National Consultant (support officer) – Final Evaluation of the Police Reform Programme


Location : Dhaka, BANGLADESH
Application Deadline :22-Jul-15 (Midnight New York, USA)
Additional Category :Democratic Governance and Peacebuilding
Type of Contract :Individual Contract
Post Level :National Consultant
Languages Required :
English  
Starting Date :
(date when the selected candidate is expected to start)
16-Aug-2015
Duration of Initial Contract :A total of 30 working days over a period of 3 months (some of these days could be home based

Background

Bangladesh is a developing nation and a fledgling democracy. Steady economic growth since the early 1990s has resulted in rapid gains in Human Development. Despite impressive achievements in a variety of fields, Bangladesh suffers from weak governance, poverty and limited government capacity to deliver basic services. For example, access to justice, respect for the rule of law and knowledge of human rights are generally acknowledged as inadequate. The 2008 Poverty Reduction Strategy paper acknowledged that the vulnerable, particularly women and children, struggle to access justice from the police and the formal and informal justice sector.

Law and order, crime and corruption remain serious problems adversely affecting individual safety, national security and economic growth. There is broad acknowledgment that the justice sector needs to be strengthened.  Overall, crime remains underreported and inadequately investigated by the police, the court system is slow and prisons are overcrowded.

Thus, an accountable, transparent and efficient police service in Bangladesh is essential for the safety and well-being of all citizens, national stability and longer-term growth and development, particularly the creation of a secure environment which is conducive to consumer and investor confidence.

Within this context the Police Reform Programme (PRP) Phase I was launched in 2005 under joint collaboration of the UK Department for International Development (DFID), European Commission, UNDP and the Government of Bangladesh (GoB).  Phase I of the PRP concluded in September 2009 and established the foundation for police reform initiatives by supporting the introduction of Model Thanas, a Victim Support Centre and a community policing philosophy across the country.

PRP Phase II commenced in October 2009 and is supported by the Government of Bangladesh, UNDP and DFID and will conclude on 31 December 2015.  The PRP’s development goal is a safer, more secure and stable Bangladesh, where the human rights of citizens, particularly the vulnerable and marginalized, are promoted and protected to accelerate progress on the MDGs, economic growth and social justice. The programme’s purpose is to improve safety, access to justice and human rights for all citizens, particularly disadvantaged and vulnerable groups.  The targeted beneficiaries of Phase II are the Bangladesh people, and in particular the Bangladesh Police, who will benefit from increased capacity, job satisfaction, improved morale, image and social standing.

The Phase II of PRP is composed of six outcome areas:

  • Strategic Direction and Organizational Reform
  • Human Resource Management and Training
  • Investigation, Operations and Prosecution
  • Crime Prevention and Community Policing
  • Promoting Gender Sensitive Policing
  • Information, Communications and Technology

PRP Phase II was designed in the pre-business case era and therefore did not have value for money (VfM) indicators and measures incorporated at commencement.  A ‘light-touch’ VfM assessment was conducted for PRP in 2015 and a copy of this report can be shared with the successful candidate(s).  Furthermore, as a consequence of being designed in 2008, there was no contemporary theory of change (ToC) process introduced at the beginning of PRP but an implied ToC can be derived from the project’s logframe and documents.

Further detail including objectives, indicators and expected key outputs and outcomes can be found in the project’s Results Framework which will be provided to the consultancy.  In addition, project related information is also available online at: www.prp.org.bd

In accordance with UNDP policy, a final (terminal) evaluation on PRP Phase II will be undertaken in the second half of 2015, to be completed before project closure on 31 December 2015. This terminal evaluation will be supplemented by a focused impact assessment in order to better understand the causal links between some of the better performing outputs and their respective outcome areas. To ensure value for money, avoid duplication of efforts, and maximise complementarity the two tasks will be undertaken as one evaluation by the same evaluation team.


Duties and Responsibilities

Objectives: The purpose of this final evaluation is to independently assess the extent that the Police Reform Programme (Phase II) contributed to outcomes as defined in the PRP Project Document and supporting documents. The evaluation will be considered by UNDP, DFID (the major Donor), the Government of Bangladesh and the Bangladesh Police and may be used to identify key areas for possible post-2015 support to the Bangladesh Police.

