Background

The Low Carbon Development Strategy (LCDS) of Guyana sets out the vision through which economic development and climate change mitigation will be enabled in the course of the generation of payments for standing forest and eco-system services.   The Guyana REDD+ Investment Fund (GRIF) has been established to channel results-based payments for avoided deforestation towards the implementation of the LCDS.  Some of the resources mobilized through the LCDS are in part directed to more inclusive models of pro-poor growth, targeting those most affected by poverty.  Critical to the realization of goals set out in the LCDS is recognition of the important role that indigenous communities play in protecting and sustainably managing the forests.

There are in excess of 180 Indigenous communities located across Guyana but concentrated in a geographic space referred to as the rural interior/hinterland, situated mostly within the boundaries of regions 1, 2, 7, 8 and 9.  The population of those communities range between 150 and 5, 000 inhabitants.  The poverty levels in the rural interior where most of the indigenous communities are located are high, combined 78.6 percent according to the household budget survey of 2006.  This is a reflection of traditional lifestyle and cultural freedoms valued by different standards of wealth co-existing with gradual integration into relatively modern aspects of the wider production and consumption structures of the national economy.

Like some aspects of the rest of the national economy, indigenous communities are primarily involved in subsistence, primary productive activities such as agriculture, hunting, fishing and small scale logging and mining, among others.  Amerindians own 13.9 percent of Guyana’s land and constitute 9.2 percent of Guyana’s population or 68, 675 people, at the last population census in 2002.  There are nine groups of Amerindian Peoples in Guyana namely the Warrau, Carib, Arawak, Patamona, Arekuna, Macushi, Wapishana and Wai Wai – each of which has its own distinct cultural identity and heritage, language and traditional economic activities.  The diversity of their focus in community development priorities therefore is a reflection of self-determination revealing idiosyncratic features of communities, their traditions, and special interest in exploiting niche opportunities reachable through the GRIF window.

The Amerindian Development Fund (ADF), established to support the Low Carbon Development Strategy (LCDS), seeks to provide funding to support the socio-economic development of Amerindian communities and villages, through the implementation of their Community Development Plans (CDPs). The rationale behind the ADF is the implementation of business ventures in communities by utilizing their CDPs. These CDPs represent and reflect the diversity of community development priorities and niche opportunities, identified through their priority ventures. With this understanding, the ADF Initiation Plan focused on implementing a representative sample of the diversity of community led ventures across the ten administrative regions.  The sample was chosen to understand what works in effective community entrepreneurship so that the lessons learned could be transferred to the implementation of the ADF II which would target CDPs in over 160 communities.

Using the Direct Implementation Modality (DIM) as the modality for implementation Phase I of the ADF was implemented using an initially selected group of 27 communities’ CDPs.  These CDPs constituted a representative sample of the administrative regions and the diversity of ventures (Agriculture, Forestry, Mining, Infrastructure, Services, Manufacturing & Tourism).

The objectives of Phase 1 were to:

• Develop and test a financial disbursement mechanism with an accompanying operational manual;
• Produce the full project document;
• Strengthen the capacity of the MOAA to directly manage and support the implementation of the project.

Phase 1 was implemented from January 2013 – December 2014.  All but one of the 3 major outputs were completed, and handed over to our long term sustainability partner Ministry of Amerindian Affairs (now Ministry of Indigenous People’s Affairs).

Duties and Responsibilities

Evaluation Purpose

The purpose of this evaluation is to assess the effectiveness and contribution of this GRIF funded project to “supporting sustainable livelihoods for the economic empowerment of indigenous communities, to arrest challenges to poverty reduction in its widest definition via community development plans”. This evaluation is expected to pronounce on the extent to which the main institutional actors involved in the project, that is the UNDP and Ministry of Amerindian Affairs (now Ministry of Indigenous People’s Affairs) are now better able to plan, coordinate and respond to economic needs of Indigenous communities  as a result of the UNDP support.

Further, it will explore the extent to which this project has contributed to the achievement of Country Programme 2012 – 2016 Outcome 1, that is, “strengthened institutional and regulatory capacities of government, civil society organizations to enable access to sustainable financial and business development services for the economic poor, women and Indigenous populations.”

Considering that this evaluation comes at the beginning of the implementation of Phase II of the Amerindian Development Fund (ADF), this evaluation is intended to substantively contribute both retrospective and prospective analysis that can inform the programmatic choices the UNDP Guyana Country Office can make in deciding on its future involvement and support for this area of supporting village economy development for Indigenous communities. In this context, it is expected that practical options will be presented based on this assessment of current national capacity and what future investments are needed to sustain and solidify investments made by UNDP and the Government of Guyana.

Evaluation Scope and Objectives

The Evaluation will consider the project, inputs, activities, outputs and the project’s contribution to CPAP outcome 1.

The primary issues would be the relevance/appropriateness, efficiency, effectiveness, and sustainability of the outputs.

Specifically, this exercise will:

• Provide evidence to support accountability of the project.

