International Consultant – Final evaluation of the UN Joint Programme “Improving Municipal Social Protection Service Delivery”


Location : Home-based with one 6-day mission to the programme targeted municipalities, ALBANIA
Application Deadline :08-Dec-21 (Midnight New York, USA)
Type of Contract :Individual Contract
Post Level :International Consultant
Languages Required :
English  
Expected Duration of Assignment :20 working days

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 United Nations Joint Programme “Improving Municipal Social Protection Service Delivery” (UN JP IMSPSD) focuses on catalyzing a step-change in the quantity and quality of delivery at local (municipal) level of integrated social care, as part of an effective integrated social protection system.  It builds upon the vast experience of the UN in addressing social inclusion, protection and the needs of the most vulnerable groups including Roma, refugees and migrants, persons with disabilities, vulnerable children, elderly, rural women, and women at risk of GBV. The programme supports the implementation of the newly shaped vision of the social sector in Albania, in line with Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the country’s aspirations towards European Union (EU) integration. The programme avails of technical expertise and know-how of UN agencies aiming at allowing for greater impact and outreach by focusing on the municipal level and its linkage to the national level.

The programme’s goal – contribute to support Albanian Government translate the policy intent into proper local actions so that men, women, girls and boys living in poverty, or vulnerable situation have access to integrated, quality social care services- supports the vision of an overall inclusive Albania. The joint programme supports Albania’s progress in view of achieving SDGs - being directly related to social protection/inclusion - especially SDGs 1-5 (no poverty, zero hunger, good health and well-being, quality education, gender equality, 10 (reduced inequalities), and 16 (peace, justice and strong institutions).

Programme Outcome

 All women, men, girls and boys, especially those from marginalized and vulnerable groups, are exercising their entitlements to equitable quality services, in line with human rights; and more effective and efficient investments in human and financial resources are being made at central and local levels to ensure social inclusion and cohesion.

 

The programme’s target groups who indirectly and directly benefit from improved social care services, are the marginalized populations of Albania, with persons with disabilities often being the most vulnerable, along with Roma and Egyptians as well as children, women, migrant, refugees, long term unemployed etc. The improvement of their social protection is supported by interventions at macro level (central government authorities and national services), at meso level (municipalities and civil society organizations), and at micro level, actively involving the project’s target groups into the project’s implementation. The project covers six selected municipalities: Tirana, Kamza, Puka, Rrogozhina, Pogradec and Devoll.  The “Improving Municipal Social Protection Service Delivery” programme is implemented through the modalities of the Delivering as One (DaO) mechanism, under the Programme of Cooperation for Sustainable Development 2017-2021, with the joint participation of UN agencies, including UNDP, UNICEF, UN Women, UNFPA, UNHCR, WHO and ILO, and in close partnership with relevant governmental bodies at the central and local levels.  UNDP is the lead UN agency for the overall implementation and coordination of the Programme.

 

The programme duration is January 2019- June 2022.

https://www.al.undp.org/content/albania/en/home/projects/municipal-social-protection-service-delivery.html

 

Joint programme outputs:

Output 1.            Integrated social care services, institutional arrangements and coordination mechanisms functional with clear roles and responsibilities at local level in 6 municipalities.

The Joint Programme supports the targeted municipalities to design guidance note, workflows, protocols and effective mechanisms that aim to provide information on how municipalities have adapted their existing institutional and coordination frameworks or established new ones in order to implement integrated social care services.

 

Output 2.            Municipal and national institutional capacities strengthened through training and mentoring for the development of social care plans and accessing the Social Fund.

The Joint Programme supports municipalities to strengthen their capacities in operationalizing social protection policies at local level by developing and costing social care plans which respond to the needs of vulnerable men and women.  New innovative models of integrated social services, community-based services for persons with disabilities are developed at the local level. MoHSP is supported to make functional Management Information System (MIS) on social care services. The programme supports the government to identify and validate with national stakeholders the set of indicators that will be collected, inputted and processed in the system according to the existing legislation on case management practices and social care services delivery.

 

Output 3.            Innovative models of integrated social care services piloted, including established local linkages between health and social protection services.