Scope of work and expected outputs / deliverables:

Evaluation scope and objectives

This final evaluation will consist of two components: the final evaluation that covers all of the programme and analyses achievements and what worked and what did not work; and the impact assessment that looks more in depth at certain identified key focus areas to assess their contribution to the outcomes.

 

The output of this consultancy will be a final evaluation report that includes a rigorous impact assessment.  PRP has already undertaken a range of quantitative assessments involving various public perception surveys so a greater focus of the impact assessment should be on qualitative assessments.  Please see the Annex for a list of surveys facilitated by PRP and these surveys and their data tables will be made available to the evaluators at the commencement of the contract.

The evaluation team has primary responsibility for the preparation of an objective and high-quality evaluation report. The team will meet with key national and international stakeholders and at a minimum including representatives from the: Ministry for Home Affairs; Bangladesh Police; national justice experts; Victim Support Centre personnel; and community beneficiaries. The team will also meet with donor partners (DFID), development partners and other UNDP projects operating in the criminal justice sector. The evaluation will predominately be conducted in Dhaka, however, field missions will also be undertaken.

The evaluation activities shall be based, at a minimum, on UNDP evaluation principles, norms and standards that are outlined in the UNDP Handbook on Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation (2010), the addendum to that Handbook Updated Guidance on Evaluation (2011) and Outcome Level Evaluation: a companion guide to the handbook on planning monitoring and evaluating for development results for programme units and evaluators (2011).  In addition to UNDP’s evaluation principles contained in the UNDP Handbook on Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation, the team should also consider the OECD DAC criteria for evaluating development assistance.

Suggested Evaluation Areas for the Final Evaluation

Effectiveness: what extent did the Police Reform Programme attain its objectives.  In evaluating the effectiveness of the project it is useful to consider:

  • To what extent were the objectives achieved?
  • What were the major factors influencing the achievement or non-achievement of the objectives?
  • Has PRP successfully leveraged its partnerships with: 1) government agencies; 2) civil society, including victim support services; 3) relevant UNDP projects; 4) DFID Security and Justice Program and 5) other development projects in the sector?

Relevance: what extent was PRP suited to the priorities and policies of the target group, recipient and donor. In evaluating the relevance of a project, it is useful to consider:

  • To what extent the objectives are still valid?
  • Were the outputs and activities consistent with the overall goal and the attainment of its objectives?
  • Were the activities and outputs of the programme consistent with the intended impact and effects?

Efficiency: is measuring the outputs, qualitative and quantitative, in relation to the inputs.  When evaluating the efficiency of a project, it is useful to consider:

  • Were activities cost-effective?
  • Were objectives achieved on-time?
  • How well has the project translated inputs into outputs?[1]

 

Impact:  The impact assessment should, inter alia, assess the following issues:

What are the positive and negative changes produced by PRP’s interventions (direct and indirect)? When evaluating impact it is useful to consider:

  • What has happened as a result of the project?
  • What real difference has the activity made to beneficiaries?
  • What is the impact from a gender perspective?
  • How many people have been affected?
  • Have outputs been achieved? And if so, to what extent have outcomes been achieved?

 

The six components of PRP are outlined in the section B above.  The impact assessment will involve a rigorous assessment of the key focus areas under those components and may include specific impact assessments of the PRP support provided to:The strategic planning process of the Bangladesh Police;

  • Strengthening awareness on human rights responsibilities by police;
  • Developing a framework for sustainable development of police training structures;
  • Strengthening the investigation process, including improvements in the collection of evidence;
  • Targeted police stations;
  • Community Policing Forums;
  • Promoting gender sensitive policing strategies;
  • ICT governance; and
  • The use of ICT in police decision making processes.

 

The final decision on what key focus areas will be included in the impact assessment will be agreed upon between the evaluation team and PRP.  The suggested areas above are provided as guidance for candidates at this time.

Sustainability: is concerned with measuring whether the benefits of an activity are likely to continue after donor funding has been withdrawn. When evaluating the sustainability of a project, it is useful to consider:

  • To what extent did/will the benefits of the project continue after funding ceased?
  • To what extent has the development theory been accurate? Have other theories of change emerged?
  • What were the major factors which influenced the achievement or non-achievement of sustainability or non-sustainability of the project?
  • Should UNDP continue its work in this area?
  • Are risk management/mitigation processes adequate?
  • How should the development approach/theory of change adjust for future programming?

