UNDP Jobs - 69165- Local Evaluation Specialist to Conduct the Final P

Local Evaluation Specialist to Conduct the Final Project Evaluation of the Local-level Response for Employment Generation and Integrated Territorial Development

Location :

Prishtinë/Priština, Kosovo, UNSCR 1244 (1999)

Type of Contract :

Individual Contract

Starting Date :

14-Nov-2016

Application Deadline :

03-Nov-16 (Midnight New York, USA)

Post Level :

National Consultant

Duration of Initial Contract :

November 2016 – January 2017 (14 working days within this period)

Languages Required :

Expected Duration of Assignment :

November 2016 – January 2017 (14 working days within this period)

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

The InTerDev is an Austrian Development Cooperation (ADC)-funded, three-year project which aims to create institutional and local capacities that will facilitate the transition from survival-based to business and market-oriented economic activities. By the end of the implementation, the project is expected to achieve three results: 1) The capacities of municipal staff in Dragash/Dragaš and Štrpce/Shtërpcë, involved in the provision of services for economic development and integrated rural development, are advanced to the point where the participating municipalities can offer services in an efficient, effective, and self-sustained manner; 2) New jobs and income generation opportunities are created through an improved market positioning and productivity of local micro and small enterprises, including farmers; 3) Bottom-up approaches and local-level concentration for employment generation are operationalized at municipal level through Territorial Employment Pacts (TEPs).

The quality of life of people in Kosovo, in particular in the two target Municipalities of the InTerDev Project in the south of Kosovo is undermined by several factors, including the lack of access to employment opportunities and sustainable livelihoods, poor public service delivery at the local level, and vulnerability to shocks (not only in relation to the household’s income). The compounded result of these elements is that many individuals live in a situation of social exclusion and marginalization, which prevents them from participating as active citizens in the economic and social development of their communities.

Under the expected result 1, the project conducted a series of capacity development sessions for, and based on a consultative and participatory identification of needs by the municipality officials, private sector representatives, as well as civil society representatives in the target municipalities. The provision of trainings focused on practical sessions to ensure application of the information learnt. The Municipal Development Centre in Suharekë/Suva Reka has contributed to the coaching services with knowledge and advice on effective municipal structures in order to efficiently facilitate employment generation and upgrading of (micro) enterprises, particularly household-based operations in specific value chains that have competitive and sustainable potential, as well as existing SMEs.

Under the expected result 2, the project has worked in close cooperation with the Local Development Fund (LDF) in the Municipality of Suharekë/Suva Reka and implemented 3 rounds of a grant scheme targeting local micro and small enterprises, including farmers, to increase their productivity and competitiveness. 57 grants have been disbursed in the three rounds of the scheme.

The Territorial Employment Pact developed for each municipality, under the expected result 3, has enabled local-level public institutions, municipal structures, the private sector, and the civil society to join forces in reducing unemployment, serving the most vulnerable groups in the municipalities of Dragash/Dragaš and Štrpce/Shtërpcë. In this regard, several interventions under the TEPs have been implemented between 2014 and 2016 including a number of advisory services, upgrading of rural micro-enterprises, vocational training of unemployed youth, subsidized employment, green jobs and establishment of social enterprises in each municipality.

In Q4 of 2015, a scheduled external mid-term evaluation of the project was carried out, assessing the progress of the project made towards expected results and providing recommendations for the way ahead in the second half of the project. A comprehensive mid-term evaluation report provided a concise assessment of the achieved results and recommendations for improvement of project efforts in the remaining implementation period of the project.

The January 2014 - January 2017 InTerDev project entered its final stage of implementation and an external final evaluation of the project activities will be conducted to assess the overall progress of the project towards the expected results, identify how were the mid-term evaluation recommendations addressed through the implementation of the project activities and provide lessons learned and recommendations for future interventions of similar nature. To this end, the project will hire an Evaluation Team composed of an international evaluation specialist and a local evaluation specialist, who will work jointly to achieve the expected results.

Objective of the Assignment

The overall objective of this assignment is to conduct a final evaluation of the project in terms of its relevance, impact, effectiveness, efficiency, and sustainability, and elaborate on the lessons learned and recommendations for future interventions of similar nature. The Local Specialist will work together with and under the leadership of the International Specialist under direct supervision of the Project Manager, in close consultation with the Programme Team. The project team will provide administrative and logistical support as needed.

Duties and Responsibilities

Scope of Work and Final Evaluation Questions

In order to achieve the above objective, the main tasks of the Local Specialist (as part of the Evaluation Team) is to:

In close cooperation with the International Specialist, conduct a comprehensive desk review of relevant project-related documents and UNDP evaluation policies and, based on this information, draft and submit an inception report with appropriate methodology to be applied during the evaluation, the evaluation matrix, as well as the work plan and any technical instruments to be used during the course of the assignment, while being guided by the set of evaluation questions as presented below. The Local Specialist will assist the International Specialist in obtaining relevant documents for the desk review, in cooperation with the UNDP team. (3 w/ds);
Together with the International Specialist, conduct on-site field visits, meetings, discussions, and interviews with relevant stakeholders and project beneficiaries in Kosovo. The Evaluation Team is expected to share the list of interviews to be conducted beforehand, and receive feedback and clearance from UNDP and the Austrian Development Agency (ADA). An initial briefing meeting with the UNDP team will be held in order to finalize the evaluation design. The local specialist will work close with the InTerDev project team in arranging the logistics of the field mission. (4.5 w/ds);
Jointly with the International Specialist, hold a debriefing workshop at the end of the mission with main stakeholders to summarize initial findings and recommendations (0.5 w/d);
Based on the feedback received during the debriefing workshop, support the International Specialist in drafting a final evaluation report containing the methodology applied, a presentation of findings, presentation of the lessons learned and clear strategic recommendations to the UNDP and its partners for future interventions of similar nature in the target areas and beyond. These recommendations should contain specifically to whom of each of the partners of the project they are addressed. The International Specialist is the lead writer of the evaluation report. (4 w/ds);

The final evaluation report must include, but not necessarily be limited to, the elements outlined below:

Title and opening pages
Table of contents
List of acronyms and abbreviations
Executive summary, including a summary of the lessons learned and recommendations
Introduction
Description of the intervention
Evaluation scope and objectives
Evaluation methodology
Data analysis
Findings and conclusions
Lessons learned
Recommendations
Report annexes

Together with the International Specialist, finalize the final evaluation report, accounting for the UNDP and stakeholders’ feedback on the first draft (2 w/ds).

