Antecedentes

Pursuant to United Nations General Assembly Resolution 56/201 on the triennial policy review of operational activities for development of the United Nations system, the Harmonized Approach to Cash Transfers (HACT) framework was first adopted in 2005 by UNDP, UNICEF, UNFPA and WFP. In Malawi, HACT has been implemented since 1 January 2008 and is coordinated by the HACT Working Group representing 7 UN Agencies namely: FAO, UNAIDS, UNDP, UNFPA, UNICEF, WFP and UNW. The HACT framework represents a common operational (harmonized) framework for transferring cash to government and non-governmental IPs, irrespective of whether these partners work with one or multiple United Nation agencies. The objective of the HACT framework is to support a closer alignment of development aid with national priorities and to strengthen national capacities for management and accountability, with the ultimate objective of gradually shifting to national systems. It is understood that ‘harmonized’ in the context of the HACT framework refers to agencies implementing a common operational framework using the same, consistent, standardized approach and tools.

The HACT framework represents a shift from assurance for cash transfers derived from project level controls and audits towards a method of assurance derived from risk/system-based assessments and audits

These agencies were then referred to as the United Nations Development Group Executive Committee agencies. As WFP primarily distributes goods through execution of its mission rather than cash, the HACT framework is not necessary for WFP at this time.

Deberes y responsabilidades

To ensure adequate awareness of the public financial management (PFM) environment within which agencies provide cash transfers to IPs, a desk review of assessments of the PFM system is conducted. In the HACT framework PFM is broadly defined to include a range of considerations for operating in the country. It is not limited solely to the financial environment but also includes national procurement capacity, exchange rate volatility, presence of informal/black markets, etc. This assessment is called a macro assessment.

The two primary outputs of thmacro assessment are:

  • An outline of the risks related to use of the PFM for cash transfers within the country by governmental IPs, as well as for non-governmental IPs; and
  • A determination on whether the government’s supreme audit institution (SAI) has the capacity to undertake scheduled and special audits of government IPs.

Macro Assessment Procedures

The consultant performing the macro assessment collects available PFM assessments to aid in detailing the risks related to the use of PFM systems for cash transfers within the country. This includes considerations regarding the use of the SAI and broader country conditions, such as environmental conditions, legal regulations, judicial environments, exchange rate volatility and the presence of informal/black markets, etc.

Typical sources of PFM assessments are:

World Bank

  • Country financial accountability assessments. These vary in format and presentation;
  • Public expenditure reviews. These analyse a country’s fiscal position, expenditure policies and public expenditure management systems;
  • Country procurement assessment reviews. These review public procurement institutions and practices;
  • Institutional and governance reviews. These review the quality of accountability, policymaking and service delivery institutions;
  • Capacity assessments of heavily indebted poor country PFM. Performed jointly with IMF, this assessment covers some of the same issues as a country financial accountability assessment.

Assessments by other institutions:

  • Fiscal transparency reviews (IMF). These use the code of good practices on fiscal transparency adopted by IMF in 1998;
  • Diagnostic study of accounting and auditing (Asian Development Bank);
  • Ex-ante audits of PFM systems (European Commission);
  • Assessments by CIDA, DFID, EU, ADB and other agencies.

The preliminary results of the macro assessment will be discussed with the agencies implementing the HACT framework, both to provide a summary of the results and to incorporate agency-specific experience and knowledge of the country into the final assessment.

Competencias

Corporate Competencies:

  • Promotes the vision, mission and strategic goals of UNDP;
  • Demonstrate integrity by modelling the UN's values and ethical standards;
  • Displays cultural, gender, religion, race and age sensitivity and adaptability.

Habilidades y experiencia requeridas

Education:

  • Master degree in financial management, Economics or related areas.

Experience:

  • 5 years experience in performing assessments similar to a macro assessment and assessing risks related to PFM systems also have 5 years experience in financial management and knowledge of the United Nations system and the development sector.

Language:

  • Fluency in written and spoken English.

Curriculum vitae (CVs) /P11 should include details on engagements carried out by the consultant, including ongoing assignments indicating responsibilities assumed, and his/her qualifications and experience in undertaking similar assessments.

The HACT Working Group will provide the following documentation before starting fieldwork:

  • Summary of primary programme initiatives and IPs in the country;
  • Details of macro assessments previously performed in the country; and
  • Any other documentation that may help the consultant to better understand the country context from a United Nations perspective.

Interested individual consultants must submit the following documents/information to demonstrate their qualifications by to the following email address: procurement.mw@undp.org or apply on line https://jobs.undp.org/ by 18th April 2015.

Technical Proposal:

  • Explaining why they are the most suitable for the work;
  • Provide a brief methodology on how they will approach and conduct the work.

Financial Proposal

Personal CV (P11 Form) including past experience in similar projects and at least 3 references

Proposals must include all four documents. Proposals not meeting this requirement will be rejected.

Financial Evaluation

Contracts based on daily fee

The financial proposal will specify the daily fee, travel expenses and per diems quoted in separate line items, and payments are made to the Individual Contractor based on the number of days worked.

Travel

All envisaged travel costs must be included in the financial proposal. This includes all travel to join duty station in Lilongwe /repatriation travel.

Evaluation

Individual consultants will be evaluated based on the following methodologies:

Cumulative analysis

When using this weighted scoring method, the award of the contract should 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.

Technical Criteria weight; [70]

Financial Criteria weight; [30]

Technical Criteria:

  • Criteria AMaster degree in Financial management, Economics or related areas up to a maximum of 10 points;
  • Criteria B: experienced in performing assessments similar to a macro assessment and assessing risks related to PFM systems - up to a maximum of 20 points;
  • Criteria C: The consultant should also have financial management experience and knowledge of the United Nations system and the development sector – up to a maximum of 20 points;
  • Criteria D: Methodology of work Technical proposal - up to a maximum of 20 points.

Financial Criteria:

Only candidates obtaining a minimum of 70 points in the Technical Evaluation would be considered for the Financial Evaluation.

The financial score for the financial proposal will be calculated in the following manner:

Sf = 100 x Fm/F, in which Sf is the financial score, Fm is the lowest price and F the price of the proposal under consideration.

(Total Financial Maximum points = 100 points)

Total Score

The technical score attained at by each proposal will be used in determining the Total score as follows:

The weights given to the technical and financial proposals are: T= 0.7, F=0.3

The Total score will be calculated by formula: TS = T x 0.7 + F x 0.3

TS - Is the total score of the proposal under consideration?

T - is technical score of the proposal under consideration?

F - is financial score of the proposal under consideration?