The improvement of management of social services at local level is supported by the development of human resources and of organizations, including their processes, as well as by the divulgating, across Albania, good and innovative practices for providing social services and promoting social protection. A grant scheme provides the opportunity to support social inclusion of persons with disabilities, Roma and Egyptians not only through training of staff and organizational development, but also by realizing innovative small projects to be realized in selected municipalities and as cooperation of authorities and beneficiaries possibly also civil society organizations. Innovative service delivery is an approach municipality should explore to ensure better and efficient services and nontraditional ways to address vulnerability and exclusion. Elements of good governance such as public transparency and accountability, participatory decision-making will serve to bring municipalities closer to citizens, including vulnerable groups, and render effective services.

 

Output 4.            Vulnerable communities (disaggregated by gender, ethnicity, disability etc.) are empowered to actively participate in decision making and make institutions accountable.

The empowerment of target groups, especially persons with disabilities, Roma and Egyptians and vulnerable women, vulnerable children, migrants and refugees for their capacity to request social protection and access social services is a precondition for improving their social situation and their livelihoods. The achievement of the planned outcome then depends on the supported persons’ and groups’ preparedness to demand adequate services and to equally access these. This willingness is supported by contributing to the improvement of a constructive dialogue and culture of participatory decision-making between municipal structures and target groups, the capacity of service providers and beneficiaries to interact effectively and efficiently and establish a culture of mutual dialogue and decision-making.

 

Output 5.            Financing options for extending social protection coverage and benefits developed and assessed at the national and municipality levels.

To formulate and implement sustainable social protection strategies and policies it is essential to assess the financial requirements that they would entail, so that social protection policy decisions can be based on solid quantitative information. The ILO has developed a wide set of quantitative tools and maintains a comprehensive database, including data and information on coverage and expenditure for all branches of social protection, to assess the financial costs of national social protection floors and programmes and to undertake actuarial valuations of social security schemes. The costing exercise serves as a basis for discussions on strategies to create fiscal space.


Duties and Responsibilities

This assignment relates to the final evaluation of the UN JP “Improving Municipal Social Protection Service Delivery”. The objective of the final evaluation is to assess the: Accomplishment of the main expected results, Contribution to improving the situation of vulnerable groups identified in the JP document (ProDoc), Contribution to SDG acceleration, Contribution to UN reforms (including, UNCT coherence), Focus on disability and including an assessment of how results have contributed to social services improvement, conclusions, and recommendations. The general objective of the assignment is to conduct a final evaluation of the project outcome in terms of its Relevance, Impact, Effectiveness, Efficiency, Sustainability, as well as its gender mainstreaming and focus on disability and against the project-level theory of change.

 

The international expert for the final evaluation will conduct this assignment in close cooperation with a national expert for the joint programme evaluation. The International expert (to be recruited under this vacancy) will be the team leader and fully responsible for the below listed deliverables.

 

Below are listed the key Evaluation Questions, to guide the evaluation, based on UNDP Evaluation Guidelines (2021), UNEG Norms and Standards for Evaluation (2016)[1] and the OECD-DAC evaluation criteria. The list of questions is not exhaustive and therefore, the consultant is expected to suggest the adjustment of this list within the Inception Report. The final list of questions and the evaluation methodology will be discussed and be agreed with the UN programme team.

The evaluation shall document the learning and positive examples and provide recommendations to enable the UN implementing agencies (UNDP, UNICEF, WHO, UN Women, UNFPA and ILO), the programme implementing partners and stakeholders to draw on positive lessons and models/examples, for future similar interventions. The evaluation will also highlight areas where the programme performed less effectively than anticipated, the rationale behind that, and the related recommendations to be considered in similar future interventions. The evaluation shall document learning, positive examples and provide recommendations that reflect the national and local perspective of the programme.

The evaluation should provide an overview of key integrated social services improvement recommendations that are appropriately tailored to specific actors. They should be articulated clearly so that they can be used for any future programming needs and generate lessons for the overall national social care landscape. Joint the UN agencies will coordinate and provide joint inputs throughout the entire process.

