Background
Project Description/Background:
Bangladesh’s formal justice system remains relatively inaccessible for the vast majority of the public. Vulnerable groups, including women and children, ethnic minorities, the poor, and people with disabilities face particular difficulty in accessing timely and affordable justice. Large case backlogs, estimated at nearly 3.1 million cases, are slowly overwhelming the court administration and undermining access to justice. There is increasing acknowledgement that these are critical governance, access to justice and rule of law issues that need to be addressed.
The Justice Sector Facility (JSF) commenced in July 2012 and coming to an end in December 2016. It is implemented by the Law and Justice Division of the Ministry of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs with the technical and financial support of United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), funded by the Department for International Development of the United Kingdom. The longer term aim of the project, is outlined in the United Nations Development Framework (UNDAF) as “strengthen the justice and human rights institutions to better serve and protect the rights of all citizens including women and vulnerable groups in Bangladesh”. The project is aligned with the UNDP’s strategic plan outcome-3: “countries have strengthened institutions to progressively deliver universal access to basic services”. The project’s overall objective is to improve justice sector outcomes through strengthened communication, coordination and cooperation between agencies. The expected outputs of the Facility are:
- Communication, coordination and co-operation between justice agencies enhanced in two district pilots through establishment of solutions for inter-agency case management;
- Selected agencies have improved strategic planning, monitoring and evaluation, delivery of government legal aid, and prosecution of cases; and
- Strengthened cross-sectoral dialogue and sector-wide coordination mechanisms established.
The direct beneficiaries of Justice Sector Facility are the key justice sector institutions of the Government of Bangladesh, including the Law and Justice Division of Ministry of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs, the Office of the Attorney General, the National Legal Aid Services Organization, the Judicial Administration Training Institute, the Bangladesh Judicial Service Commission, the Law Commission and the Bar Council which are supported to strengthen capacity in several fields, including research, planning, budgeting, monitoring and reporting. In addition, court users and the general public are also expected to benefit from JSF support through the work carried out in the pilot districts and the improved service delivery and quality of justice dispensation.
Duties and Responsibilities
Description of the Assignment
The assignment will provide an independent assessment on the level of achievement towards output and outcome of the Justice Sector Facility in accordance with relevance, efficiency, effectiveness, impact and sustainability and consolidate lessons learned and prepare a rationale and recommendations to proceed with further support for improved communication, coordination and cooperation across the justice sector for the improvement of mechanism for justice service delivery in Bangladesh. The evaluation shall be based on UNDP evaluation principles, norms and standards.
A two-member team comprising of a National and an International Consultant will carry out the assignment under the supervision of Chief Technical Advisor/Project Manager of Justice Sector Facility.
Scope of Work
The evaluation team has primary responsibility for the preparation of an objective and high-quality evaluation report. The team should meet with key national and international stakeholders, including: the Ministry of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs, Supreme Court, National Legal Aid Services Organization, Bangladesh Bar Council, Bangladesh Judicial Service Commission, Bangladesh Law commission, Judicial Administration Training Institute, Bangladesh Police, Attorney General’s Office, members of the Steering Committee, Criminal Justice Coordination Committees. The team will also meet with donor partners (DFID), development partners and other UNDP projects operating in the justice sector. The evaluation will mostly be conducted in Dhaka. A visit to pilot districts will also be included.
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. The following areas and questions will need to be incorporated into the final report:
Relevance: the extent to which the aid activity is 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 relevant with the overall project structure.
Are the outputs and activities consistent with the overall goal and the attainment of its objectives?
Are the activities and outputs of the programme consistent with the intended impact and effects?
Efficiency: measures the outputs, qualitative and quantitative, in relation to the inputs. It is an economic terms which signifies that the aid uses the least costly resources possible in order to achieve the desired results (value for money). 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]
Effectiveness: a measure of the extent to which an aid activity attains its objectives. In evaluating the effectiveness of the project it is useful to consider:
To what extent were the objectives achieved/are likely to be achieved?
