Historique

United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) works with an aim to reduce poverty in Pakistan and accelerate the pace of achieving the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) for all segments of the society, with a particular focus on marginalized communities and poor women. In close collaboration with the Government of Pakistan, UNDP supports the national frameworks of the MDGs, the Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper, and New Growth Framework for Pakistan. The focus of the interventions can be structured into three major domains; pro-poor policy and advocacy, community based programmes, and enhancing public-private partnerships.
 
Since 2006, UNDP has been supporting the Government of Pakistan in formulating pro-poor and inclusive growth policies which complement international commitments to achieve the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) by 2015. Within the nationally defined frameworks and MDGs, UNDP works to promote pro-poor policy planning, monitoring and reporting on the MDGs, and analyze public expenditures through a gender lens. UNDP works with disenfranchised communities in various regions in Pakistan to reduce poverty through broad based, low-cost participatory interventions. Capacity development interventions are conducted for mobilized communities to increase their agricultural and livestock productivity, grow their income generation opportunities, and conserve natural resources.
 
Partnerships involve the joint financing, development, operation and maintenance of the government with one or more private sector companies. UNDP, in an effort to support the Government of Pakistan to promote partnerships, has undertaken pilot projects with the private sector. These projects have been undertaken in a selected range of economic sectors to provide economic opportunities to the marginalized.
 
UNDP poverty reduction interventions are contributing to following outcomes of Country Programme Action Plan (CPAP):
 
CPAP Outcome (2011-2012):
  • Strengthened national capacities to develop, monitor and implement policies and programmes at the national and local levels for contributing towards inclusive growth, the reduction of social and economic inequality, timely recovery from the ongoing impacts of crisis, and the attainment of MDGs
CPAP Outcome (2008-2010):
  • Reduction of human and income poverty addressed as a major concern of macroeconomic policies, improved national capacity to monitor poverty and inequality.
  • Secure access for the poor to land and infrastructure (e.g. irrigation); Provision to the poor of affordable ICT.

Devoirs et responsabilités

This evaluation is being undertaken to evaluate the collective outcomes of the four and a half years (2008 -2012) of UNDP’s contribution towards poverty reduction in Pakistan. The evaluation team will ensure deseg­regation and unpacking of contribution of UNDP projects i.e. determine the combined impact of UNDP projects and clearly distinguish its relevance and contribution to the outcome.
Outcome evaluations include four standard categories of analysis (i.e., assess progress towards the outcome, examine the factors af­fecting the outcome, assess key UNDP contributions to outcomes, review the partnership strategy).
 
Outcome status:
The key questions to be discussed under the outcome status are:
  • What were the origin of the outcome, the baseline indicators and benchmarks?
  • How were the past experience, findings and recommendations of previous evaluations if any, dialogue with stakeholders used in design of outputs?
  • Assess the adequacy of background work carried out in project design
  • Determine whether or not the outcome has been achieved and, if not, whether there has been progress made towards its achievement.
  • List innovative approaches tried and capacities developed through UNDP assistance.
Underlying factors:
An analysis of the underlying factors beyond UNDP’s control that influenced the outcome will include:
  • Key assumptions made, and internal and external factors
  • Differentiation between the substantive design issues and the key implementation and/or management capacities and issues including the timeliness of generating outputs
  • The degree of stakeholder and partner involvement in the completion of the outputs, and how processes were managed/carried out.
  • Assessment of UNDP’s work with other relevant actors and their influence/contribution in achieving the outcome.
 
UNDP contribution:
UNDP contributions to the outcome take the form of output produced as part of the full range projects and non project activities (soft assistanceThe evaluator will determine whether or not UNDP funded constituent outputs and other interventions—including the outputs, projects and soft assistance, can be credibly linked to achievement of the outcome.
 
Partnership strategy:
Ascertain whether UNDP’s partnership strategy has been appropriate and effective. What were the partnerships formed for? How did partnerships arise? What was the role of UNDP? Did it identify a niche for itself? How did the partnership contribute to the achievement of the outcome? What was the level of the participation of stakeholders? List key beneficiaries and their major perceptions. Examine the partnership among UN Agencies that both influenced the programme design and contribution to the achievement of results.
 