 

  1. Evaluation criteria and key questions         

The final evaluation will assess the below criteria of OEDC/DAC guidelines:   

  • Relevance –   will assess to what extent the results of the joint programe are consistent with national and local policies and priorities and the needs of the intended beneficiaries, country needs and partners’ and donors’ policies.
  • Impact – will explore the effects (positive or negative, intended or not) on individual households and institutions, and the environment created, by the joint programme.
  • Effectiveness - will assess to what extent results at various levels, including outcomes, have been achieved based on planned activities.  
  • Efficiency - will assess how well and productively the programme has utilized its resources to reach the predefined goals.
  • Sustainability – will assess preliminary indications of the degree to which the programme results are likely to be sustainable beyond the programme’s lifetime (both at the community and government level) and provide recommendations.

 

Sample evaluation questions:

Programme relevance

  • To what extent have the intervention logic / theory of change and the underlying assumptions of the joint programme integrated gender equality and other cross-cutting issues?
  • To what extent are they still valid or do they need to be adapted to changes in the needs or priorities of the country?
  • Are the activities and outputs of the programme consistent with the overall goal and the attainment of its objectives?
  • Are the activities and outputs of the programme consistent with the intended impacts and effects?
  • How relevant is the programme to target groups’, including central and local governments’, needs and priorities?
  • How relevant is the programme to other key stakeholders’ (executing agencies, partner organizations, including other UN agencies, NGOs etc.) needs and priorities?
  • To what extent is the programme aligned with the policies and strategies of the country, UN agencies participating in the programme and donors?
  • To what extent is the programme contributing to country system development?

Programme impact

  • How the objectives have been achieved?
  • What are the direct impacts/expected impacts prospects of the pogramme?
  • Which are the direct effects on intended beneficiaries?
  • To what extent the programme produced indirect positive and /or negative impacts?
  • Which changes regarding the project stakeholders and other relevant actors have emerged in relation to supported actions? What factors have been identified that are driving or hindering progress?

Programme effectiveness

  • To what extent has progress been made towards the programme goals, including gender equality, women’s empowerment and other cross-cutting issues?
  • What key results and changes have been attained for men, women and vulnerable groups?
  • To what extent have the expected outputs, outcomes and goal been achieved or are likely to be achieved?
  • What are the major factors influencing the achievement or non-achievement of the outcomes/expected results/outputs?
  • Did the programme contribute to capacity building and organisational development as planned?
  • To what extent have UN agencies coordinated effectively and created synergies in the delivery of assistance?
  • Is the current coordination set up producing the intended results?
  • Coordination with other projects: How has the programme interacted and coordinated with other implementers and vice versa?
  • To what extent has the project contributed to gender equality, the empowerment of women and the realization of human rights?

Programme efficiency

  • To what extent has the programme delivered, or is likely to deliver, its interventions and results in an economic and timely manner?
  • To what extent were resources (funds, expertise, time) sufficient?
  • Is the programme implemented in the most efficient way, making best use of available human, technical, technological, financial and knowledge inputs to achieve its desired results? Have there been any unforeseen problems? How well are they resolved?
  • Following up on risk management, how the risk is assessed? and how the risk is managed?

Programme Sustainability

  • Are the approaches and methods used likely to ensure a continued benefit after the end of the programme?
  • What are the major factors which influenced the achievement or non-achievement of sustainability of the programme?
  • Are all key stakeholders sufficiently and effectively involved? Are their expectations met and are they satisfied with their level of participation? What is the risk that the level of stakeholder ownership (including ownership by governments and other key stakeholders) will be insufficient to allow for the programme’s outcomes/benefits to be sustained?
  • Based on lessons learned what specific recommendations could be given to each key partner under the joint programme that would contribute to the sustainability of the intervention?

Gender responsiveness

Final evaluation report should assess the extent to which UN JP IMSPSD initiatives have considered addressing gender equality issues in the design, implementation and outcome of the initiative and if both women and men can equally access the programme’s benefits to the degree, they were intended through gender analysis process. A keen focus should be given to aspects covered by UN JP IMSPSD interventions that have taken into close considerations the specific needs of women and girls.

 

Gender-responsiveness includes and relates to both what the evaluation examines and how it is undertaken. This means:

• assessing the degree to which gender and power relationships, including structural and other causes of inequities, discrimination and unequal power relations, change as a result  of an intervention; and

• using a process that is inclusive, participatory and respectful of all stakeholders (rights holders and duty bearers).

Furthermore, the final evaluation report should also address the extent to which UN JP IMSPSD programme has advocated for the principles of equality and inclusive development and has contributed to empowering and addressing the needs of the most disadvantaged and vulnerable populations in the Albanian society.