What were the major factors influencing the achievement or non-achievement of the objectives?
Has JSF successfully leveraged its partnerships with: 1) government agencies; 2) civil society and access to justice NGOs; 3) UNDP access to justice projects; 4) DFID Security and Justice Programme and 5) other development projects in the sector (USAID etc.).
Impact: The positive and negative changes produced by a development intervention (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?
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 the benefits of the project continue after funding ceased?
To what extent has the theory of change 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?
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 design as well as management and operation of the Facility.
Methodology:
Data collection and analysis of the evaluation will be combined in the methodologies mentioned below, however, the consultant will propose any other modern method and technique for the evaluation in the inception report.
Documents review: The evaluation team will review project documents, quarterly reports, annual reports, results reports, M&E framework, DFID’s annual review reports, different workshops and training reports, PSC and PIC meeting minutes, conference report etc.
Stakeholder interview: The evaluation team will meet with project staff and senior officials of NLASO, AG Office, JATI, and JSC, Supreme Court and other development agencies working in justice sector. The team will also meet with the Secretary and senior officials of Law and Justice Division of the Ministry of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs, UNDP senior management and representative from DFID.
Observation of pilot district Intervention: The evaluation team will visit JSF pilot intervention. They will meet district judges, Chief Judicial Magistrates and other senior judges, police, prison, civil surgeons and legal aid officers to have an understanding about improved communication, coordination and cooperation (3Cs) between the justice institutions.
| Estimated Duration | Payment Schedule | Tentative date of Completion | Approvals required |
Submission of inception report containing evaluation design, methodology, evaluation questions and tools for data collection, reporting outline and work plan. | 4 days | 20% upon satisfactory receiving and acceptance of the report | By 2nd week of June 2016 | CTA/PM of JSF |
Conduction of evaluation data collection through documents review, stakeholders interview, direct observation and field visit Preparation and submission of draft evaluation report. | 16 days | 40% upon satisfactory receiving and acceptance of the report | By 2nd week of July 2016 | CTA/PM of JSF |
Submission and acceptance of final evaluation report including executive summary (not more than 25 pages) with the comment on draft report from the stakeholders. | 5 days | 40% upon satisfactory receiving and acceptance of the report | By 3rd week of July 2016 | CTA/PM of JSF |
The consultant should produce all deliverables by the dates mentioned against each expected output. UNDP JSF will take 2-7 working days to review the draft reports and share feedback with the consultant. Notably, liquidated damages for delay caused by the consultant shall be 0.1% of the price of the contract per each working day of delay but not exceeding 10% of the total value of the contract. UNDP JSF also preserves the right to terminate the contract for serious consequences or impact of any form of delay in the completion of work e.g. deferment of the succeeding phase to the following year, cancellation of the budget for the project and other potential losses to any party involved. In this case, payment will be admissible only for the amount of deliverables accepted by JSF UNDP.
Institutional Arrangement
The Chief Technical Advisor/Project Manager of the Justice Sector Facility will be the contract administrator for the assignment and will supervise the activities of the consultant, evaluate her/his performance and approve the deliverables.
During the contract period, the consultant shall meet the key stakeholders in Dhaka and JSF pilot districts. JSF UNDP will provide office space (no computer). While travelling to field within and outside Dhaka necessary vehicle support would be provided from the Project of UNDP. UNDP JSF team will assist to arrange various meetings, consultations, and interviews and ensure access to key officials as mentioned in proposed methodologies.
Notably, JSF UNDP will not provide vehicle support for pick and drop from residence to office and office to residence. Consultant has to be arranged personally by herself/himself.
Duration of the Work and Duty Station
The duration of the assignment will be 25 working days over a period of 02 months with the expected beginning on the date of 9th June 2016. This position is based in Dhaka, however, the consultant requires field visits to JSF pilot districts, outside Dhaka.
