UNDP Jobs - 59382- Mid-term Evaluation of the UNDP/GEF Project Sustai

Mid-term Evaluation of the UNDP/GEF Project Sustainable Land and Forest Management in the Greater Caucasus Landscape

Location :

Baku, AZERBAIJAN

Type of Contract :

Individual Contract

Starting Date :

15-Sep-2015

Application Deadline :

01-Sep-15 (Midnight New York, USA)

Post Level :

International Consultant

Duration of Initial Contract :

2 months

Languages Required :

English

Expected Duration of Assignment :

2 months

UNDP is committed to achieving workforce diversity in terms of gender, nationality and culture. Individuals from minority groups, indigenous groups and persons with disabilities are equally encouraged to apply. All applications will be treated with the strictest confidence. UNDP does not tolerate sexual exploitation and abuse, any kind of harassment, including sexual harassment, and discrimination. All selected candidates will, therefore, undergo rigorous reference and background checks.

Background

Climate change is an overarching factor contributing to land degradation in the Greater Caucasus. Climate change will impact and is thought to already be impacting the composition, extent and distribution of forests and pastures in the Great Caucasus. Other factors contributing factors to the degradation of land include overgrazing, inappropriate tree harvest for fuel wood and timber, and non-timber forest product harvest. Maintaining current poor management of pastures and forests will continue to degrade these resources and reduce their resilience. As the system becomes more degraded the pressures will increase on pastures and forests threatening livelihoods and continuing a cycle of poverty and poor management. Although climate change will be quite favorable for winter pastures, their area will not expand and might even diminish. This will be mainly caused by soil erosion and an increasing use of lands for crops as well as increased evaporative demands.

The objective of the project is the sustainable land and forest management in the Greater Caucasus Landscape secures the flow of multiple ecosystem services, including carbon storage and sequestration and water provisioning services, while ensuring ecosystem resilience to climate change. The project will engineer a paradigm shift from the current unsustainable practices to sustainable land and forest management practice. In addressing the barriers to SLFM the project will support measures to mitigate CC such as managing natural forests to emphasize natural regeneration through improved grazing and wood collecting in forests. It will avoid GHG emissions caused by degradation, increase sequestration through enhanced biomass and improve the productivity of forests and pasturelands. This would result in short and long-term global benefits.

Duties and Responsibilities

The MTR team will assess the following four categories of project progress. See the Guidance For Conducting Midterm Reviews of UNDP-Supported, GEF-Financed Projects for extended descriptions.

Project Strategy

Project design:

Review the problem addressed by the project and the underlying assumptions. Review the effect of any incorrect assumptions or changes to the context to achieving the project results as outlined in the Project Document;
Review the relevance of the project strategy and assess whether it provides the most effective route towards expected/intended results. Were lessons from other relevant projects properly incorporated into the project design?
Review how the project addresses country priorities. Review country ownership. Was the project concept in line with the national sector development priorities and plans of the country (or of participating countries in the case of multi-country projects)?
Review decision-making processes: were perspectives of those who would be affected by project decisions, those who could affect the outcomes, and those who could contribute information or other resources to the process, taken into account during project design processes?
Review the extent to which relevant gender issues were raised in the project design. See Annex 9 of Guidance For Conducting Midterm Reviews of UNDP-Supported, GEF-Financed Projects for further guidelines.
If there are major areas of concern, recommend areas for improvement.

Results Framework/Logframe:

Undertake a critical analysis of the project’s logframe indicators and targets, assess how “SMART” the midterm and end-of-project targets are (Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Relevant, Time-bound), and suggest specific amendments/revisions to the targets and indicators as necessary;
Are the project’s objectives and outcomes or components clear, practical, and feasible within its time frame?
Examine if progress so far has led to, or could in the future catalyse beneficial development effects (i.e. income generation, gender equality and women’s empowerment, improved governance etc...) that should be included in the project results framework and monitored on an annual basis;
Ensure broader development and gender aspects of the project are being monitored effectively;
Develop and recommend SMART ‘development’ indicators, including sex-disaggregated indicators and indicators that capture development benefits.

Progress Towards Results

Progress Towards Outcomes Analysis:

Review the logframe indicators against progress made towards the end-of-project targets using the Progress Towards Results Matrix and following the Guidance For Conducting Midterm Reviews of UNDP-Supported, GEF-Financed Projects; colour code progress in a “traffic light system” based on the level of progress achieved; assign a rating on progress for each outcome; make recommendations from the areas marked as “Not on target to be achieved” (red).

In addition to the progress towards outcomes analysis:

Compare and analyse the GEF Tracking Tool at the Baseline with the one completed right before the Midterm Review;
Identify remaining barriers to achieving the project objective in the remainder of the project;
By reviewing the aspects of the project that have already been successful, identify ways in which the project can further expand these benefits.

Project Implementation and Adaptive Management

Management Arrangements:

Review overall effectiveness of project management as outlined in the Project Document. Have changes been made and are they effective?
Are responsibilities and reporting lines clear?
Is decision-making transparent and undertaken in a timely manner?
Recommend areas for improvement;
Review the quality of execution of the Executing Agency/Implementing Partner(s) and recommend areas for improvement;
Review the quality of support provided by the GEF Partner Agency (UNDP) and recommend areas for improvement.

