Historique

Local Governance and Decentralization Programme for Union Parishad and Upazila Parishad is part of the overall Programmatic Framework for UNDP and UNCDF support to the Government of Bangladesh in Local Governance reforms, assisted by the European Union and the Governments of Denmark and Switzerland. The two components of the Programme - UPGP (Union Parishad Governance Project) and UZGP (Upazila Governance Project) - are based on successes and lessons learned from the previously implemented projects - Sirajganj Local Government Development Fund Project (SLGDFP) piloted in 2000-2006, Local Government Support Project Learning and Innovation Component (LGSP-LIC) in 2007-2012 and Preparatory Assistance to Upazila Parishads (UZP) in 2009-2011. Upazila Parishad Governance Project (UZGP) is a five-year (August 2011- July 2016) project with an estimated budget of 19.3 million dollar. On the other hand, Union Parishad Governance Project (UPGP) is a five-year (Dec 2011- Nov 2016) project with an estimated budget of 18.3 million dollar .

Union Parishad (UP) is an elected local government institution, responsible for providing various services to citizen and coordinating many aspects of local rural development in Bangladesh. The Union Parishad Act 2009 introduced new dimensions in the operations of UPs, which include a citizen participation platform (Ward Shava), provisions to implement Citizen Charters, provisions to implement Right to Information Act, use of information technology and deployment of additional staff from different line departments. These new dimensions have the potential to significantly enhance the role and impact of UPs on development. UPGP complements LGSP II (Local Governance Support Project) in addressing fiscal issues of UP and, simultaneously, strengthening their democratic accountability and governance.

Upazila Parishads (UZP), being the middle tier of local government, occupies a very strategic position in the country’s governance system. The re-establishment of the Upazila Parishads (UZP) in 2009, after a gap of 18 years, created democratically elected institutions at sub-national level that act as structural linkages between Union Parishads (UP) and service-delivery line agencies at Upazila level. The Upazila Act amended in 2009 and 2011 empowered Upazila Parishads to play a major role in the process of promoting local democracy and management and delivery of basic social services.

After the elections of 481 Upazilas, strengthening of institutional capacities of the newly elected leadership of UZP and Upazila Parishad members/UP Chairmen , in related rules, regulations, and processes to ensure effective functioning of UZP, became a priority.

Although there exists a favourable national policy environment on local governance (UP Act 2009, UZP Act 2009), local government institutions are facing a number of challenges that hamper their effective performance. The challenges include lack of fiscal resources, lack of appropriate planning to utilize the scarce resources, lack of staff, holistic, strategic and targeted use of resources to address local level development, and poor coordination between Upazila Parishads (councils) and the local offices of line Ministries, etc.

UPGP and UZGP were positioned to assist the Government of Bangladesh in implementation of the local governance reforms and to contribute in redressal of landscape of challenges. Both projects are designed to improve functional and institutional capacities of local government institutions for effective, efficient and accountable delivery of pro-poor infrastructure and services.

The UZGP and UPGP are Nationally Implemented Projects (NIM), in accordance with the National Implementation Manual, adopted in December 2004 by the Economic Relations Division (ERD), Ministry of Finance and UNDP. Following an identical implementation modality both UZGP and UPGP projects have independent structure as elaborated below:

The National Project Director (NPD), the Additional Secretary of LGD, leads the project. The NPD is assisted by the Joint Secretary who is the project’s Focal Person from the LGD and by the National Project Manager provided by UNDP.

The Project Steering Committee (PSC) is chaired by the Secretary, LGD, and serves as strategic guidance provider and oversight body for the project. The PSC is the key decision-making body for UPGP and the UZGP. The PSC provides policy guidelines, reviews all aspects of the project progress against targeted results, including examination of lessons learned and service delivery and ensures coordination with other national initiatives and development projects. The PSC members include representatives from relevant ministries and departments of the Government of Bangladesh and respective development partners.

