Background

This is the Terms of Reference for the UNDP-GEF Midterm Review (MTR) of the full -sized project titled Comprehensive Environmentally Sound Management of PCBs in Montenegro (PIMS 5562) implemented through the UNDP Montenegro, which is to be undertaken in 2019. The project started on the 16th January 2017 and is in its third year of implementation. In line with the UNDP-GEF Guidance on MTRs, this MTR process was initiated before the submission of the second Project Implementation Report (PIR). The MTR process must follow the guidance outlined in the document Guidance For Conducting Midterm Reviews of UNDP-Supported, GEF-Financed Projects (see Annex).

The project Comprehensive Environmentally Sound Management of PCBs in Montenegro intends to support the country with the necessary technical and financial assistance to ensure that all the remaining PCBs in the country (estimated in not less than 900 t of PCB contaminated equipment, waste and soil) are identified and disposed of. The project will be implemented side by side with the relevant institutional and industrial stakeholders, i.e. the Ministry for Sustainable Development and Tourism, private and state owned companies, holders of PCB containing equipment. Although the project expects to solve all remaining PCBs issues in the country, it will also ensure that enough capacity for the sound management of PCBs would have been built for the management of any further such hazardous waste identified in time after project’s closure.
The disposal or decontamination of PCBs in Montenegro presents a number of issues and risks. First of all, the reliability of initial PCB inventory is very low and mostly limited to phased out equipment that needs to be disposed of. In Montenegro where most of information on PCBs from NIP inventory comes from disconnected equipment. This is due to the fact that electrical equipment (transformers, capacitors) when in good operating condition are usually not inspected for PCB content. The reasons are that:

• the cost of replacing transformer and capacitor is capital intense (very high), and
• the sampling and analysis of in-use equipment is a complex task requiring a significant coordination effort (for instance, coordination with maintenance schedule of electric equipment).

A second feature is that, being not immediately perceived as a hazard by the common public, the issue of PCBs is very often given a low priority from the authorities. Therefore, the existing legislation on PCB is not effectively enforced. As explained in the chapter above, although the Montenegrin legislation is well advanced and generally compliant with the Stockholm convention and the EU directive on PCBs management, and the government updated the inventory of PCB waste, the requirements related to the PCB management plans, and PCB “logbooks” are almost completely disregarded. In the absence of a sound level of enforcement of current legislation, even the industry’s commitment to address the issue of PCBs – given the high costs related to the decontamination or disposal (with subsequent replacement) of contaminated equipment – is low. For this reason, the national PCB management situation can be effectively addressed only if the government’s commitment and capacity are high.

A third feature is the lacking of PCB treatment technologies at local level. This is a common feature in many countries supported by UN/GEF projects in PCBs management.  This usually results in industries undertaking substantial investment for shipping PCB contaminated equipment for abroad, typically EU, for disposal. In the case of Montenegro, there are no technologies for treatment of low PCB-contaminated equipment or disposal facilities available for high PCB contaminated equipment or waste, therefore until now only the highly PCB contaminated equipment has been to date treated by shipping and disposal abroad.

The project strategy is therefore designed to address simultaneously all these important aspects as outlined below.
1) Increasing national PCB management capacities and the enforcement of the legislation. This will require working side by side with the control authorities (mainly the Ministry for Sustainable Development and Tourism) and the key stakeholders (the electric power industry and other potential owners of PCB containing equipment) to:

• develop and implement a practical guidance on PCB environmentally sound management (ESM);
• provide assistance in fulfillment of legal obligations towards recording and reporting PCB related information;
• conduct inspections at sites where electrical equipment (transformers, capacitors) operates,
• train operators and officers on both sides – the governmental authorities and PCB equipment/waste owners.

