Monitoring and Evaluation requirements

This Final Evaluation is initiated by the UNDP Uzbekistan and aims to assess the relevance, performance, management arrangements and success of the project and provide recommendations whether there is an exit strategy and possible follow-up. It should provide the basis for learning and accountability for managers and stakeholders. The evaluation will have to provide to UNDP complete and convincing evidence to support its findings/ratings. Particular emphasis should be put on the project results, the lessons learned from the project and recommendations for the follow-up activities.

This evaluation is to be undertaken taking into consideration the evaluation policy of UNDP
(http://www.undp.org/eo/documents/Evaluation-Policy.pdf) and the UNDP Handbook on Monitoring
and Evaluating for Results (http://www.undp.org/gef/05/monitoring/policies.html ).

Project objectives

The project is the UNDP project “Capacity Building for Clean Development Mechanism in Uzbekistan” aimed at developing public and private sector capacities to access carbon finance in Uzbekistan. This objective will be realized through implementation of the following components:

• Creating legal and institutional framework for carbon finance
• Building in-country capacities for identification, implementation of and resource mobilization for Green House Gas reduction projects eligible for Clean Development Mechanism and other carbon market mechanisms.

The project is implemented by the Ministry of Economy of the Republic of Uzbekistan. Overall management of the project is the responsibility of the Project Manager, who is a full time employee of the UNDP.

Objectives of the Evaluation / Evaluation requirements and methodology

The assignment will take place in the period between November 1 and November 30, 2008. The assignment will involve desk work and one mission to Tashkent, Uzbekistan. Throughout the assignment the consultant will work in close collaboration with UNDP Uzbekistan Country Office and relevant stakeholders.

EVALUATION OBJECTIVES:

The evaluation is intended to provide a comprehensive overall assessment of the project and to provide recommendations for exit strategy and follow-up activities.

The purpose of the Final Evaluation is:

• To assess overall performance against the Project objective and outcomes as set out in Project Document and other related documents.
• To assess the effectiveness and efficiency of the Project.
• To analyze critically the implementation and management arrangements of the Project.
• To assess the sustainability of the project’s interventions.
• To list and document lessons concerning Project design, implementation and

management.

• To assess Project relevance to national priorities.
• To assess changes in the baseline situation and provide guidance for the future activities in the area of capacity building for post-Kyoto regime. Project performance will be measured based on Project’s Results and Resources Framework, which provides clear indicators for project implementation. The Report of the Final Evaluation will be stand-alone document that substantiates its recommendations and conclusions.

EVALUATION:
The evaluation should assess:

Project concept and design: The evaluators will assess the project concept and design. He/she should review the problem addressed by the project and the project strategy, encompassing an assessment of the appropriateness of the objectives, planned outputs, activities and inputs as compared to cost-effective alternatives. The executing modality and managerial arrangements should also be judged. The evaluator will assess the achievement of indicators and review the work plan, planned duration and budget of the project. Implementation: The evaluation will assess the implementation of the project in terms of quality and timeliness of inputs and efficiency and effectiveness of activities carried out. Also, the effectiveness of management as well as the quality and timeliness of monitoring and backstopping by all parties to the project should be evaluated. In particular, the evaluation is to assess the Project team’s use of adaptive management in project implementation.

Project outputs, outcomes and impact: The evaluation will assess the outputs, outcomes and impact achieved by the project as well as the likely sustainability of project results. This should encompass an assessment of the achievement of the immediate objectives and the contribution to attaining the overall objective of the project. The evaluation should also assess the extent to which the implementation of the project has been inclusive of relevant stakeholders and to which it has been able to create collaboration between different partners. The evaluation will also examine if the project has had significant unexpected effects, whether of beneficial or detrimental character.

The Final Evaluation will also cover the following aspects:

Results and effectiveness:

Changes in development conditions. Address the following questions, with a focus on the perception of change among stakeholders:

• What are the results (outcomes and impacts) of the project?
• Have awareness on CDM projects in general and capacity of national stakeholders to identify and develop such projects in particular increased?
• Have the project contributed in the establishment of efficient national institutional frameworks for CDM project development?

Measurement of change: Progress towards results should be based on a comparison of indicators before and after the project intervention. Project strategy: How and why outputs contribute to the achievement of the expected results.

Examine their relevance and whether they provide the most effective route towards results.Sustainability: Extent to which the benefits of the project will continue, within or outside the project domain, after it has come to an end. Relevant factors include for example:

development of a sustainability strategy, establishment of financial and economic instruments and mechanisms, mainstreaming project objectives into the local economy, etc.

Project’s Adaptive Management Framework:

Monitoring Systems

• Assess the monitoring tools currently being used:
• Do they provide the necessary information?
• Do they involve key partners?
• Are they efficient?
• Are additional tools required?

Risk Management

• Validate whether the risks identified in the project document and the ATLAS Risk Management module are the most important and whether the risk ratings applied are appropriate. If not, explain why. Describe any additional risks identified and suggest risk ratings and possible risk management strategies to be adopted for the future activities.

Work Planning

• Assess the use of the logical framework as a management tool during implementation and any changes made to it;
• Assess the use of routinely updated workplans;
• Are work planning processes result-based? If not, suggest ways to re-orientate work planning.
• Consider the financial management of the project, with specific reference to the cost-effectiveness of interventions. Any irregularities must be noted.