Key Evaluation Criteria and Questions:
Specifically, the outcome evaluation is expected to include but not to be limited to the following aspects:
 
Relevance:
  • Provide a detailed assessment of how well the poverty reduction initiatives are aligned with UNDP’s mandate, national priorities and needs of targeted women and men.
  • How did the initiative promote UNDP’s principles of gender equality, human rights and human development?
  • To what extent is UNDP’s engagement a reflection of strategic considerations, including UNDP’s role in a particular development context and its comparative advantage?
  • To what extent are UNDP’s CPAP relevant to the national development context?
  • How relevant was selection of implementing partners for achieving poverty reduction goals?
Effectiveness:
  • Whether the outcome has been achieved and, if not, whether there has been progress made towards the achievement of both qualitative and quantitative targets?
  • What were the positive and negative, intended or unintended, changes contributed by UNDP’s work?
  • What has been the quality of output and outcome level monitor­ing and how it has contributed to the project achieve­ments? How have corresponding outputs delivered by UNDP affected the outcomes, and in what ways have they not been effective? How effectively were project evaluations used?
  • Evaluate UNDP’s knowledge management systems.
Efficiency:
  • To what extent have the programme outputs resulted from economic use of resources?
  • To what extent were quality outputs delivered on time? 
Sustainability:
  • What is the prospect of the sustainability of UNDP inter­ventions related to the outcome? Provide recom­mendations for ensuring sustainability.
  • Indicate if the scaling up/replication of the projects or service methodology elsewhere is feasible and make recommendations to ensure the same; assess how well UNDP replicates or extends projects including timings and change in project design etc.
  • An analysis of the underlying factors beyond UNDP’s control that influence the outcome; 
All UNDP evaluations need to assess the degree to which UNDP initiatives have supported or promoted gender equality, a rights based approach and human development.
 
Lessons learnt/ recommendations:
  • Formulate a set of specific, actionable recommendations for any re-orientation of the future program, identify the necessary ac­tions required to be undertaken, who should undertake those and what the deadline should be; in order to re­move or minimize the problems identified and to ensure efficient and effective implementation and to maximize impact. The improvement and suggestion will also have implications for partners therefore recommendations must be carefully and constructively phrased in a neutral manner. 
Methodology
 
The evaluation team will be responsible for developing the methodology for the outcome evaluation utilizing both qualitative and quantitative data collection methods as appropriate, in collaboration with UNDP Strategic Management Unit (SMU), which will be responsible for coordination and quality assurance of the evaluation. The proposed methodology will be shared with the Evaluation Steering Committee, including sampling methodologies, interview questions and questionnaires prepared, field plan and techniques to be used for evaluation. An evaluation approach is suggested below, however, the evaluation team is responsible for revising the approach as necessary. Any changes should be in-line with international criteria and professional norms and standards (as adopted by the UN Evaluation Group). They must be also agreed upon by UNDP before being applied by the evaluation team.
 
Deliverables
  • Inception report (Please see Annex D for Table of Contents), including outcome model (Annex E) and evaluation matrix (Annex F). The purpose of the inception report is to provide an opportunity to clarify expectations, verify and share the same understanding about the evaluation and clarify any misunderstanding at the outset, including the scope and the methodologies of the evaluation.
  • Draft evaluation report as per the template (Annex G). The Evaluation Steering Committee and UNDP country and regional office will review the draft evaluation report to ensure that the evaluation meets the required quality criteria.
  • Debriefing session on the draft evaluation report by the evaluation team.
  • Final evaluation report as per the template (Annex G). If any discrepancies have emerged between the findings of the evaluation team and the Evaluation Steering Committee, these should be explained in an annex attached to the final report.
  • Power point presentation and evaluation brief for dissemination to the stakeholders
    For further guidance on the outcome evaluation, please refer to ‘Handbook on Planning, Monitoring and Evaluating for Development Results’ and ‘Outcome Level Evaluation Guide’ on http://web.undp.org/evaluation/methodologies.htm

Compétences

  • Knowledge of the UNDP Monitoring and Evaluation Policy;
  • Demonstrable analytical skills;
  • Good understanding of the national context.

Qualifications et expériences requises

Education:
  • At least Masters degree (preferably in Economic Development or related fields);
Experience:
  • Experience in conducting outcome evaluations in past five years in similar positions;
  • Experience in Results Based Management;
  • Work experience in poverty issues and MDG analysis for at least ten years;
  • Experience with multilateral or bilateral supported capacity development projects;
  • Evaluation experiences within United Nations system will be considered an asset;

Language Requirements:
  • Excellent English communication skills (oral and written).

For detailed TOR please visit our website http://undp.org.pk/bids-and-quotations/