant experience (7 points);
- Criteria 2:Demonstrated experience in development programming (35 points);
- Criteria 3:Familiarity with the inter-relations between operations and programming (18 points);
- Criteria 4:Analytical and communications skills relevant to the position (10 points).
Only candidates obtaining a minimum of 70 (70%) points on technical evaluation will be considered for the Financial Evaluation.
Financial evaluation (maximum 30 points):
The following formula will be used to evaluate financial proposal:p = y (µ/z), where p = points for the financial proposal being evaluated:
y = maximum number of points for the financial proposal: µ = price of the lowest priced proposal:z = price of the proposal being evaluated.
The award of contract will be made to the individual consultant who receives the highest combined score out of the weighted technical and financial criteria as specified above.