 

South-South cooperation:  How did PRP/UNDP contribute to the development of national capacities and the promotion of South-South cooperation?

 

Partnerships: play a key role in ensuring that primary stakeholders achieve outcomes.  How were partnerships relevant in the PRP context? How effective were they in contributing to the achievement of outcomes? How efficiently were they managed? and how sustainable are they?

 

Comparative strengths and weaknesses:  What are the comparative strengths and weaknesses of the PRP and UNDP support, including in relation to other programs/projects in the criminal justice sector? 

 

Lessons learned:  the evaluation will also document the innovations and lessons learned from the project. This includes analysis of what has worked and what has not as well as observations related to the project design, management and operation of the PRP.  Acknowledging that the PRP project design aimed to support the Bangladesh Police as a major beneficiary, this assessment shall also analyse the extent to which PRP was able to influence change in internal police oversight and the extent to which PRP could appropriately challenge the Bangladesh Police in terms of the reform process.   The assessment should also consider the content of relevant reviews that have suggested that any future support should consider a greater cross-disciplinary approach to tackling specific issues and to also utilise wider themes such as gender equality, labour rights, urban insecurity, better services to the community at local levels and better compliance with human rights and accountability.

Methodology for the Impact Assessment and the Final Evaluation Report

At a minimum, the final evaluation will involve the following:

 

Briefing of evaluators: by PRP/UNDP on the requirements of the final evaluation.

 

Document review: of project documents, quarterly reports, results reports, M&E framework, indicator progress sheet, AWP monitoring tool, DFID’s annual review reports, different workshop and training reports, PSC and PIC meeting minutes, conference report etc.

 

Evaluation Inception Report:  Shall be prepared by the evaluators before commencing the evaluation.  This report shall 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 will also include a proposed schedule of tasks, activities and deliverables, designating a team member with the lead responsibility for each task or product.

Stakeholder interviews: The evaluation team will conduct evaluation related interviews with project staff, community beneficiaries and senior officials from the Bangladesh Police, UNDP, and DFID.

Observation of PRP Initiatives: The evaluation team will identify and visit relevant PRP initiatives operating in the field. This may include, inter alia, observing the operations of Victim Support Centres, Community Policing Forums, the Forensic Training Institute and/or PRP-supported Thanas to gain a better understanding of these initiatives.

Debriefing Session: A draft report/summary of major findings shall be presented to PRP/UNDP in accordance with the timeframe included in section 6 below. A preliminary draft of the findings will be shared with UNDP prior to the debriefing session to ensure that the evaluation meets the required quality criteria.

 

Final Evaluation Report:  That incorporates comments from the debriefing session.

 

Evaluation Ethics

This evaluation will be conducted in accordance with the principles outlined in the UNEG Ethical Guidelines for Evaluation[2] and at a minimum shall include in the design and implementation of the evaluation procedures to safeguard the rights and confidentiality of information providers, for example: measures to ensure compliance with legal codes governing areas such as provisions to collect and report data, particularly permissions needed to interview or obtain information about children and young people; provisions to store and maintain security of collected information; and protocols to ensure anonymity and confidentiality.

Expected Outputs and Deliverables

The output of the contract will be an evaluation report that consists of two parts (impact assessment and the final evaluation report). The report will include an executive summary, which will use the project’s results framework as defined in the Project Document and that also considers any revisions of the framework. The body of the report shall provide a detailed assessment of the performance of the project, including lessons learned. A section that includes recommendations for future programming shall also be included.

 

Deliverables/Outputs

Estimated Duration to Complete in  working days

Payment Schedule

Review and Approvals Required

Review documents and consult with stakeholders

5

25%

PRP Project Manager

Submission of a detailed inception report that includes the overall evaluation plan, refinement of objectives, sampling design, questions and indicators.  The plan will also identify the team member with the lead responsibility for each task.

4

PRP Project Manager

Develop data collection instruments that detail the evaluators’ understanding of what is being evaluated and why, showing how each key evaluation area will be answered by way of: proposed methods, proposed sources of data and data collection procedures.