The Project Board (PB), chaired by the NPD, is responsible to oversee the implementation of project activities. The PB is responsible for preparing and endorsing the annual and quarterly work plans and progress reports. It supervises the overall project implementation and day-to-day management of the project. There are two PBs (UZGP and UPGP) comprising representatives from UP and UZP, UNDP and UNCDF. In UZGP the PB also include UNOs.

The Project Assurance (PA) role is vested upon UNDP and UNCDF. UNDP Local Governance Head of Cluster has the overall responsibility for quality assurance for UNDP related activities. UNCDF Regional Office has the overall responsibility for quality assurance for UNCDF related activities. The two POs for both agencies are to ensure that the projects deliver planned outputs as per the annual work plan, project documents and results on the basis of monthly, quarterly, and annual progress reports.

Seven Districts have been designated as project area for the UPGP and UZGP in consultation with the Government. They are - Barguna, Brahmanbaria, Kishorganj, Khulna, Rangpur, Sirajganj and Sunamganj. This selection was based on four criteria i.e.
(a) proportion of population below the upper poverty line and with different levels of capacity;
(b) two districts formerly covered by LGSP-LIC;
(c) one district covered by MDG localization pilot project;
(d) and one district supported through SHARIQUE project funded by SDC.

Under the selected 7 Districts, 65 Upazila and Upazilla Parishads are the target for UZGP and consequently 564 Union and Union Parishads falling under 65 Upazilla are targeted by the UPGP.

The two projects targeted outreach is as follows:

Output                                       UPGP target coverage          UZGP target coverage

Output 1: capacity building : 564 Union Parishads (UP) -  481 Upazila Parishads (UZP)
Output 2: Fiscal Facility :  400 UP / year                                14 UZP / year
Output 3: Policy Research: Nationwide and shared output between the 2 projects.

The UPGP and UZGP results are similar, but envisaged to be achieved at different levels – i.e. at the Upazila level and the Union Parishad level respectively. The third expected result in both projects - UPGP and UZGP - is shared.

UPGP Results

• Strengthened Democratic Accountability of the Union Parishads though Citizen Engagement;
• Innovations in Pro-Poor and MDG-Oriented Planning and Financing of Service Delivery by Union Parishads;
• Strengthened national capacity for effective policy review, monitoring, lesson learning and capacity development of local government institutions (LGIs) for enhanced Local Governance;
• Strengthened national capacity for effective policy review, monitoring, lesson learning and capacity development of local government institutions (LGIs) for enhanced Local Governance.

UZGP Results

• Strengthened Upazila Parishads as more functional, transparent and accountable institutions;
• Strengthened Planning and Budgetary system at UZP with MDG orientation and pro-poor service delivery mechanism;
• Strengthened national capacity for effective policy review, monitoring, lesson learning and capacity development of local government institutions (LGIs) for enhanced Local Governance.

Devoirs et responsabilités

Objective:

The Term of Reference has been designed to conduct the Mid-term Evaluation for both Upazila Governance Project and Union Parishad Governance project as part of UNDP’s decentralized evaluation process. This MTE should provide the basis for learning and accountability for programme managers and stakeholders. It will have to provide convincing evidence to support its findings/ratings. Particular emphasis should be put on the project results attained thus far, the lessons learned from the projects and recommendations for the follow-up activities.

Evaluation purpose

The purpose of the Mid-Term Evaluation of the UPGP and UZGP in Bangladesh is to:

• Assess the performance of the UPGP and UZGP since their commencement in 2011 to date against the outcome and outputs on the basis of indicators as set out in the Results Framework;
• Assess the performance of the UPGP and UZGP against UNDAF outcome specified for local governance;
• Draw lessons learned and to make recommendations to assist further improvement in the implementation of the programme over the remainder of its term and way forward for future intervention

The primary audience for this evaluation is the Local Government Division, Development Partners, UNDP, UNCDF and all concerned stakeholders including Union and Upazila parishads. The evaluation will be carried out by independent consultants under the direct supervision of UNDP and UNCDF in close coordination with Local Government Division.