2) Increasing the industry and general awareness. PCBs are very often a not very well known environmental issue. Except for extremely high pollution levels, resulting in acute and immediate health impacts, the toxic effect of PCBs (increase of cancer probability) is delayed in time and not associated to any “visible” pollution like black smoke from open burning or factories’ stacks or turbidity in water. Therefore, the PCB hazard is usually not perceived as an immediate threat by many. However, an unsafe disposal of PCBs results in the contamination of food chain and other environmental media (like, for instance, sediments and soil) which may last for years. PCBs have been recently (March 2013) re-assessed by the IARC and are now classified as “known human carcinogens (class 1)” compared to the previous “probable human carcinogens (class 2)” category. There is therefore the need to inform the main stakeholders and the public at large on the benefit brought by the project so that the government and the industry are encouraged in undertaking necessary actions.

3) Engagement of stakeholders. As in other environmental programmes, only in case of key stakeholder’s buy-in, the project’s goals can be satisfactorily achieved. No major change in current practices can be achieved if there is little or no awareness of the risks posed by PCBs, and if stakeholders do not feel the need to address the PCB management issue once and for all. As previously described in more detail, the project had identified at PIF stage a number of important stakeholders which will be involved in all project activities during its implementation. Besides MoSDT, which will be the national implementing institution, key PCB holders, like EPCG (both for electricity generation and distribution) and KAP were informed on the project’s related benefits and on the expected and required level of commitment towards it. As a result, they participated proactively in all the project development activities, including providing lists of their power equipment and facilitating oil sampling and analysis for PCB content.  More stakeholder engagement, by involving other line Ministries, academic institutions and NGO sector is planned during the project implementation which will too include civil society associations, trade unions, and other beneficiaries.

4) Strengthening the reliability of information through updating of the PCB inventory. At PIF stage, the only available information was related to the list of phased-out PCB equipment and waste, a few pure PCB transformers, online or stored at KAP, oil tanks and contaminated material (sawdust, soil, waste) potentially contaminated by PCBs. Due to the low enforcement of the legislation, there was very little information available on the concentration of PCB online equipment. The information concerning the number, age and level of contamination of PCB equipment is indeed essential for both management purposes and identification of the proper treatment / disposal technologies. This situation was already evident at the PIF formulation stage, and therefore the main focus in the preliminary inventory carried out during preparation of the FSP project document concerned existing offline and online equipment at EPCG company. At same time, only limited PCB content in transformers stored or online at KAP was re-confirmed, including that data on PCB contaminated soil. The project will continue consolidating the PCB inventory by undertaking dielectric oil sampling and analytical determination of PCBs in 3,000 pieces of equipment during the first two years of its implementation.

5) Provide know-how and financial support on the technologies for the disposal of PCB equipment. Clearly, one of the central issues on the side of PCB ESM concerns the availability of technical and financial resources for PCB disposal. In the absence of a sound know-how related to disposal operations of PCB contaminated equipment, the cost / benefit ratio is always very high, for the following reasons:

• the options allowing the chemical destruction of the PCBs in the dielectric oil without destroying the oil itself are usually not considered, so that the dielectric oil, which is usually a very expensive asset, is lost;
• the planning of PCB equipment phasing out is not aligned with their residual value, so that very often a strategy aimed at minimizing the cost of disposal of PCB contaminated equipment is not pursued; and
• the legal aspects related to the storage of PCB containing equipment under maintenance versus PCB phased out equipment (to be considered waste) are usually neglected, exposing therefore owners of PCB equipment to a severe liability risk.

The project budget from the GEF Trust Fund is 3,5 mil USD, UNDP TRAC resources are 50,000 USD and total co-financing is 19,803,691 USD.

Duties and Responsibilities

The MTR team will consist of two independent consultants that will conduct the MTR - one team leader (with experience and exposure to projects and evaluations in other regions globally) and one local expert.

The MTR team will first conduct a document review of project documents (i.e. PIF, UNDP Initiation Plan, Project Document, ESSP, Project Inception Report, PIRs, Finalized GEF focal area Tracking Tools, Project Appraisal Committee meeting minutes, Financial and Administration guidelines used by Project Team, project operational guidelines, manuals and systems, etc.) provided by the Project Team and Commissioning Unit. Then they will participate in a MTR inception workshop to clarify their understanding of the objectives and methods of the MTR, producing the MTR inception report thereafter. The MTR mission will then consist of interviews and site visits to UNIPROM KAP, CEDIS, HEMOSAN in Bar.

