Antecedentes

The project was launched on 13 May 2012 and is a continuation of the Confidence Building early Response Mechanism (COBERM), implemented from 12 May 2010 to 12 May 2012, with EU funding received through the Instrument for Stability.  COBERM Phase II is the result of EU/UNDP's determination to maintain an effective mechanism in order to address the needs and challenges that exist in the Georgian context relating to peace and stability, security, promotion of peaceful resolution of political differences and reconciliation, confidence building processes and human rights promotion in communities affected by and/or at risk of conflict.

An external evaluation was conducted at the end of COBERM's phase I (2012). The evaluation underscored that confidence building and conflict settlement require time and sustained human and financial resources, and recommended the continuation of the project, that would enable further confidence building initiatives to gain roots and develop further.

COBERM II aims to: a) Support opportunities for direct people-to-people contacts within and between conflict affected communities, and b) Build an enabling environment within the divided communities to strengthen respect for peace and stability.

During its lifespan COBERM has been able to support civil society activities in Abkhazia and across the ABL and has managed to avoid politicization of its activities. Civil society in Abkhazia remains isolated, and COBERM has been instrumental in keeping civil society dialogue alive. In regard to South Ossetia, where the international community, with exception of ICRC, does not have access, COBERM appears to be one of the very few initiatives that provide support to a significantly underdeveloped civil society. Through its engagement in Abkhazia, South Ossetia, areas adjacent to the Administrative Boundary Lines (ABLs) and other communities in Georgia, COBERM is considered a trusted and impartial partner by the parties to the conflict and civil society on both sides of the conflict divide.

Deberes y responsabilidades

Under the direct supervision of the International Consultant /Team Leader and the UNDP Assistant  Resident Representative, the National Consultant will be required to assist the Team Leader  to conduct an evaluation of the COBERM project, according to the following objectives identified below:

Main objectives:

The overall objective of the evaluation is to assess the impact of the COBERM on the post-conflict transformation dynamics in Georgia as well as its contribution to enhancing process of long-term reconciliation and confidence building among the diverged societies.

Specifically, the following activities of the mission are anticipated:

• Introduction meeting of the evaluation team with the COBERM team, UNDP and the EU Delegation;
• Collection of information – Review of project related information, interviews and field visits. Preparation of the draft report;
• Meeting with UNDP, the COBERM team, the EU Delegation and other key stakeholders to present the initial findings of the evaluation at the end of the field mission;
• Consolidation of comments and submission of the Final Evaluation Report.

Follow-up and Learning:

The findings of the evaluation report will be reviewed jointly by UNDP, the EU Delegation, relevant stakeholders and partners to ensure that the key recommendations are incorporated into the design of potential new projects and programmes. 

Methodology:

General Principles and Approach

The DAC Principles for the Evaluation of Development Assistance, OECD (1991) are the general basis for the evaluation: relevance/appropriateness, efficiency, effectiveness, impact and sustainability/connectedness.                                  

The evaluation of conflict prevention programming however remains a complicated field, given the challenges of causality and attribution. The principles developed in 2007 by the OECD/DAC “Guidance on Evaluating Conflict Prevention and Peace building Activities” (available at http://www.oecd.org/secure/pdfDocument/0,2834,en_21571361_34047972_39774574_1_1_1_1,00.pdf) should however provide a useful starting point for the development of a relevant methodological framework, as well as tailored indicators for measuring impact (Feedback to the OECD on the relevance and appropriateness of these guidelines as a framework for evaluations of CPPB will be provided at the end of the evaluation).

The evaluation will use the following criteria:

• Relevance: the degree to which the purpose of the UNDP projects remains valid and pertinent.
• Effectiveness: the productivity of the implementation process - how good and how cost efficient the process of transforming inputs into outputs and outcomes was.
• Efficiency: a measure of the extent to which project have contributed through an effective use of their results. Capacity development: as a key to development effectiveness, the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals and sustainable local development.
• Impact: Examine the impact of the COBERM in terms of whether the design and implementation of the relevant initiatives have facilitated or hindered progress towards the outcomes of the CPAP and UNDAF. Determine whether the current design and implementation will allow for the optimum achievements of   the planned impact on the target groups.   
• Sustainability: an assessment of the likelihood that the project results will endure after the active involvement of UNDP has ended. To what extent the changes (and benefits) brought by the COBERM funded initiatives can be expected to last after projects completion. The evaluation team should be requested to provide recommendations for potential follow-up interventions, i.e. how feasible the follow-up actions would be, what alternatives can be identified and/or what components can be added to it, what knowledge products could be developed.
• Connectedness: In conflict/post-conflict settings, it is important to assess not only the progress made against project or programme goals, but the contribution of individual initiatives to the overall conflict prevention and peace-building process. Assessment of connectedness should also include the extent to which projects and programme were complementary or contradictory.

Evaluation Time frame:

It is expected that the evaluation will be conducted no later than January 2015 over a period of 20 working days. The Evaluation Team consists of the International Consultant/Team Leader and a National Consultant.