Work Planning:

Review any delays in project start-up and implementation, identify the causes and examine if they have been resolved.
Are work-planning processes results-based?
If not, suggest ways to re-orientate work planning to focus on results?
Examine the use of the project’s results framework/ logframe as a management tool and review any changes made to it since project start.

Finance and co-finance:

Consider the financial management of the project, with specific reference to the cost-effectiveness of interventions.
Review the changes to fund allocations as a result of budget revisions and assess the appropriateness and relevance of such revisions;
Does the project have the appropriate financial controls, including reporting and planning, that allow management to make informed decisions regarding the budget and allow for timely flow of funds?
Informed by the co-financing monitoring table to be filled out, provide commentary on co-financing: is co-financing being used strategically to help the objectives of the project?
Is the Project Team meeting with all co-financing partners regularly in order to align financing priorities and annual work plans?

Project-level Monitoring and Evaluation Systems

Review the monitoring tools currently being used:

Do they provide the necessary information?
Do they involve key partners?
Are they aligned or mainstreamed with national systems?
Do they use existing information? Are they efficient? Are they cost-effective?
Are additional tools required?
How could they be made more participatory and inclusive?
Examine the financial management of the project monitoring and evaluation budget;
Are sufficient resources being allocated to monitoring and evaluation?
Are these resources being allocated effectively?

Stakeholder Engagement

Project management:

Has the project developed and leveraged the necessary and appropriate partnerships with direct and tangential stakeholders?

Participation and country-driven processes:

Do local and national government stakeholders support the objectives of the project? Do they continue to have an active role in project decision-making that supports efficient and effective project implementation?

Participation and public awareness:

To what extent has stakeholder involvement and public awareness contributed to the progress towards achievement of project objectives?

Reporting:

Assess how adaptive management changes have been reported by the project management and shared with the Project Board.
Assess how well the Project Team and partners undertake and fulfil GEF reporting requirements (i.e. how have they addressed poorly-rated PIRs, if applicable?)
Assess how lessons derived from the adaptive management process have been documented, shared with key partners and internalized by partners.

Communications:

Review internal project communication with stakeholders: Is communication regular and effective? Are there key stakeholders left out of communication? Are there feedback mechanisms when communication is received? Does this communication with stakeholders contribute to their awareness of project outcomes and activities and investment in the sustainability of project results?

Review external project communication:

Are proper means of communication established or being established to express the project progress and intended impact to the public (is there a web presence, for example? Or did the project implement appropriate outreach and public awareness campaigns?
For reporting purposes, write one half-page paragraph that summarizes the project’s progress towards results in terms of contribution to sustainable development benefits, as well as global environmental benefits.

Sustainability:

Validate whether the risks identified in the Project Document, Annual Project Review/PIRs and the ATLAS Risk Management Module are the most important and whether the risk ratings applied are appropriate and up to date. If not, explain why.

In addition, assess the following risks to sustainability:

Financial risks to sustainability:

What is the likelihood of financial and economic resources not being available once the GEF assistance ends (consider potential resources can be from multiple sources, such as the public and private sectors, income generating activities, and other funding that will be adequate financial resources for sustaining project’s outcomes)?

Socio-economic risks to sustainability:

Are there any social or political risks that may jeopardize sustainability of project outcomes? What is the risk that the level of stakeholder ownership (including ownership by governments and other key stakeholders) will be insufficient to allow for the project outcomes/benefits to be sustained? Do the various key stakeholders see that it is in their interest that the project benefits continue to flow? Is there sufficient public / stakeholder awareness in support of the long term objectives of the project? Are lessons learned being documented by the Project Team on a continual basis and shared/ transferred to appropriate parties who could learn from the project and potentially replicate and/or scale it in the future?

Institutional Framework and Governance risks to sustainability:

Do the legal frameworks, policies, governance structures and processes pose risks that may jeopardize sustenance of project benefits? While assessing this parameter, also consider if the required systems/ mechanisms for accountability, transparency, and technical knowledge transfer are in place.

Environmental risks to sustainability:

Are there any environmental risks that may jeopardize sustenance of project outcomes?

Competencies

Competence in adaptive management, as applied to Land Degradation, Climate Change and Sustainable Management of ForestGEF Focal Areas;
Demonstrated understanding of issues related to gender andLand Degradation, Climate Change and Sustainable Management of Forest GEF Focal Areas;
Excellent communication skills;
Demonstrable analytical skills.

Required Skills and Experience

Education:

A Master’s degree in environmental management, or other closely related field.

Experience:

Work experience in relevant technical areas (land degradation, forest and pasture management, climate change) for at least 10 years;
Experience working with the GEF-evaluations;
Experience working in Europe and CIS regions, particularly Azerbaijan, will be an asset;
Recent experience with result-based management evaluation methodologies;
Experience applying SMART indicators and reconstructing or validating baseline scenarios;
Project evaluation/review experiences within United Nations system will be considered an asset;
Experience in gender sensitive evaluation and analysis.

Language:

Fluency in English.