Scope of work and expected outputs / deliverables:

Evaluation scope and objectives:

The objectives of this Mid-Term Evaluation (MTE) are:

• To assess the relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, sustainability and likely impact of the projects drawn from its design and implementation in the context of Bangladesh;
• To assess the stakeholders’ and beneficiaries’ level of satisfaction with the programme’s results so far 
• To assess the extent to which the application of the rights-based approach and gender-mainstreaming are sought 
• To make recommendations for adjustments in terms of programmatic approach and resource allocation in the remaining months of project implementation (December 2014 to November 2016) ;
• To assess whether the projects have fully utilized the success and lessons learned from the previously ;implemented/piloted projects, namely Sirajganj Local Government Development Fund Project (SLGDFP) piloted in 2000-2006, Local Government Support Project Learning and Innovation Component (LGSP-LIC) in 2007-2012 and Preparatory Assistance to Upazila Parishads (UZP) in 2009-2011;
• To draw the positive and negative, and foreseen and unforeseen, changes and effects driven by project-supported interventions;
• To draw lessons learned and good practices for replication and/or up-scaling and provide forward looking recommendations for next programming phase.

The MTE will examine in particular results at the outputs level with a focus on overall implementation process and progress towards project targets at the time of the mid-term evaluation, covering the period from the project launch. This includes a review of allocated resources for the spent/planned outputs and an identification of implementation issues at the activity level to pin down any alarming barriers and bottlenecks and come up recommendations. This will also cover the re-assurance of results chain envisaged in the project document towards achieving the overall objectives. Taking into account the Output 3 of the both projects that aim strengthened national capacity on policy review and monitoring, the MTE will need to review alignment with the government national policies as well as its current capacity on policy review and monitoring.

While the geographic coverage of both projects are spread in the selected seven districts, the MTE will cover all the districts for desk review and attempt to cover as many district as possible if not all for field visits given the budgetary and time constraints of the MTE. The location of field visits will be consulted and agreed among the Evaluation Team and Local Governance Cluster. The MTE will include all the relevant stakeholders for assessment but incorporate in particular a gender equity perspective and human right approach.

Evaluation questions

The evaluation should cover the following aspects:

Overall Results Achievement at the mid-term stage

• Has the programme made satisfactory progress in terms of achievement of overall results (as per RRF/logframe) of “Strengthened capacities of local governments and other stakeholders to foster participatory local development service delivery for the MDGs”?
• Results achievement at the output and outcome level; 
• Has the programme made satisfactory progress in terms of achievement of programme outputs (as per RRF/logframe indicators and annual work plan targets) and related delivery of inputs and activities? 
• How effectively and efficiently have results been achieved, and to what level of quality? (analysed by output)

Factors affecting successful implementation and results achievement

• Were programme implementation and results achieved according to plan, or were there any obstacles/bottlenecks/issues on the UNDP/UNCDF/Government/programme partner side that limited the successful implementation and results achievement of the programme?
• What are the success factors to keep for the future phase and how can shortcoming be factored in to be prevented in the future?

External Factors:

• Has the policy environment had consequences for programme performance? 
• To what extent does the broader policy environment remain conducive to the replication of the lessons learnt from the pilot programme? 
• Are there any other factors external to the programme that have affected successful implementation and results achievement, and prospects for policy impact and replication? 
• How could the identified positive or negative external factors be mitigated or exploited further for the next programme phase?

Programme-related Factors:

Programme design (relevance and quality):

• Was the programme logic, design and strategy optimal to achieve the desired programme objectives/outputs, given the national/local context and the needs to be addressed?
• Clarity and consistency of the design and results framework 
• Adequacy of resources allocated and management arrangements;
• Adequacy and usefulness of the baseline; 
• Were relevant gender issues adequately addressed in programme design? 
• Is the programme rooted in and effectively integrated with national strategies (e.g. Five year plan) and UN planning and results frameworks (UNDAF, CPD etc.) at country level? 
• Have the programme’s objectives remained valid and relevant? Has any progress in achieving these objectives added significant value? 
• What lessons from the programme design could be retained for the next programme phase?