 

Focus on disability

As persons with disabilities are among the most vulnerable and marginalized groups across Albania and considering the critical role that social protection can play in supporting their inclusion, the UN JP IMSPSD has identified them as direct beneficiaries. In line with the Leaving No One Behind principle and the obligations stemming from the Convention on the rights of persons with disabilities, the evaluation will therefore assess to what extent:

  • Joint programme design, implementation, and monitoring have been inclusive of persons with disabilities (accessibility, non-discrimination, participation of organizations of persons with disabilities, data disaggregation.) 
  • Joint programme effectively contributed to the socio-economic inclusion of persons with disabilities by providing income security, coverage of health care, and disability-related costs[2]across the life cycle.

 

Guiding questions on Persons with Disabilities:

  • To what extent did the program target persons with disabilities?
    • Not specifically targeted 
    • One of the groups of direct beneficiaries targeted  
    • Main target group for the program 
  • To what extent did the design and implementation of activities of the joint program supported include disability-related accessibility and non-discrimination requirement?
    • No requirements 
    • General reference  
    • Specific requirements 
  • To what extent have persons with disabilities, in particular children and women with disabilities, been consulted through their representative organizations?    
    • Not invited 
    • Invited 
    • Specific outreach 
  • To what extent did support to data collection and analysis, registries, and information system feature disability? 
    • No reference to disability  
    • Disability included, but no analysis  
    • Disability included as  
      • Part of general analysis  
      • with specific analysis  
  • To which extent did the program contribute to support inclusion of persons with disabilities via: 
    • Ensuring basic income security 
    • Coverage of health care costs, including rehabilitation and assistive devices  
    • Coverage of disability-related costs, including community support services  
    • Facilitate access to inclusive early childhood development, education, and work/livelihood 

 

The final evaluation report should also cover:

Joint Programme contribution to SDGs.  – assess whether the programme’s goal and outcomes and progress done so far are contributing to SDGs progress.   

Joint Programme contribution to UN reforms (including, UNCT coherence).

UN JP IMSPSD cross-cutting issues – assess whether the cross-cutting issues related to human rights, governance and gender equality, are addressed/promoted as an articulation of human rights principles.

UN JP communication and visibility – assess and review whether the communications and visibility guidelines and actions undertaken by UN agencies and implementing partners provide insights into the implementation of the programme activities.

 

 

Evaluation management

The evaluation will be a consultative, inclusive and participatory process and will include a management structure. An Evaluation Management Group (EMG) comprising focal points and programme specialists from each participating agency will be established to oversee the evaluation management, make key decisions and quality assure the different deliverables throughout the evaluation process. Under the guidance of the EMG, the evaluation will be carried out by an external evaluation team.

 

UNDP as a leading agency will lead the day-to-day management of the process and will consult with the management group regarding key issues. The inputs of EMG members are expected to strengthen the quality and credibility of the evaluation. Joint EMG members will be expected to:

  • Participate in any meetings of the EMG;
  • Approve the evaluation ToR;
  • Approve the consultants selected to conduct the evaluation;
  • Gather key documentation for desk review and store it prior to initiation of the evaluation process;
  • Provide timely access to information and contact information of key evaluation informants to the evaluation team;
  • Participate in the preliminary inception meeting with the evaluation team;
  • Review and quality assure the evaluation inception report;
  • Approve the final evaluation inception report;
  • Organize and participate in the presentation of the presentation of preliminary findings;
  • Review and quality assure the draft and final evaluation report;
  • Approve the final evaluation report;
  • Participate in a EMG meeting to draft a joint Management Response to be approved by Heads of the different entities;
  • Liaise with relevant senior managers in the different agencies for the final approval of the Evaluation Management Response;
  • Disseminate and promote the use of the evaluation findings and recommendations.

 

  1. Methodology

The evaluation should employ a combination of qualitative and quantitative evaluation methods and instruments. The evaluator is expected to follow a participatory and consultative approach that ensures close engagement with the evaluation managers, implementing partners and male and female direct beneficiaries. Final decisions about the specific design and methods for the evaluation should emerge from consultations with the programme unit, the evaluators and key stakeholders about what is appropriate and feasible to meet the evaluation purpose and objectives and answer the evaluation questions, given limitations of budget, time and data.