The MTR team will assess the following four categories of project progress and produce a draft and final MTR report. See the Guidance For Conducting Midterm Reviews of UNDP-Supported, GEF-Financed Projects. No overall rating is required.

1. 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 relevanced of the project strategy and assess whether it provides the most effective route towards expected/intended results. 
• Review how the project addresses country priorities
• Review decision-making processes

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.
• 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.

2. Progress Towards Results

• Review the logframe indicators against progress made towards the end-of-project targets; populate the Progress Towards Results Matrix, as described in 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 the project objective and each outcome; make recommendations from the areas marked as “not on target to be achieved” (red).
• 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.
• By reviewing the aspects of the project that have already been successful, identify ways in which the project can further expand these benefits.

3. Project Implementation and Adaptive Management
Using the Guidance For Conducting Midterm Reviews of UNDP-Supported, GEF-Financed Projects; assess the following categories of project progress:

• Management Arrangements
• Work Planning
• Finance and co-finance
• Project-level monitoring and evaluation systems
• Stakeholder Engagement
• Reporting
• Communications

4. Sustainability

• Assess overall risks to sustainability factors of the project in terms of the following four categories:
• Financial risks to sustainability
• Socio-economic risks to sustainability
• Institutional framework and governance risks to sustainability
• Environmental risks to sustainability

The MTR consultant/team will include a section in the MTR report setting out the MTR’s evidence-based conclusions, in light of the findings.

Additionally, the MTR consultant/team is expected to make recommendations to the Project Team. Recommendations should be succinct suggestions for critical intervention that are specific, measurable, achievable, and relevant. A recommendation table should be put in the report’s executive summary. The MTR consultant/team should make no more than 15 recommendations total.

Expected Outputs and Deliverables

The MTR consultant/team shall prepare and submit:

• MTR Inception Report: MTR team clarifies objectives and methods of the Midterm Review no later than 2 weeks before the MTR mission. To be sent to the Commissioning Unit and project management. Approximate due date: (10 June 2019)
• Presentation: Initial Findings presented to project management and the Commissioning Unit at the end of the MTR mission. Approximate due date: (28 June 2019)
• Draft Final Report: Full report with annexes within 3 weeks of the MTR mission. Approximate due date: (19 July 2019)
• Final Report*: Revised report with annexed audit trail detailing how all received comments have (and have not) been addressed in the final MTR report. To be sent to the Commissioning Unit within 1 week of receiving UNDP comments on draft. Approximate due date: (20 September 2019)

*The final MTR report must be in English. If applicable, the Commissioning Unit may choose to arrange for a translation of the report into a language more widely shared by national stakeholders.

Institutional Arrangement

The principal responsibility for managing this MTR resides with the Commissioning Unit. The Commissioning Unit for this project’s MTR is UNDP Montenegro.

The Commissioning Unit will contract the consultants and ensure the timely provision of per diems and travel arrangements within the country for the MTR team. The Project Team will be responsible for liaising with the MTR team to provide all relevant documents, set up stakeholder interviews, and arrange field visits.

Duration of the Work

The total duration of the MTR will be approximately 25 days over a period of 18 weeks starting 16 May 2019, and shall not exceed five months from when the consultant(s) are hired. The tentative MTR timeframe is as follows:

• 20 April 2019: Application closes
• 15 May 2019: Selection of MTR Team
• 16 May 2019: Prep the MTR Team (handover of project documents)
• 16 May - 28 May 2019, 4 days: Document review and preparing MTR Inception Report
• 3 June – 10 June 2019, 2 days: Finalization and Validation of MTR Inception Report- latest start of MTR mission
• 24 June – 28 June 2019, 6 days: MTR mission: stakeholder meetings, interviews, field visits
• 28 June 2019: Mission wrap-up meeting & presentation of initial findings- earliest end of MTR mission
• 29 June – 19 July 2019, 10 days: Preparing draft report
• 16 September – 20 September 2019, 2 days: Incorporating audit trail on draft report/Finalization of MTR report (note: accommodate time delay in dates for circulation and review of the draft report)
• 16 September 2019: Preparation & Issue of Management Response
• n/a: (optional) Concluding Stakeholder Workshop (not mandatory for MTR team)
• 20 September 2019: Expected date of full MTR completion

The date start of contract is 16 May 2019.