Institutional and implementation arrangements:

• Were the programme’s institutional and implementation arrangements appropriate, effective and efficient for the successful achievement of the programme’s objectives? 
• Where there any institutional obstacles hindering the implementation/operations of the programme? 
• What lessons from the institutional and implementation arrangements could be retained for the future interventions?

Programme management:

• Were the management arrangements for the programme adequate and appropriate?
• How effectively has the programme been managed at all levels? 
• Is programme management results-based and innovative? 
• Has financial management been sound?
• Have the programme’s management systems, including M&E, reporting and financial systems functioned as effective management tools, and facilitated effective implementation of the programme? 
• Have the programme’s logical framework, performance indicators, baseline data and monitoring systems provided a sufficient and efficient basis for monitoring and evaluating programme performance? Has the M&E system supported effective programme management, corporate decision-making and learning?
•  What lessons from the programme management arrangements should be considered for the next programme phase?

Future phase of joint programming

• What are findings and lessons from the mid-term evaluation of the current programme that should influence any decision on a future intervention for UNDP and UNCDF and its partners?
• Analyse and comment on any emerging vision, strategy and measures proposed for the planned next phase of programming or, if appropriate, disengaging or continuing UNDP and UNCDF’s local governance programming in the country;
• What are the remaining challenges and gaps in the area of decentralization in the country? How are various actors positioned to address these? Is there a conducive environment for further progress on decentralization? 
• Do the envisaged overall objectives and results of the next phase of programme seem adequate and relevant in light of the UPGP and UZGP MTE findings? 
• Have key factors (external, programme or partnership related) changed, with respect to those existing at the time of the UPGP and UGZP design, in a way that needs to be taken into consideration for the next phase?

Methodology:

Standard Evaluation approach will be used for this mid-term evaluation. In accomplishing the aforementioned tasks, the evaluation team will adopt both quantitative and qualitative methodologies like rapid assessment methods, key informant interviews, focus group discussions, collecting information for determining the overall effectiveness of the program. The review process should be participatory engaging Government high officials, implementing and donor partners, project concerns, key stakeholders and a wide cross-section of staff and beneficiaries incorporating gender equity. It should consider the diversified components/interventions of the overall project. The methods used for the evaluation may include the followings:

• Meeting or interview with key project personnel and stakeholders- European Union, Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation, DANIDA, LGD, local government organizations, relevant government ministries, selected community participants, partner NGOs;
• Key informant interview with potential key stakeholders, civil society members and policy influencers;
• Focus group and group interviews with contestants and respondents - to determine benefits of the project,
• unanticipated consequences and possible areas of modification or redesign; 
• Direct observations of activities through site visits-assess technical practices, quality of activities, confirm recorded outputs, assess impact of activities; 
• Review of different study reports (baseline, impact baseline study, case study etc.) to measure the changes of target groups for achieving the results;
• Review of program records- to establish outputs and financial accountability; 
• Review of program and organizational documents-to assess institutional strengthening of various partners and organizations.

Gender and Human Rights:

The evaluation must include an assessment of the extent to which the design, implementation and results of the project have incorporated a gender equality perspective and rights-based approach. The evaluators are requested to review UNEG’s Guidance in Integrating Human Rights and Gender Equality in Evaluation during the inception phase .
In addition, the methodology used, data collection and analysis methods should be human rights and gender sensitive to the greatest extent possible, with evaluation data and findings disaggregated by sex, ethnicity, age etc.

Evaluation ethics:

The evaluation will be conducted in accordance with the principles outlined in the UNEG ‘Ethical Guidelines for Evaluation’ (http://www.uneval.org/search/index.jsp?q=ethical+guidelines.) See Annex
The evaluation team has 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.