 

Suggested methodological tools and approaches may include:

  1. Document review: This would include a review of all relevant joint programme documentation; Theory of change and results framework; Programme quality assurance reports; Annual workplans; Activity designs; Consolidated quarterly and annual reports etc.
  2. Interviews and meetings with key stakeholders (men and women) such as key government counterparts, representatives of key civil society organizations, United Nations country team (UNCT) members and implementing partners based on evaluation questions around relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, and sustainability.
  3. Key informant and focus group discussions with men and women, beneficiaries and stakeholders.
  4. Field visits and on-site validation of key tangible outputs and interventions.
  5. Other methods such as outcome mapping, observational visits, group discussions, etc.
  6. Data review and analysis of monitoring and other data sources and methods. To ensure maximum validity, reliability of data (quality) and promote use, the evaluation team will ensure triangulation of the various data sources.
  7. Gender and human rights lens. All evaluation products need to address gender, disability, and human right issues.

The final methodological approach including interview schedule, field visits and data to be used in the evaluation should be clearly outlined in the inception report and fully discussed and agreed between Un Joint Programme team, key stakeholders and the evaluator.

 

  1. Expected Outputs and Deliverables:

 

No.

Deliverable

Description

Timing

1.

Inception report that includes the evaluation matrix 

 

 

Evaluation team clarifies the objectives and methods to be used during the evaluation.      

 

No later than 2 weeks from the final evaluation mission date

 

4 working days

2.

Data collection and field visits

 

Meeting with counterparts and stakeholders

8 working days including 6 travel working days

3.

Debriefing meeting

 

Presentation of key findings

End of the final evaluation field mission  

 

1/2 working day

4.

Draft Report

Full draft report

Within 4 weeks from the field mission

 

5 working days

5.

Consultation on the draft report

UNDP in cooperation with other UN agencies organize a consultation process on the draft report and provide the evaluation team with a consolidated feedback.

Within 4 weeks from the submission of the draft report

 

1/2 working day

6.

Final evaluation report completion

Revised report with audit trail detailing how all the received comments have / have not been addressed in the final report

 

All evaluation products need to address gender, disability and human rights issues.

Within 1 week of receiving feedback on draft report

 

2 working days

 

 

This evaluation will be conducted in accordance with the principles outlined in the UNEG ‘Ethical Guidelines for Evaluation’. The consultant must safeguard the rights and confidentiality of information providers, interviewees and stakeholders through measures to ensure compliance with legal and other relevant codes governing collection of data and reporting on data. The consultant must also ensure security of collected information before and after the evaluation and protocols to ensure anonymity and confidentiality of sources of information where that is expected. The information knowledge and data gathered in the evaluation process must also be solely used for the evaluation and not for other uses with the express authorization of UNDP and partners.

 

[1] UNEG Norms and Standards for Evaluation, 2016, http://www.unevaluation.org/document/detail/1914

[2]   Joint statement on inclusive social protection system for full and effective participation and inclusion of persons with disabilities


Competencies

Core Values

Integrity:

  • Demonstrate consistency in upholding and promoting the values of UN in actions and decisions, in line with the UN Code of Conduct.

Professionalism:

  • Demonstrate professional competence and expert knowledge of the pertinent substantive areas of work.

Cultural sensitivity and respect for diversity:

  • Demonstrate an appreciation of the multicultural nature of the organization and the diversity of its staff;
  • Additionally, the individual should have an international outlook, appreciating difference in values and learning from cultural diversity.

Core Competencies:

Communication:

  • Facilitate and encourage open communication and strive for effective communication.

Planning & Organizing:

  • Develops clear goals in line with agreed strategies, identifies priorities, foresees risks and makes allowances accordingly.

Organizational Awareness:

  • Demonstrate corporate knowledge and sound judgment.

Teamwork:

  • Demonstrate ability to work in a multicultural, multi-ethnic environment and to maintain effective working relations with people of different national and cultural backgrounds.

Accountability:

  • Takes ownership of all responsibilities and delivers outputs in accordance with agreed time, cost and quality standards.