15

25%

PRP Project Manager

Conduct field visits

20

50%

N/A

Data analysis and impact assessment report writing

10

N/A

Draft report presentation to PRP/UNDP

2

PRP Project Manager

Revision of draft report and submission of final evaluation report

4

PRP Project Manager

 

Supervision and Performance Evaluation

The PRP Project Manager or a delegate will supervise the activities of the consultant on a regular basis and evaluate the performance and approve the deliverables/outputs. Payment for services of the consultant at each stage will be made upon satisfactory certification by the PRP Project Manager. Payment will be made through Electronic Fund Transfer (EFT). For each instalment the consultant has to submit a request letter duly signed and describing the agreed accomplishment.

Evaluation Team Composition

An International Consultant will be assigned as the Evaluation Team Leader for the impact assessment and the evaluation and be responsible for:

  • The overall management and coordination of the mission and team’s activities;
  • Review of relevant project documents;
  • Planning and design of the assessment and evaluation tools;
  • Ensuring that the mission objectives are completed and delivered within the given schedule;
  • Ensuring the independence, impartiality and accuracy of all conclusions, recommendations and/or findings reported;
  • The compiling and drafting of the final report and coordinating the presentation of its findings.

 Two national consultants (to be recruited by UNDP) will work with the International Consultant as team members: one being a national Subject Matter Expert with extensive understanding of policing in Bangladesh, engaged for the same or similar duration as the Team Leader; and a national Support Officer that is sufficiently experienced in criminal justice related matters and evaluation to provide high level support to the team throughout the final evaluation process.The Team Leader of this evaluation will determine how the 30 working days allocated to the Support Officer will be allocated.

 Implementation arrangements

PRP/UNDP will provide office space (no computer).  While travelling to the field to conduct assessment and evaluation activities, necessary vehicle support (flights if appropriate) would be provided by PRP.  Staff from PRP will also assist the evaluation team to arrange various meetings, consultations, and interviews and ensure access to key officials as mentioned in proposed methodologies.

In addition to this, UNDP will bear the cost of arranging consultation meetings and debriefing sessions and other events as required and agreed between PRP and the Evaluation Team Leader.

Duty Station

The evaluation will predominately be conducted in Dhaka, however, field missions will also be undertaken to selected locations outside of Dhaka. While travelling to the field to conduct assessment and evaluation activities, necessary vehicle support (flights if appropriate) would be provided by PRP.  Staff from PRP will also assist the evaluation team to arrange various meetings, consultations, and interviews and ensure access to key officials as mentioned in proposed methodologies.

In addition to this, UNDP will bear the cost of arranging consultation meetings and debriefing sessions and other events as required and agreed between PRP and the Evaluation Team Leader.

Timeframe and deadlines: The total number of working days for the National Consultant (Support Officer) of the impact assessment and evaluation team will be 30 working days (some working days possibly home based) over a maximum period of three months.  The International Consultant in his/her capacity as the Team Leader will determine how the 30 days allocated to the Support Officer will be best used to achieve the deliverables associated with the Impact Assessment and the Final Evaluation.

Payment Installment:

  • 25% upon receiving and acceptance of the inception report;
  • 25% upon receipt and acceptance of the data collection instruments; and
  • 50% upon receipt and acceptance of the final evaluation report.

 [1]DFID’s 3Es Framework and Value for Money Policy Note, 2011 https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/67479/DFID-approach-value-money.pdf

[2]Ethical Guidelines for Evaluation, June 2008. Available at http://www.uneval.org/earch/index.jsp?q=ethical+guidelines


Competencies

Corporate competencies:

  • ? Demonstrates commitment to UNDP’s mission, vision and values;
  • ? Displays cultural, gender, religion, race, nationality and age sensitivity and adaptability;
  • ? Highest standards of integrity, discretion and loyalty.

Functional competencies:

  • Independent and flexible;
  • Ability to work under pressure in a challenging and complex environment;
  • Excellent communication skills;
  • Creative and result-oriented; and
  • Client-oriented

Other requirements:

  • Demonstrated fluency in written and spoken English.  Excellent oral and written communication skills are a requirement;
  • Strong analytical and time management skills.


