UNDP Jobs - 48786- International Consultant for Mid-term Review of UN

International Consultant for Mid-term Review of UNDP’s global project “Anti-Corruption for Development Effectiveness: Strengthening Anti-Corruption Systems, Institutions and Mechanisms for MDG Acceleration and Human Development

Location :

Home-Based

Type of Contract :

Individual Contract

Starting Date :

01-Sep-2014

Application Deadline :

27-Aug-14 (Midnight New York, USA)

Post Level :

International Consultant

Duration of Initial Contract :

60 Days

Languages Required :

English

Expected Duration of Assignment :

60 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

Anti-corruption has recently been one of the fastest growing policy and programming service areas in the UNDP and worldwide as a result of tremendous movement on the discourse on anti-corruption. The transparency and access to information movements have increased demand by citizens for greater transparency and accountability. The advent of the United Nations Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC) and its near universal ratification (171 state parties as of 17 July 2014) positively added to the global anti-corruption movement. There is increasing evidence that corruption hurts the poor disproportionately and hinders efforts to achieve the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and promote sustainable human development, whereas enhanced transparency, accountability, and anti-corruption do have a ‘development dividend’.

Thus, as reflected in UNDP Strategic Plan (2014-2017) and the ongoing discussion on the post-2015 development agenda, there is emerging consensus among governments, donors, civil society organizations, the private sector and the development community that corruption is a major bottleneck to development.

With this background, anti-corruption programming is becoming one of the key priorities in fostering democratic governance in UNDP. For example, UNDP’s Result-Oriented Annual Report (ROAR) shows that with support from the global and regional programmes, UNDP Country Offices (COs) more than 82 UNDP Country Offices provided anti-corruption support to governments to integrate transparency, accountability and anti-corruption components in various national development processes.

With this background and in order to respond to the growing demand for technical assistance on anti-corruption, UNDP signed a cost-sharing agreement of USD 10.6 million for 2012-2015 with the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT and previously known as AusAID) in 2012 to implement UNDP’s global project titled “Anti-Corruption for Development Effectiveness: Strengthening Anti-Corruption Systems, Institutions and Mechanisms for MDG Acceleration and Human Development”. This four year project was an integral part of the UNDP Global Programme on Anti-Corruption for Development Effectiveness (PACDE) (2008-2013), which, in 2014, has been succeeded by the UNDP’s Global Anti-corruption Initiative (GAIN) (2014-2017).

The objective of the project under review and supported by DFTA is to strengthen national capacities to: a) To Accelerate MDG achievement and reduce poverty through addressing corruption bottlenecks; b) To mainstream UNCAC and anti-corruption into national development processes; and c) Strengthen the capacity of anti-corruption agencies (ACAs).

The project primarily focuses on four regions in which UNDP operates: Asia, Africa, Arab States and Latin America and the Caribbean with a few activities in Eastern Europe and the CIS region.

This global project was a result of tri-partite consultations and discussion between UNDP, UNODC and DFAT to have a long-term and sustainable partnership on anti-corruption with a multi-year result framework that builds on UNDP and UNODC’s comparative advantages and complementarities in the area of the fight against corruption. The main purpose of this arrangement was to promote “Delivering as One UN”, enhance consistency, coherence and quality in the delivery of technical assistance in support of UNCAC and avoid duplication of efforts in the areas of governance and anti-corruption between UNDP and UNODC.

The agreement also built on a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU), which was signed between UNDP and UNODC on 15 December 2008. The MoU recognizes that the two organizations share common goals related to the delivery of technical assistance to countries in the areas of governance and anti-corruption. UNODC and UNDP have successfully collaborated and implemented joint efforts at the global, regional and country levels with UNODC’s lead role on various inter-governmental processes, including the UNCAC self-assessment and UNCAC review mechanism, and UNDP’s focus on promoting UNCAC review process as an entry point to broader reform and integrating anti-corruption norms and standards in national development processes.

As part of this agreement, DFAT also supports UNODC’s global project as well as a joint UNDP-UNODC project for the Pacific region. The oversight mechanisms of these three projects (UNDP and UNODC) are ensured by a Project Steering Committee integrated by representatives of UNODC, UNDP and DFAT. The Steering Committee reviews and discusses progress, and provides overall policy and strategic guidance on the annual work plan and project implementation. .

Under the “Reporting, Monitoring and Evaluation” requirement, the global project supported by DFAT envisages conducting of a mid-term review of the project and thus, UNDP is looking for an international consultant to conduct the mid-review and provide recommendations to improve the quality and delivery of the project.

Moreover, this reviewing is taking place at a time when the organizational changes have occurred both in DFAT and UNDP. In 2013, the Australia’s International Development Agency (AusAID) was merged with DFAT to better align Australia’s aid and foreign policy. Similarly, in 2014, UNDP embarked into its restructuring to make the organization more effective in delivering on its new strategic plan. Thus, this review will take into account these changes and their impact on the project delivery as well its sustainability.

Duties and Responsibilities

The objectives of this mid-term review are threefold:

To assess progress of the project against the result framework (outcomes and outputs) and provide recommendations for strengthening its performance and impact;
To evaluate the implementation of projects and its existing capacity according to: a) the donor’s quality criteria and expectations; and b) taking into consideration the restructuring processes that have occurred both in DFAT and UNDP during the implementation of the project;
To assess the project’s alignment with and contribution to the UNDP Global Programme on Anti-corruption and UNDP’s Strategic Plan, “Changing with the World” (2014-2017) , and provide forward looking recommendations based on lessons learned and good practices;

Issues to be addressed:

Outcomes and impact:

The consultant will review the mid-term results achieved by the project against its objectives and result indicators by answering the following key questions:

What are the key mid-term results and significant progress achieved against the results and resource framework of the project?