Supervision and Performance Evaluation:

The Local Governance Cluster in the Country Office will be in charge of the overall management of the Mid-term Evaluation with technical guidance from the Results and Resource Management Cluster (RRMC). The Evaluation Team led by the international team leader will be closely working with the Project Management Team of UPGP and UZGP and seek guidance from Programme Analyst in the Local Governance Cluster who coordinates the whole evaluation process in consultation with UNCDF Programme Analyst who are responsible for the project assurance. They will be responsible for arranging all types of meetings and field visits. The RRMC will be working as an oversight body and will be responsible for ensuring the quality of the evaluation in line with the UNEG Evaluation principles.

Timeframe and deadlines:

The estimated duration of the mid-term evaluation is 2 months spread over 4 months covering the period from September to December with the proposed timing:

Phase     

• Desk review: Duration - One week; Proposed time : Within 10 – 20 September 2014;
• Inception and Mission in Dhaka: Duration- Two weeks ;Proposed time: Within 21 September – 15 October 2014;
• Field visits: Duration: Two weeks; Proposed Time: within16 – 31 October 2014;
• Debriefing, draft report: Duration: Two weeks; Proposed Time: Within 1 – 30 November 2014;
• Report finalization : Duration:Two weeks; Proposed time: Within 1 – 15 December 2014.

The distribution of number of days for Team Leader and evaluation phase is as follows:

• Inception Phase: 10 days;
• In-country Phase:45 days;
• Post-mission Phase: 5 days;
• Total number of days 60.
  

The sequence of evaluation steps are as follows:

Desk Review/ Pre-mission briefing

• Pre-mission briefing to ensure understanding of evaluation methodology and familiarize the Evaluation team with the programme;
• Review of secondary data such as background literature and project documentation lead by the Evaluation Team Leader in consultation with his/her team. It will involve necessary clarifications by UNDP and UNCDF personnel, UPGP and UZGP Project Managers and other national and international staff, Assistant Country Director and other UNDP and UNCDF Cluster staff, UNDP CO senior management and UNCDF Regional Office in Bangkok;
• This phase will culminate in the preparation of a brief Inception Report to be forwarded to UNDP and UNCDF for comments. The Inception report should incorporate the information from the desk review, present the reconstructed intervention logic, spell out the evaluation questions and a plan for how these will be tackled by the team including draft interview questions;
• This phase will help the team to prepare for the team hypothesis meeting that is held when the team assembles in Dhaka and for the Inception Workshop with stakeholders.

Kick- Off meeting

• Kick- Off meeting to share evaluation team approach and questions and receive feedback with the senior management of UNDP and UNCDF;
• Inception workshop for key stakeholders set up to interact with the Evaluation Team;
• Interviews by the team with national stakeholders such as key ministries and donors; initial consultations in Dhaka with Project team, UNDP and UNCDF CO office teams, MLGRD&C, development partners (European Commission, SDC and Danida) and LGSP partner, the World Bank;
• Data collection Phase: Field visits to the implementation areas – local level (visits to sample of 4 intervention areas from seven divisions generally considered the minimum requirement):

Debriefing / Post-mission phase

• Debrief UNDP and UNCDF CO teams and project team and LGD. 
• Debriefing of the UNDP Country Director and Deputy Country Director (Programme)
• Debriefing of the MLGRD&C and other relevant Ministerial staff 
• National debriefing workshop with key stakeholders to present and discuss findings & recommendations – this workshop will generally review an Aide Memoire which presents the key findings, recommendations (conveyed in power point) and collect feedback from stakeholders.
• Global Debriefing UNDP and UNCDF senior management at HQ and regional office via teleconference generally conducted with the evaluation team leader and with participation from the country level. 
• Incorporate feedback as well as observations from stakeholders during the MTE.