Required Skills and Experience

Academic Qualifications: A Bachelor’s degree in law, criminology, social sciences, management or in a relevant field of study

 Experience:

  • At least 5 years of professional experience working in democratic governance, rule of law or the criminal justice sector in Bangladesh;
  • Experience in supporting the organisation, facilitation and recording of stakeholder consultations;
  • Experience in supporting the monitoring and/or evaluation of criminal justice related initiatives;
  • Previous experience working with UNDP and knowledge of UNDP’s approach to planning, monitoring and evaluation is preferred.

 Language requirements:

Fluency in written and spoken English is mandatory.

Evaluation of the Candidates:

Individual consultants will be evaluated based on the following methodology:

 Cumulative analysis:

 The candidates will be evaluated through Cumulative Analysis method. When using the weighted scoring method, the award of the contract will 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.

Only candidates obtaining a minimum of 49 points in the technical evaluation out of 70 would be considered for Financial Evaluation.

Technical Evaluation Criteria (Total 70 marks)  

  • Experience in supporting the organisation, facilitation and recording of stakeholder consultations – 25 marks
  • Experience in supporting the monitoring and/or evaluation of criminal justice related initiatives - 25 marks
  • Previous experience working with UNDP and knowledge of UNDP’s approach to planning, monitoring and evaluation - 20 marks

Financial Evaluation (Total 30 marks)

All technical qualified proposals will be scored out 30 based on the formula provided below. The

maximum points (30) will be assigned to the lowest financial proposal. All other proposals received

points according to the following formula:

p = y (µ/z)

where:

  • p = points for the financial proposal being evaluated;
  • y = maximum number of points for the financial proposal;
  • µ = price of the lowest priced proposal;
  • z = price of the proposal being evaluated.

Documents to be included when submitting the proposal:

Interested individual consultants must submit the following documents/information to demonstrate their qualifications:

  • Letter of Confirmation of Interest and Availability and Financial proposal using the template provided in below link:

http://www.bd.undp.org/content/dam/bangladesh/docs/Jobs/Interest%20and%20Submission%20of%20Financial%20Proposal-Template%20for%20Confirmation.docx 

  • Personal CV or P11, indicating all past experience from similar projects, as well as the contact details (email and telephone number) of the Candidate and at least three (3) professional references.
  • Technical proposal, including a) a brief description of why the individual considers him/herself as the most suitable for the assignment; and b) a methodology, on how they will approach and complete the assignment.

Note:

(i) Financial Proposal needs to submitted along with other documents

(ii) Please upload all as one document.

Annexes :

 Annex I:  Suggested final report structure

Annex 7 of the PME Handbook provides an annotated outline for evaluation reports (additional guidance is also available in UNEG’s Quality Checklist for Evaluation Reports)[1]  The PRP/UNDP and the appointed Team Leader of the Final Evaluation will decide on the most appropriate way in which to structure and present the final evaluation report. The report structure should be specified in the inception report. The following report structure is being proposed at this time

Indicative Sections

Description and comments

Title and opening pages

 

Table of contents

 

List of acronyms and abbreviations

 

Executive summary

This should be an extremely short chapter, highlighting the evaluation mandate, approach, key findings, conclusions and recommendations. Often, readers will only look at the executive summary. It should be prepared after the main text has been reviewed and agreed, and should not be circulated with draft reports.

 

Chapter 1: Introduction

Introduce the rationale for the evaluation, including mandate, purpose and objectives, outline the main evaluation issues including the expected contribution at the outcome level, address evaluability and describe the methodology to be used. Refer to the outcome model and evaluation matrix, to be attached as annexes.

 

Chapter 2: The development

challenge

 

In addition to providing a general overview of historical trends and development challenges, specifically address the evaluation theme. Explain how the theme is addressed by government(s), and how it is reflected in national policies and strategies.  Also provide information on the activities of other development partners in the area.

 

Chapter 3: UNDP response

and challenges

 

Against the background of Chapter 2, explain what UNDP has done in this area (purely descriptive, not analytical). Provide the overarching outcome model, specifying the results frameworks for the programme, programme area or projects (if available), as well descriptions of some of the main UNDP activities, especially if they are going to be assessed later.