What real difference have the activities made so far to the beneficiaries? Please also take into account any gender dimension?

What are the main lessons learned/recommendations - what has worked well and what hasn’t and what need to be done?

Client’s expectations on quality implementation/ performance

The review will take into account DFAT’s Quality in Implementation (QAI) criteria such as relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, monitoring and evaluation, sustainability, gender equality, and risk management to review the results and progress of the project vis-à-vis DFAT and UNDP’s restructuring. More, the review will try to answer the following questions:

Is the project delivery according to the QAI criteria of DFAT? How have the implementation of project been affected by the restructuring in DFAT and UNDP, particularly looking at resource availability, existing capacity and project delivery?

What are the recommendations to ensure the sustainability of this project and hence that of the Global Anti-corruption Initiative (GAIN?

Projects contribution to the UNDP’s Global Anti-corruption Initiative (GAIN) (2014-2017) and UNDP’s Strategic Plan (2014-2017).

This review will also look at the alignment with and contribute to the UNDP’s Global Anti-corruption Initiative (GAIN) (2014-2017) and UNDP Strategic Plan (2014-2017). More specifically, the review will try to answer the following key questions:

How does this project relate to the UNDP’s Global Anti-corruption Initiative (GAIN)?

How well the project contributes to the UNDP’s new strategic plan in terms of its policy and programme support on anti-corruption at global, regional and national levels?

What are the lessons learnt and areas for improving results, impact, approaches and processes, particularly addressing the integration of anti-corruption in new development challenges (such as the post-2015 framework)?

What the recommendations to improve the delivery and results of this project to contribute to the UNDP strategic plan (e.g., improving policy and programme delivery architecture and processes, resource mobilization, strengthening synergies with UNDP’s governance priorities, etc.)?

Methodology

Based on UNDP’s polices and guidelines on M&E and the standard global practices on reviewing projects/programmes and with support from the GAIN team, the consultant will discuss and design the methodology to conduct the mid-term review. The review process will entail a combination of desk review of all relevant project documents and knowledge products; interviews (Via Skype or phone) with UNDP key staff, senior management, regional focal points on anti-corruption, selected Country Offices, partner organizations, civil society organizations or beneficiaries of pilot projects; and a quick online survey to review UNDP’s policy and programme support through this project around the world

Deliverable and reporting

The consultant will be responsible for the following derivables:

Mid-term inception report—an inception report should be prepared by the consultant before going into the full-fledged data collection exercise. It should detail the evaluators’ understanding of what is being evaluated and why, showing how each evaluation question will be answered by way of: proposed methods, proposed sources of data and data collection procedures. The inception report should include a proposed schedule of tasks, activities and deliverables.

First draft evaluation report which should be reviewed and approved by GAIN team members and interviewed staff.

Final evaluation report, incorporating the comments and inputs made to previous drafts.

The consultant will work closely with the GAIN programme team and under direct supervision of the GAIN Programme Manager. The GAIN team will provide all the necessary documents and facilitate the work of the consultant.

Time frame

The consultancy will start in August 2014 and the final product should be delivered by the end of September 2014.

Payments

The consultant(s) will be paid in three tranches upon submission of the agreed deliverables

Upon submission and approval of the inception report (20% of the agreed fee);
Upon satisfactory submission and approval of first draft (30% of the agreed fee);
Upon satisfactory submission and approval of the final draft. (50% of the agreed fee).

Terms and Conditions

Details about terms and conditions for this consultancy can be found at:

http://www.undp.org/procurement/documents/UNDP_GCC_IC_Final_English.pdf.

Competencies

Functional competencies:

Excellent analytical skills;
Ability to work independently;
Ability to perform tasks in a timely manner and produce quality final product.

Corporate Competencies:

Demonstrates integrity by modeling the UN’s values and ethical standards;
Promotes the vision, mission, and strategic goals of UNDP;
Displays cultural, gender, religion, race, nationality and age sensitivity and adaptability;
Treats all people fairly without favoritism;
Fulfills all obligations to gender sensitivity.

Required Skills and Experience

Education:

Master’s degree in public administration, law, political science, finance, economics, international relations, development studies, or related field.

Experience:

At least 10 years of working experience in programme management, monitoring and evaluation or design of anti-corruption measures;
A prior record of producing research studies (preferably in anti-corruption).

Language Requirements:

Strong writing skills in English.

Interested institutions/individual consultants must submit the following documents/information to demonstrate their qualifications to Diana Torres at diana.torres@undp.org

Proposal:

Explaining why they are the most suitable for the work

Provide a brief methodology on how they will approach and conduct the work (if applicable).

Financial proposal
The financial proposal shall specify a total lump sum amount, and payment terms around specific and measurable (qualitative and quantitative) deliverables (i.e. whether payments fall in installments or upon completion of the entire contract). Payments are based upon output, i.e. upon delivery of the services specified in the TOR. In order to assist the requesting unit in the comparison of financial proposals, the financial proposal will include a breakdown of this lump sum amount (including travel, per diems, and number of anticipated working days).

Travel: All envisaged travel costs must be included in the financial proposal. This includes all travel to conduct interviews in HQ, NY. In general, UNDP should not accept travel costs exceeding those of an economy class ticket. Should the IC wish to travel on a higher class he/she should do so using their own resources.

Personal CV of individual(s) including past experience in similar projects and at least 3 references.