Completion of Management Response

• The Management Response will be circulated with the final report for completion by all relevant stakeholders (a 30-day turn-around time is expected). The completed Management Response will then be uploaded on the Evaluation Resource Database maintained by UNDP Headquarters

Roles and Responsibilities of International Team Leader:

The Team Leader will be a senior consultant with strong international experience in the field of decentralization and local government such as:

• fiscal decentralization, decentralized infrastructure and service delivery; 
• local government capacity building for decentralized public expenditure management and operationalisation of decentralized systems of planning and budgeting; 
• policy, legal and regulatory reform related to decentralization; rural development; and
•  decentralised cooperation involving non-state actors such as civil society organisation and private sector bodies.
  

He/she has extensive experience in undertaking evaluations. The team leader will allocate roles and responsibilities within the team, including meeting schedules and drafting duties, and be responsible for timely delivery.

Responsibilities:

• Documentation review 
• Inception Report
• Leading the evaluation team in planning, execution and reporting (hypothesis workshop, Inception workshop, kick-off and feedback meeting, national and global debriefings).
• Deciding and managing division of labour within the evaluation team
• Use of best practice evaluation methodologies in conducting the evaluation
• Conducting the debriefing for the UNDP Country Office in Bangladesh and the UNCDF 
• Leading the national debriefing for programme stakeholders in Bangladesh 
• Leading the drafting and finalization/quality control of the evaluation report 
• Preparing the Management Response template in terms of Findings and
  Recommendations
  

Reports/deliverables:

The Team Leader (International) will be responsible for submitting the following deliverables:

• Inception Report (10-20 pages) 
• The Draft report (30-40 pages excluding Annex )
• The final report: (max 35-40 pages excluding annexes) and Executive Summary (max 2-3 pages). It should also contain a matrix of recommendations to be used for the Management Response and action, and recommendations for the next phase of the programme. 
• Brief synopsis of evaluation and key findings and recommendations (1000 words for corporate communications use)

The UNDP CO is responsible for circulating the finalized report to all concerned parties, for inclusion on the UNCDF website and the UNDP Evaluation Resource Centre database.

Main Deliverables:

• Inception report-Submission date: 30 September, 2014
• Draft Evaluation Report-Submission date: 30 November, 2014
• Power Point Presentation for debriefing- Submission date: 30 November, 2014
• Final Evaluation Report, Executive Summary and Management Response with main recommendations listed in order of priority-Submission date:15 December, 2014

The language of communication and reporting will be English. All research tools and reports will be prepared in English and translated into Bangla for field application, as required by the national consultants, and the work coordinated and vetted by the National Consultant (Lead).

Inputs:

UNDP through its projects (UZGP & UPGP) will provide support as required. It will provide key project documentation and in-house research. It will introduce the team to LGD counterparts and facilitate critical meetings.

Payment Milestones:

Payments will be made in tranches based on the following percentages and milestones.

1st Payment: 30% of total contract value will be paid after submission of inception report ;
2nd Payment: 30% of total contract value will be paid after submission of draft report ;
3rd Payment: 40% of total contract value will be paid after submission of final report .

Terms:

• The selected IC shall prepare and submit the work plans for approval and submit reports as stipulated in this ToR.
• Payment for services of the contractor will be made upon satisfactory certification by the Local Governance (LG) Cluster of UNDP and will be remunerated by the UPGP and UZGP Project;
• All envisaged travel costs must be included in the financial proposal. This includes all travel to join duty station/repatriation travel;
• In general, UNDP should not accept travel costs exceeding those of an economy class ticket. Should the IC wish to travel on a higher class he/she should do so using their own resources;
• In the case of unforeseeable travel, payment of travel costs including tickets, lodging and terminal expenses should be agreed upon, between the respective business unit and Individual Consultant, prior to travel and will be reimbursed.
  

Compétences

Corporate Competencies:

• Demonstrates integrity and fairness by modeling UN values and ethical standards;
• Displays cultural and gender sensitivity and adaptability; 
• Treats all people fairly and without favoritism; and
•  Shows strong corporate commitment.