The following evaluation criteria and related evaluation questions are proposed for the evaluation process; however, these can be expanded and modified by the evaluator. Each evaluation criteria must be raked as per UNDP ranking methodology.

Evaluation questions:

Relevant evaluation criteria	Key questions suggested
Relevance	Are the project’s activities and any of their continuation still relevant for the main beneficiaries? Has the initiative tackled key challenges and problems? Were cross-cutting issues, principles and quality criteria (i.e. for private sector development[1]) of the Austrian Development Cooperation duly considered/mainstreamed in the project implementation and how well is this reflected in the project reports? How could they have been better integrated? How did the project link and contribute to the Sustainable Development Goals?
Effectiveness	To what level has the project reached the project purpose and the expected results as stated in the project document (logical framework matrix)? What challenges have been faced? What has been done to address the potential challenges/problems? What has been done to mitigate risks? In what ways did the project respond to the findings/recommendations of the mid-term evaluation in the second half of project’s implementation?
Sustainability	How is the project ensuring sustainability of its results and impacts (i.e. strengthened capacities, continuity of use of knowledge, improved practices, etc.)? Did the project have a concrete and realistic exit strategy to ensure sustainability? Are there any jeopardizing aspects that have not been considered or abated by the project actions? In case of sustainability risks, were sufficient mitigation measures proposed? Has ownership of the actions and impact been transferred to the corresponding stakeholders? Do the stakeholders / beneficiaries have the capacity to take over the ownership of the actions and results of the project and maintain and further develop the results?
Impact	Is there evidence of long lasting desired changes, in which aspects? How much did the project lead to a change of behaviours and motivations (of local governments) in terms of paying attention to marginalised and vulnerable population groups? Is there clear evidence for it? Has the project appropriately reached its target groups? Did the project serve the needs of vulnerable groups, i.e. women, youth, non-majority communities? What effects were realized in terms of social inclusion? Did vulnerable groups had the same possibilities to participate and benefit, or was there a clear distinguishment? How did the project contributed to (more) sustainable management of natural resources? Is there evidence that institutional systems/mechanisms are in place which: Supports further capacity development at local level; and Promotes sustainable and inclusive development
Efficiency	Have the resources been used efficiently? How well have the various activities transformed the available resources into the intended results in terms of quantity, quality and timeliness? (in comparison to the plan) Was the overall aid coordination properly ensured in the field of local economic and rural development in the target area? Were the management and administrative arrangements sufficient to ensure efficient implementation of the project?
Stakeholders and Partnership Strategy	How has the project implemented the commitments to promote local ownership, alignment, harmonization, management for development results and mutual accountability?
Evaluation	Were intended results (outputs, outcomes) adequately defined, appropriate and stated in measurable terms, and are the results verifiable?
Theory of Change or Results/Outcome Map	Is the Theory of Change or project logic feasible and was it realistic? Were assumptions, factors and risks sufficiently taken into consideration?
Gender	What effects were realized in terms of gender equality and women’s empowerment? Were women and men distinguished in terms of participation and benefits within project?

[1] Found at: http://www.entwicklung.at/uploads/media/IV_Quality_Criteria_on_Private_Sector_Development_01.pdf

Methodology and Evaluation Ethics

The Evaluation Team may employ any relevant and appropriate quantitative or qualitative methods it deems appropriate to conduct the project final evaluation. Methods should include: desk review of documents; interviews with stakeholders, partners, and beneficiaries; field visits; use of questionnaires or surveys, etc. However, a combination of primary and secondary, as well as qualitative and quantitative data should be used. The Evaluation Team is expected to revise the methodological approach in consultation with key stakeholders as necessary, particularly the intended users and those affected by final evaluation results. The Team should present its findings in both quantitative data and qualitative recommendations.

The Evaluation Team is expected to hold interviews and meetings with the relevant staff of UNDP, ADA, municipal officials, partners, and beneficiaries. The Team will be expected to share the list of interviews to be conducted with UNDP and ADA beforehand.

The suggested methodology should be compatible with the UNDP approach to evaluations as described in the Handbook for Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation.

Prior to the Evaluation Team’s arrival, it will receive a list of documents to be consulted for its review. The Team will have latitude to design a detailed evaluation scope and methodology and will present a proposed work plan as part of the inception report to UNDP before arrival to Kosovo in order to optimize the time spent during the field mission.

The final evaluation will be conducted in accordance with the principles outlined in the UNEG ‘Ethical Guidelines for Evaluation.’ The Evaluation Team must address any critical issues in the design and implementation of the evaluation, including 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, particularly permissions needed to interview or obtain information about children and young people; provisions to store and maintain security of collected information; and protocols to ensure anonymity and confidentiality.

Expected Results:

Outputs/Deliverables

Inception report containing appropriate methodology to be applied during the final evaluation, as well as the work plan and technical instruments to be used during the course of the assignment is drafted, submitted, and endorsed by UNDP after consultation with ADA.

Tentative Due Dates

18th of November 2016