 

Functional Competencies:

  • Strong analytical and M&E skills;
  • Demonstrates leadership, team building and coordinating skills;
  • Plans and produces quality results to meet established goals;
  • Generates innovative, practical solutions to challenging situations;
  • Conceptualizes and analyses problems to identify key issues, underlying problems, and how they relate;
  • Demonstrates substantive and technical knowledge to meet responsibilities and post requirements with excellence;
  • Demonstrates strong oral and written communication skills;
  • Demonstrates openness to change and ability to manage complexities;
  • Responds positively to critical feedback and differing points of view.


Required Skills and Experience

Education 

  • Post-graduate degree in social sciences, public policy, public administration, international relations, political science, evaluation, international development or a related subject.

Work experience

  • Knowledge and working experience on social inclusion, social protection or related policies and programmes;
  • Substantial technical knowledge on monitoring and evaluation of development programmes, and at least 10 years of relevant working experience;
  • Documented previous experience in evaluations in the UN system, and a solid understanding on the use of evaluation methodologies;
  • Demonstrated capacity in strategic thinking and policy advice;
  • Strong inter-personal, teamwork and organizational skills;
  • Excellent drafting skills and familiarity with information technology.
  • Excellent communication and report-writing skills in English

 

Evaluation Procedure

UNDP applies a fair and transparent selection process that would consider both the technical qualification of Individual Consultants as well as their financial proposals. The contract will be awarded to the candidate whose offer:

  • Is deemed technically responsive / compliant / acceptable (only technically responsive applications / candidates will be considered for the financial evaluation)
  • And has obtained the highest combined technical and financial scores.

 

Technical Criteria - 70% of total evaluation – max points: 70

Criteria A: Professional-level experience (at least 10 years) related to monitoring and evaluation of development programmes– max points: 35

Criteria B: Relevance of prior working experience on social inclusion / social protection or related policies and programmes, preferably within UN system– max points: 20

Criteria C: Educational background- post-graduate degree in social sciences, public policy, public administration, international relations, political science, evaluation, international development or a related subject – max points: 15

Financial Criteria - 30% of total evaluation – max points: 30

 

Candidates obtaining a minimum of 70% (49 points) of the maximum obtainable points for the technical criteria (70 points) shall be considered for the financial evaluation.

 

 

 

Application Procedure 

Interested applicants are advised to carefully study all sections of this ToRs and ensure that they meet the general requirements as well as specific qualifications described. Please make sure you have provided all requested materials. 

The application should contain: 

  • Cover letter explaining why you are the most suitable candidate for the advertised position. Please paste the letter into the "Resume and Motivation" section of the electronic application. 
  • Letter to UNDP Confirming Interest and Availability & Financial Proposal Form - please fill in the attached form. Download Here (kindly use FireFox Browser)
  • Filled P11 form including past experience in similar projects and contact details of referees, please upload the P11 instead of your CV. Download Here (kindly use FireFox Browser)
  • Financial Proposal in USD* - Specify Lump Sum in the United States Dollar for each of the tasks and at the bottom the Total Lump Sum for the Entire Job specified in this announcement. Please note that the financial proposal is all-inclusive and shall consider various expenses incurred by the consultant during the contract period (e.g. fee and any other relevant expenses related to the performance of services). 
  • Copy of Diplomas and copy of Passport. 

*Kindly note that Letter to UNDP Confirming Interest and Availability and Financial Proposal are two separate documents and should be both part of your application. 

How to Submit the Application

To submit your application online, please follow the steps below: 

  • Download and complete the UN Personal History Form (P11) for Service Contracts (SCs) and Individual Contracts (ICs); In the P11 Form make sure to include Email Addresses of the Persons who are willing to provide References on your past experience in working with them.
  • Merge your UN Personal History Form (P11) for Service Contracts (SCs) and Individual Contracts (ICs), Financial Proposal Letter to UNDP Confirming Interest and Availability and cover letter into a single file. The system does not allow for more than one attachment to be uploaded; 
  • Click on the Job Title (job vacancy announcement); 
  • Click “Apply Now” button, fill in necessary information on the first page, and then click “Submit Application;” 
  • Upload your application/single file as indicated above with the merged documents (underlined above); 
  • You will receive an automatic response to your email confirming receipt of your application by the system. 

Due to large number of applications we receive, we are able to inform only the successful candidates about the outcome or status of the selection process. 

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. 

 

 



If you are experiencing difficulties with online job applications, please contact the eRecruit Helpdesk.

© 2016 United Nations Development Programme