Functional Competencies

Development and Operational Effectiveness:

• Ability to lead strategic planning and facilitate crucial decision making at the highest levels of government;
• Ability to lead the formulation, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of strategic policies and sound development program; 
• Ability to generate creative, practical approaches to overcome challenging situations;
• Strong technical and practical leadership and knowledge in issues related to aid management, coordination and effectiveness; 
• Familiarity with UN system and role of key stakeholders in the area of national development plans, local-level planning, aid management, coordination and effectiveness; 
• Ability to work well in multi-disciplinary and multi-cultural teams.

Knowledge Management and Learning:

• Promotes knowledge management and a learning environment through leadership and personal example;
• Ability to promote UNDP as a learning/knowledge sharing organization Experience in capacity development and facilitating positive transformational change.

Management and Leadership:

• Ability to build strong relationships with clients, to focus on impact and to responds positively to constructive feedback;
• Personal attributes to consistently approaching work with energy and a positive constructive attitude; 
• Excellent oral and written communication skills, including the ability to write in a clear and concise manner; 
• Excellent presentation skills; 
• Excellent computer skills, and applications for report and project planning; 
• Excellent organizational skills and proven ability to deliver programs/projects within assigned deadlines; 
• Openness to change and ability to manage complexities; 
• Excellent interpersonal skills and objectivity;
• Strong task management and team leading competencies. 
  

Qualifications et expériences requises

Academic Qualifications:

• Must have at least Master’s degree or higher degree on governance specializing in public administration, public policy, decentralization, local governance and other relevant fields.

Years of experience:

• At least 15 years of professional experience in decentralization and local development, especially in developing countries;
• Sound knowledge and at least 8 years of experience in evaluation of development programmes/projects;
• Thorough understanding of key elements of results-based programme management;
• Strong capacity for data collection and analysis, as well as report writing;
• Demonstrated evaluation team management skills
• Experience or knowledge of decentralization in Bangladesh and/or regional experience in the area of decentralization would be considered as an advantage; 
• Sound knowledge and understanding of gender sensitivity and social inclusion; 
• A good level of experience in the strategic positioning of decentralization and local development programmes in relationship to donors/development partners and local authorities; 
• Ability to assess the effectiveness and sustainability of programme structure and implementation modalities to inform UNDP and UNCDF.

Language:

• Fluency in English (spoken and written);
• Knowledge of Bengali would be an asset.

Evaluation:

Individual consultants will be evaluated based on the following methodology:

Cumulative analysis

The candidates will be evaluated through Cumulative Analysis method. When using the weighted scoring method, the award of the contract will be made to the individual consultant whose offer has been evaluated and determined as:

• Responsive/compliant/acceptable; and
• Having received the highest score out of a pre-determined set of weighted technical and financial criteria specific to the solicitation.
  

Only candidates obtaining a minimum 70% mark in technical evaluation will be considered eligible for financial evaluation.

Basis for Evaluation :

Technical Criteria:(Total 70 marks) 

• Overall experience in conducting project evaluation in local governance/governance:30 marks;
• Technical expertise on local governance project management and results-based management :20 marks;
• Knowledge and experience of working on decentralization in South Asia/Bangladesh:10 marks;
• Experience in leading technical team: 5 marks.

All technically qualified proposals will be scored for financial proposals out of 30 based on the formula as provided below. The maximum points (30) will be assigned to the lowest financial proposal. All other proposals received points according to
the following formula:
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.

Documents to be included when submitting the proposals:

Proposal:

• A concise statement explaining why they are the most suitable for the work
• A detailed CV entailing comprehensive work / assignment details will suffice for technical proposal .

Financial proposal

The Financial Proposal shall consist of a comprehensive budget. The budget will be prepared in USD and would include all fees and associated costs, i.e. professional fee, travel cost, subsistence per diems, printing costs, Secretarial support cost for printing & logistic coordination of national team, etc.