 

Chapter 4: Contribution to

results

 

Against the background of Chapters 2-3, analyse findings without repeating information already provided. Also, minimize the need to mention additional factual information regarding projects and programmes (these should be described in Chapter 3).  Focus on providing and analysing evidence relating to the evaluation criteria.  Preferably, structure the analysis on the basis of the main evaluation criteria:

  • Relevance (of UNDP’s involvement and its approach)
  • Effectiveness (in contributing to the achievement of outcomes). Pay particular attention to this criterion, demonstrating how UNDP initiatives have, or have not, contributed to the achievement of outcomes.
  • Efficiency (in delivering outputs)
  • Impact (with a focus on agreed key focus areas)
  • Sustainability (of the outcomes)
  • Lessons Learned (with a focus in issues outlined in the TORs)

In addressing the evaluation criteria, the narrative should respond to the corresponding questions identified in the evaluation matrix and provide a summary analysis of the findings. Partnerships play a key role in ensuring that primary stakeholders achieve outcomes. As such, all evaluation criteria should cover relevant aspects of partnership – i.e., how were they relevant; how effective were they in contributing to the achievement of outcomes; how efficiently were they managed; and how sustainable are they?  Where appropriate, discuss cross-cutting themes separately using the main evaluation criteria.  Do not allow the discussion to drift into conclusions and recommendations.

Chapter 5: Conclusions

and  recommendations

 

Conclusions are judgements based on evidence provided in Chapter 4. They are pitched at a higher level and are informed by an overall, comparative understanding of all relevant issues, options and opportunities.  Do not provide new evidence or repeat evidence contained in earlier chapters.  Recommendations should be derived from the evidence contained in Chapter 4. They may also, but need not necessarily, relate to conclusions. In line with the nature of the evaluation, some recommendations may be more strategic in nature while others may be more action-oriented. Recommendations should be important and succinct.  Typically, do not provide more than five to ten.

 

Annexes

 

N

Annex II:              Some of the key documents to be consulted

A list of some of the important documents and webpages that the evaluators should read at the outset of the evaluation and before finalizing the evaluation design and the inception report are included below:

 

SL

Title of the Studies

Objectives

Status

1

Survey on Police Investigation Practices

Assessment of investigative practices to determine timelines, processes, supervision, interaction with prosecutors and response to crime.

Completed

2

Public Opinion Survey on  Personal Security and Police Performance 2014

Assessment of public perception of law and order situation, crime incidence, personal security and police performance.

Completed

3

Public Opinion Survey on  Personal Security and Police Performance 2015

Assessment of public perception of law and order situation, crime incidence, personal security and police performance.

Completed

4

Rapid Assessment on Use of ICT 2015

Assessment of changes in the take up of ICT in supporting administrative and policing functions in police; accessibility and usefulness of different ICT systems; benefits derived from the use of ICT within police.

Completed

5

Rapid Assessment on Human Rights Initiatives (Phone Survey) 2015

Measuring the impact of the human rights training and materials.

Completed

6

Rapid Assessment on Impact of Community Policing Forum and Police Support 2015 (Phone survey)

Measuring the effectiveness of police-community engagement through Community Policing Forums, including police involvement and follow-up on identified issues.

Completed

7

Public and Police Opinion Survey on  Personal Security and Police Performance 2015

Assessment of public and police perception of law and order situation, crime incidence, personal security and police performance.

Planned

8

Impact Assessment of Major PRP Outputs

Assessment of impacts generated by selected PRP outputs in respect of increased participation, policing, community engagement, overall efficiency and effectiveness.

Planned

9

Terminal Evaluation 2015

Overall assessment of the project performance against the objectives and deliverables set out in the project document.

Planned

10

Multiple knowledge products such as manuals and guidelines

Enhancement of policing processes in line with the identified good practice:

  • Human Rights Training Handbook
  • Bangladesh Police Welfare Manual
  • Interview and Interrogation Manual
  • Crime Scene Management  Manual

Completed

[1]See www.uneval.org/papersandpubs/documentdetail.jsp?doc_id=607


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.


If you are experiencing difficulties with online job applications, please contact erecruit.helpdesk@undp.org.

© 2016 United Nations Development Programme