Identify current areas of strengths, weaknesses and gaps, especially with regard to:

• The appropriateness of UNDP’s implementation strategy;
• Impediments to achieving the outputs;
• Adjustments to be made.

The Consultant is expected to take the following factors into account:

• Geographic coverage of  Community Development Plans;
• Timeframe of the Community Development Plans;
• The relevance, performance and success of the Community Development Plans.

The evaluation should provide insights on the successes and weaknesses of the project, identify important lessons that UNDP and the Government of Guyana can use to inform future interventions in the area of Supporting Village Economy Development. More specifically, consideration should be given to the effectiveness of the project and the outputs it has produced, as well as the timeliness of implementation.  The evaluation should also assess linkages between Community Development Plans and regional/national plans to address poverty and/or sustainable development.
 
Furthermore, a review of the project implementation arrangements including the process of community engagement should also be carried out to identify practical, implementable recommendations to improve future project design, implementation and management measures.
A comprehensive list of Community Development Plans will be provided to the Consultant to aid in carrying out the consultancy.

Evaluation Criteria and Questions

The evaluation should generate information on:

Relevance: concerns the extent to which a development initiative and its intended outputs or outcomes are consistent with national and local policies and priorities and the needs of intended beneficiaries. Relevance also considers the extent to which the initiative is responsive to UNDP corporate plan and human development priorities of empowerment and gender equality issues. Relevance concerns the congruency between the perception of what is needed as envisioned by the initiative planners and the reality of what is needed from the perspective of intended beneficiaries. It also incorporates the concept of responsiveness—that is, the extent to which UNDP was able to respond to changing and emerging development priorities and needs in a responsive manner.

• What is the extent to which the Amerindian Development Fund is relevant to national development priorities?
• How relevant is the project design in addressing the outputs?

Effectiveness - measures the extent to which the initiative’s intended results (outputs) have been achieved or the extent to which progress toward outputs or outcomes has been achieved:

• Has there been progress made towards the achievement of the intended outputs?
• How effective has been UNDP’s community engagement strategy?
• How have UNDP’s practices, policies, decisions, constraints and capabilities affected the achievement of the outputs?
• To what extent have project outputs contributed to achieving UNDP Country Programme ( 2012-2016) Outcome 1?
• Is UNDP’s partnership strategy appropriate, effective and viable for the achievement of the outputs?

Efficiency - measures how economically resources or inputs (such as funds, expertise and time) are converted to results. An initiative is efficient when it uses resources appropriately and economically to produce the desired outputs. Efficiency is important in ensuring that resources have been used appropriately and in highlighting more effective uses of resources:

• Has UNDP’s strategy in producing the outputs been efficient and cost-effective?
• How efficient has been the roles, engagement and coordination among various stakeholders in implementing the project?
• Has there been any duplication of efforts among UNDP’s interventions and interventions delivered by other organizations in contributing to the outputs?
• What is the assessment of the capacity and institutional arrangements for the implementation of the project?

Sustainability: measures the extent to which benefits of initiatives continue after external development assistance has come to an end. Assessing sustainability involves evaluating the extent to which relevant social, economic, political, institutional and other conditions are present and, based on that assessment, making projections about the national capacity to maintain, manage and ensure the development results in the future:

• What are the underlying factors beyond UNDP’s control that influence the outputs (including the opportunities and threats affecting the achievement of the outputs)?
• What is the extent to which UNDP established mechanisms ensure sustainability of the outputs?

The evaluation will also:

• Isolate and elaborate lessons emerging from the programme of work implemented for application to ADF Phase II;
• Provide recommendations for improvement of the project in terms of partners, programming, operations for ADF Phase II;
• Provide recommendations on how UNDP can better fulfill its commitment to key programming principles and cross-cutting issues (gender mainstreaming, knowledge management, result-based management, capacity building, human-rights based approach and environmental sustainability).

Methodology

The evaluation must be carried out using a sound methodology including a mixed method evaluation i.e. quantitative and qualitative which allows for rigor and provides reliable results for decision making.  The evaluation will follow the United Nations Evaluation Group (UNEG) norms and standards for evaluation as well as the UNEG ethical guidelines for evaluations.

The approach of the evaluation shall be participatory in all phases, particularly in the validation of the findings and conclusions and should be sensitive to gender and human rights and be based on a theory of change. The evaluation will use methodologies and techniques as determined by the specific needs for information, the questions set out in this ToR, the availability of resources and the priorities of stakeholders. In all cases, the consultant is expected to use all available information sources that will provide evidence on which to base evaluation conclusions and recommendations. Findings must therefore be justified with primary and secondary data (in the narrative text). Anticipated approaches to be used for data collection and analysis by the evaluator are: documentation review, interviews with key stakeholders, field visits, questionnaires, participatory techniques, triangulation and participation of stakeholders and/or partners. Data collection methods and process should consider gender sensitivity and data should be systematically disaggregated by gender and age and, to the extent possible, disaggregated by geographical regions, disability, and other contextually-relevant markers of equity.