Final Products/Services
Inception report containing evaluation design, methodology, evaluation questions and tools for data collection, reporting outline and work plan.
Draft evaluation report with agreed reporting outline, soft copy
Final revaluation report with executive summary (not more than 25 pages), soft copy.
Individual consultants will be evaluated based on the following methodologies:
Evaluation
Cumulative analysis; When using this weighted scoring method, the award of the contract should be made to the individual consultant whose offer has been evaluated and determined as:
- Responsive/ compliant/ acceptable with reference to this ToR, and;
- Having received the highest score out of a pre-determined set of weighted technical and financial criteria specific to the solicitation, with the ratio set at 70: 30 respectively (this is to reflect the high level skills mix required).
Only individual obtaining a minimum of 70% (i.e. 49 points out of 70 points) in the technical analysis would be considered for financial appraisal.
Criteria | Weight | Max. Point |
|---|---|---|
Technical: | 70 |
|
Masters’ degree in Law, Development Studies, Public Administration, International Affairs or in any other relevant field of study |
| 20 |
Experience of designing, monitoring and evaluating any of democratic governance, rule of law and access to justice project |
| 20 |
Experience within any of the areas of democratic governance, rule of law and access to justice at the policy level |
| 20 |
Experience of evaluating UNDP’s project |
| 10 |
Financial proposal: | 30 | 30 |
Total | 100 | 100 |
Financial Evaluation: All technical qualified proposals will be scored against a maximum of 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
Recommended Presentation of Proposal
Interested individual consultants must submit the following documents/information to demonstrate their qualifications. Please group them into one (1) single PDF document as the application only allows to upload maximum one document:
Duly accomplished Letter of Confirmation of Interest and Availability using the template provided by UNDP in Annex II.
Personal CV and 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 brief description of why the individual considers him/herself as the most suitable for the assignment including methodology.
Financial proposal, including fees, travel cost, DSA, workshop arrangement like snacks, folders, papers and other relevant expenses): as per template provided in Annex II.
1) The financial proposal shall specify a total delivery amount (in USD or BDT) including consultancy fees and all associated costs) i.e. travel cost, subsistence per diems, printing costs, consultation workshop and interview costs and overhead recharges.
2) In order to assist UNDP in the comparison of financial proposals, the financial proposal will include a breakdown of this amount. This must at least specify: the daily rates and number of anticipated working days, any travel costs and overhead recharges. Payments will be based upon the deliverables specified in the ToR. The cost of preparing a proposal and of negotiating a contract, including any related travel, is not reimbursable as a direct cost of the assignment.
Applicants are requested to submit their financial proposal using the template from the below link;
Competencies
Competencies:
- Demonstrates commitment to UNDP’s mission, vision and values.
- Strong analytical and time management skills;
- Ability to work in a challenging and complex environment;
- Independent and flexible;
- Excellent communication skills;
- Creative and result-oriented; and
Leadership and Self-Management
- Focuses on results for the client
- Has demonstrable leadership skills;
- Demonstrates openness to change;
- Remains calm, in control and good humored even under pressure;
- Responds positively to feedback and differing points of view.
Required Skills and Experience
Education Qualification:
- Masters’ degree in Law, Development Studies, Public Administration, International Affairs or in any other relevant field of study;
Experience
- At least 8 years of professional experience working within any of the areas of democratic governance, rule of law and access to justice at the policy level;
- At least 5 years of practical experience in designing, monitoring and evaluating any of democratic governance, rule of law and access to justice project;
- Excellent oral communication and previous experience in producing high quality project evaluation report in English is required.
Additional qualification of the consultant:
- Prior experience working with and/or designing/evaluating a justice “sector-wide” programme is preferred;
- Previous experience working with UNDP and knowledge of UNDP’s approach to planning, monitoring and evaluation is preferred;
- Strong Knowledge in evaluation methodology is essential.