Duty Station

Duty station for this assignment would be Podgorica, Montenegro with travel to Bar.

Travel:

• International travel will be required to Montenegro during the MTR mission;
• The Basic Security in the Field II and Advanced Security in the Field courses must be successfully completed prior to commencement of travel;
• Individual Consultants are responsible for ensuring they have vaccinations/inoculations when travelling to certain countries, as designated by the UN Medical Director.
• Consultants are required to comply with the UN security directives set forth under https://dss.un.org/dssweb/
• All related travel expenses will be covered and will be reimbursed as per UNDP rules and regulations upon submission of an F-10 claim form and supporting documents.

Competencies

• Demonstrates integrity by modeling the UN’s values and ethical standards;
• Promotes the vision, mission and strategic goals of UN/UNDP;
• Displays cultural, gender, religion, race, nationality and age sensitivity and adaptability;
• Ability to lead strategic planning, results-based management and reporting;
• 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 good oral and written communication skills;
• Demonstrates ability to manage complexities and work under pressure, as well as conflict resolution skills.

Required Skills and Experience

Local expert will be engaged to support Mid Term Evaluation by preparing necessary inputs for the Team Leader to conduct the evaluation and prepare respective reports. Local Expert will review all relevant sources of information, such as the project document, project progress reports – including Inception Report, Annual APR/PIR,  documents produced in the scope of the project etc, GEF focal area tracking tools, project files, national strategic and legal documents, and any other materials that the team leader considers useful for this evidence-based assessment.

Local Expert will have the task to conduct most interviews with selected stakeholders outside Podgorica in the inception phase, based on the selection done jointly with the Team Leader and Project Team, and to accompany the team leader in interviews scheduled during his/her field mission. 

The selection criteria for the Local Expert are the following:

• University degree in natural or social sciences, Master’s degree would be considered as an asset – 15%
• Minimum 5 years of working experience in the fields relevant to this ToR – environment, chemicals, waste management; - 20%
• Experience in project evaluation / experience with results-based monitoring and evaluation methodologies – 20%
• Excellent social, facilitation and communication skills; - 10%
• Working experience with UN organizations and donors (GEF) is considered to be an asset; - 15%
• Demonstrated understanding of issues related to gender mainstreaming in issues related to environment portfolio; - 10%
• Fluency in English and Montenegrin both written and spoken. – 10%

Consultant Independence:

The consultants cannot have participated in the project preparation, formulation, and/or implementation (including the writing of the Project Document) and should not have a conflict of interest with project’s related activities.

Criteria for selection:

Combined Scoring method will be used. When using this weighted scoring method, the award of the contract should be made to the inidividual consultant whose offer has been evaluated and determined as: (i) responsive, compliant, acceptable, and (ii) having received the highest score out of a pre-determined set of weighted technical and financial criteria specific to the solicitation.

• Technical criteria weight - 70% (Background and education 10%; Relevant previous experience 20%; Substantial knowledge/Required competencies 30%; Required language 10%);
• Financial criteria weight - 30%.

Only offerors obtaining a minimum 490 points for technical criteria will be considered for the financial evaluation. For more information on procurement methodology for Individual Contractors, please refer to Procurement Notice.

Application Procedure:

Interested applicants are requested to submit their applications by April 20, 2019 by using the Apply now button. The application should contain CV or P11 that can be downloaded at http://www.me.undp.org/content/montenegro/en/home/operations/jobs.html. Please note that UNDP jobsite system allows only one uploading of application document, so please make sure that you merge all your documents into a single file.

Mid-term review documents can be downloaded at: http://www.me.undp.org/content/montenegro/en/home/projects/PCB.html

Only the short-listed applicants will be contacted and requested to submit a letter of interest including a price quotation indicating the lump sum (in EUR) requested for the work envisaged in the section "Description of Responsibilities".