• Evaluation design and work plan: 1 day (Evaluation team);
• Meetings (COBERM, UNDP, EU): 1 day (Evaluation team);
• Desk review of relevant documents:  5 days (National consultant);
• Field visits, interviews with partners, and key stakeholders: 5 days of field visits in Georgia (Evaluation team);
• Drafting and debriefing with UNDP + EU Delegation on preliminary findings: 2 days, the evaluation team (assisting Team Leader);
• Drafting of the evaluation reports (home based): 6 days, the evaluation team (assisting Team Leader).

Major tasks to be accomplished:

The consultant, in coordination with the team leader, will perform the following tasks:

• A comprehensive desk review of relevant background documents on COBERM, including COBERM sub-project documents and other relevant documents and reports;
• Selected existing monitoring reports of COBERM supported programmes;
• Interviews with key UNDP staff, COBERM staff, EU staff, NGOs, and other partners and stakeholders.

The evaluation itself will follow 3 steps:

• Desk review of documentation - review of the Terms of Reference, comprehensive desk review, meetings with the UNDP, the EU Delegation  and COBERM project staff,
• Conduct the evaluation – conduct  meetings in the field including with partner NGOs, beneficiaries, broader NGO community, other UN agencies, donors and relevant stakeholders,
• Writing the report – Debriefing UNDP and EU Delegation on preliminary findings and production of the Draft and  Final Evaluation Reports.

Deliverables:

The key product expected from this evaluation is a comprehensive analytical report in English covering issues as outlined in section 1, that should, as a minimum, include the following contents:

• Executive summary;
• Introduction;
• Description of the evaluation methodology;
• Analysis of the situation with regard to the outcome, the outputs and the partnership strategy;
• Analysis of opportunities to provide guidance for the future programming;
• Key findings (including good practices and lessons learned)
• Conclusions and recommendations
• Annexes: ToRs, field visits, people interviewed, documents reviewed, etc. (See the UNDP Guidelines for Outcome Evaluators for a detailed guidance on the preparation of an outcome evaluation report).

For quality assurance, all deliverables will be approved by the UNDP Assistant Resident Representative. Pending this approval, payments will be made accordingly.

Evaluation:

Individual consultants will be evaluated based on the Cumulative analysis:

Individual consultants will be evaluated against combination of technical and financial criteria. Technical evaluation stage encompasses desk review and interview of offerors. Experts not meeting any of the minimum technical qualification requirements will be automatically excluded from the list of offerors for further technical evaluation.

Maximum obtainable score is 100, out of which the total score for technical criteria equals to 70 points (70%) and for financial criteria 30 (30%). Offerors who pass 70% of maximum obtainable scores of the desk review (i.e. 50x 70% = 35 points) as a result of a desk review of applications will be invited for the interview. Those offerors who pass 70% of maximum obtainable scores of the technical criteria (i.e. 70 x 70% = 49 points) will be considered as short-listed offerors.

Financial Proposal:

The financial proposal shall specify a total lump sum amount, and payment terms around specific and measurable (qualitative and quantitative) deliverables should be accompanied by the proposed number of installments. All envisaged travel costs must be included in the financial proposal as well.

Competencias

Core Competencies

• Demonstrated commitment to UNDP’s mission, vision and values;
• Sensitivity and adaptability to cultural, gender, religion, race, nationality and age;
• Highest standards of integrity, discretion and loyalty.

Functional Competencies

Interpersonal and communication skills:

• Strong communication skills and proven ability to collaborate with different actors (UN, Government, civil society, etc.);
• Flexibility, discretion, and tact.

Professional skills:

• Good analysis and judgment;
• Teamwork, proven management and results-orientation;
• Proactive in problem-solving and recommendation for conflict prevention and resolution;
• Strong ability in managing confidential and politically sensitive issues, in a responsible way.

Technical aptitude:

• Strong drafting and oral presentation skills for document plans, proposals, mails, briefings, reports and speeches;
• Strong computer skills.

Habilidades y experiencia requeridas

Education:

• Advanced university degree in social sciences, international relations, political science, development studies, or other related domain; concentration in conflict prevention or peace studies an asset (minimum qualification requirement: 5 points;
• PhD: additional 5 points; concentration on conflict prevention, conflict transformation and peace studies: additional 5 points). 

Experience:

• At least five (5) years of experience in the field of conflict prevention, peace-building and conflict-sensitive development (minimum qualification requirement: 10 points, more than five years: additional 5 points);
• At least two years of evaluation experience of programmes and projects or equivalent (minimum qualification requirement: 10 points);
• Knowledge of the history of conflict in Georgia (assessed based on publications, research, articles, blogs, etc. listed in the CV/P11: 5 points);
• Proven track of excellent diplomatic skills and ability to work in very sensitive political environments;
• Experience in advising senior management;
• Experience in managing a multi-cultural team.
• Preferably knowledge of the United Nations system, practices, and procedures, including UNDP program modalities, particularly in conflict-affected areas; knowledge of EU processes a strong advantage;
• Previous experience in the facilitation/participation in peace processes and dialogue activities will be an asset.

Language Requirements: 

• Fluency in English and Russian (5 points).