Reporting

• Assess whether UNDP reporting requirements were met.

Underlying Factors

• Assess the underlying factors beyond the project’s immediate control that influence outcomes and results. Consider the appropriateness and effectiveness of the project’s management strategies for these factors.
• Assess the effect of any incorrect assumptions made by the project.

UNDP Contribution

• Assess whether or not UNDP’s outputs and other interventions can be credibly linked to achievement of the outcome, including the outputs, programmes, projects and soft and hard assistance that contributed to the outcome;
• Assess the role of UNDP against the requirements set out in the UNDP Handbook on

Monitoring and Evaluating for Results

• Consider the new UNDP requirements outlined in the UNDP User Guide, especially the Project Assurance role;
• Assess the contribution to the project from UNDP “soft” assistance (i.e. policy advice & dialogue, advocacy, and coordination).

Partnership Strategy

• Assess how partners are involved in the project’s adaptive management framework: (i) Involving partners and stakeholders in the selection of indicators and other measures of performance; (ii) Using already existing data and statistics; and (iii) Analyzing progress towards results and determining project strategies.
•  Identify opportunities for stronger substantive partnerships in the future.
• Assess how local stakeholders participate in project management and decision-making. Include an analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of the approach adopted by the project and suggestions for improvement if necessary.
• Assessment of collaboration between governments, intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations.
• Assessment of collaboration between implementation units of other related projects.
• Assessment of local partnerships.
• Transfer of capacity to the national institutions.

Project Finance:

• Assess the cost-effectiveness of the project interventions. Review the effectiveness of financial coordinating mechanisms.

EVALUATION METHODOLOGY:

The Final Evaluation will be done through a combination of techniques, including

• Desk study review of all relevant Project documentation
• Consultations with stakeholders
• One national project visit
• Extended Interviews with selected stakeholders.

Evaluation should involve the wider possible range of stakeholders.

Deliverables and timeframe
The following deliverables and indicative schedule are expected from the consultancy contract but the core product of the Evaluation will be Final Evaluation Report. The final schedule will be agreed upon in the beginning of consultancy assignment. All deliverables should be submitted to UNDP by the Consultant in English.

Deliverable Deadlines

1. Work plan and report outline 5 November 2009
2. Draft Evaluation Report 25 November 2009
3. Final Report 01 December 2009

Tentative timeframe

1. Briefings for evaluator 2-5 November 5, 2009
2. Desk review 2-5 November 5, 2009
3. Trip to the field sites (including allocation for travel), interviews with local stakeholders, questionnaires 9-13 November 2009
4. Validation of preliminary findings with stakeholders through circulation of initial reports for comments, meetings, and other types of feedback mechanisms 14-17 November 2009
5. Preparation of final evaluation report 18-30 November, 2009
6. Submission of final evaluation report 01 December 2009

Payment Conditions

This is a lump sum contract that should include costs of consultancy and travel costs required to produce the above deliverables. Payment will be released in three installments: 20%, 30% and 50%, upon satisfactory provision of respective deliverables.

The following deliverables and indicative schedule are expected from the consultancy contract but the core product of the Evaluation will be Final Evaluation Report. The final schedule will be agreed upon in the beginning of consultancy assignment. All deliverables should be submitted to UNDP by the Consultant in English.

To prepare:

1. Work plan and report outline 5 November 2009
2. Draft Evaluation Report 25 November 2009
3. Final Report 01 December 2009
4. Validation of preliminary findings with stakeholders through circulation of initial reports for comments, meetings, and other types of feedback mechanisms 14-17 November 2009
5. Preparation of final evaluation report 18-30 November, 2009
6. Submission of final evaluation report 01 December 2009

Education:

• Master Degree in energy, economics, environmental management or closely related field Experience:
• At least 10 years of practical experience in the relevant areas;
• Recent experience with result-based management evaluation methodologies;
• Experience applying participatory monitoring approaches;
• Experience applying SMART indicators and reconstructing or validating baseline scenarios;
• Experience of work in the climate change field, in particular knowledge of Kyoto

Protocol and carbon finance:

• Experience with GEF Monitoring and Evaluation Policy and knowledge of UNDP’s results-based evaluation policies and procedures would be an advantage;
• Project evaluation experiences within United Nations system will be considered an asset.

Language Requirements:

• Full proficiency in English both written and verbal; knowledge of Russian would be considered an advantage.

Others:

• Strong and demonstrable analytical skills;
• Excellent communication skills,

Application process:

Applications (UN Personnel History Form and CV in English only) quoting VA # 221/2009 should be sent (preferably via e-mail) to jobs.uz@undp.org, or submitted in sealed envelopes indicating VA # 221/2009 to UNDP Office in Uzbekistan located at 4, T. Shevchenko St., 700029, Tashkent, Uzbekistan. Blank UN Personal History Forms are available at the reception of the UNDP Office on the above address (paper copies) or on http://www.undp.uz (Job Opportunities Section).

The deadline for submission of applications is October 4, 2009.

Qualified female candidates are strongly encouraged to apply.

Applicants will be contacted only if under serious consideration. The position is open for international candidates only.