Evaluation Products (Deliverables):

• Evaluation Inception Report - This should detail the evaluator’s understanding of the task at hand and a methodology which clearly demonstrates how each evaluation question would be answered by way of: proposed data collection methods; proposed  sources of data; and data collection and analysis procedures as reflected in the evaluation matrix. The Inception Report should include a proposed schedule of tasks, activities and deliverables, identifying who is responsible for each task or product.

Evaluation matrix should reflect:

• Criteria/Sub-criteria;
• (Examples of) questions to be addressed by project-level evaluation;
• What to look for?
• Data sources;
• Data collection methods;
• Methods for data analysis.

Evaluation brief:

• Including audio visual presentation of key findings, lessons learned, and recommendations.

Draft Evaluation report:

• UNDP will provide guidance on the quality criteria that will be used to assess quality of the report.  The draft report will be reviewed by UNDP and Ministry of Indigenous People’s Affairs to ensure the evaluation meets expectations and quality criteria and would inform the final evaluation report.

Final Evaluation report – The final evaluation report should not exceed 40-50 pages.

The content should comprehensively address the following:

• Strategies for continuing or concluding UNDP assistance towards the outputs;
• Recommendations for formulating future assistance in the outputs if warranted;
• Lessons learned concerning best and worst practices in producing outputs, linking them to the outcomes and using partnerships strategically;
• A rating on progress towards outputs;
• A rating on the relevance of the outcome;
• Recommendations for implementation ADF Phase II.

Evaluation Ethics

This evaluation should be conducted in accordance with the principles outlined in the United Nations Evaluation Group ‘Ethical Guidelines for Evaluation’.

The following should be addressed in the design and implementation of the evaluation:

• Evaluation ethics and procedures to safeguard the rights and confidentiality of information providers, for example: measures to ensure compliance with legal codes governing areas such as provisions to collect and report data;
• Provisions to store and maintain security of collected information; and protocols to ensure anonymity and confidentiality;
• The evaluator will be required to sign the UNEG evaluation code of conduct.

Implementation Arrangements

Role of UNDP

The evaluation will be conducted by a consultant working under the guidance of the Deputy Resident Representative, UNDP Guyana.  Consideration of the local context would be critical to the execution of this assignment.

UNDP will:

• Recruit, select and approve evaluator;
• Provide pre-evaluation briefing to evaluator;
• Review evaluator’s inception report and provide feedback on areas for strengthening;
• Review the draft report and offer comments, if any;
• Approve Final Evaluation report and ensure the overall quality of evaluation;
• Provide substantive feedback on the findings of the evaluation in the form of a management response;
• Provide logistical and documentary support to evaluator in the implementation of the Evaluation;
• Organize and facilitate debriefing with relevant stakeholders on findings of the Evaluation.

Role of Ministry of Indigenous People’s Affairs:

• Provide documentary support to evaluator in the implementation of the evaluation;
• Identify and ensure the participation of relevant national stakeholders in the evaluation;
• Review inception, draft and final reports and provide feedback on areas for strengthening.

Procedures to amend TOR:

• For amendments to this TOR, specific requests can be made to the Deputy Resident Representative UNDP Guyana.

Reporting relationships:

• The Consultant will submit evaluation deliverables to UNDP Guyana.

Annexes – List of key documents and databases to be provided to consultant.

Evaluation Matrix:

• UNDP 2014-2017 Strategic Plan;
• UNDP Country Programme Document (2006 - 2011 and 2012 - 2016);
• Country Programme Action Plan (2006 – 2011 and 2012 - 2016);
• Low Carbon Development Strategy.

Project Document – Low Carbon Development Strategy (LCDS) Amerindian Development Fund:

• Village Economy Development under GRIF (Phase 1);
• Annual Work Plans (AWPs);
• Quarterly Progress Reports;
• Field Mission Reports;
• Final Project Report;
• List of Target Villages and Community Development Plans;
• The format required for the evaluation report;
• Code of Conduct for UNEG evaluators.

Competencies

• Demonstrated ability to conduct empirical research and prepare reports to be used by Government;
• Ability to coordinate inputs from different agencies and present comprehensive report;
• Able to communicate results in a manner that is easily understood by all parties;
• Able to interact with all parties in a sensitive and effective way;
• Able to complete work within required timeframes.

Required Skills and Experience

Education:

• A minimum of a Master’s Degree in the Social Sciences, Sustainable Development, Agriculture or related fields.

Experience:

• At least 5 years’ experience in conducting project level evaluations as sole evaluator or team leader;
• Understanding of, and experience in, the required evaluation methodologies;
• Expertise in the sectoral area of the project being evaluated - at least 7 years of experience in sustainable development projects, experience in indigenous issues would be desirable;
• Knowledge of UNDP's programme/Strategic Plan 2014-2017 would be an asset;
• Be available for full participation and intensive work within required timeframes;
• Have working knowledge of community engagement and community economic development initiatives;
• Able to bring fresh perspectives, insights, experiences and recent state-of-the-art knowledge;
• Displays awareness of constraints on feasibility of recommendations;
• Demonstrated independence of any organizations that have been involved in designing, executing or advising any aspect of the project.

Language:

• Proficiency in english language is required;