UNDP Jobs - 67585- National Consultant to Conduct Midterm Review for

National Consultant to Conduct Midterm Review for Addressing Barriers to Adoption of Improved Charcoal Technologies and Sustainable Land Management Practices Through Integrated Approach

Location :

Kampala, UGANDA

Type of Contract :

Individual Contract

Starting Date :

05-Sep-2016

Application Deadline :

05-Aug-16 (Midnight New York, USA)

Post Level :

National Consultant

Duration of Initial Contract :

25 working days

Languages Required :

English

Expected Duration of Assignment :

25 working 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

This is the Terms of Reference (ToR) for the UNDP-GEF Midterm Review (MTR) of the full -sized project titled “Addressing barriers to adoption of improved charcoal technologies and Sustainable land management practices through an integrated approach” implemented through the Ministry of Energy and Mineral Development (MEMD), National Forestry Authority (NFA) and four district Local Governments including Kiryandongo, Kiboga, Nakaseke and Mubende.. The project was signed in May 2014, though full implementation commenced in July 2014 and is currently in its second year of implementation. In line with the UNDP-GEF Guidance on MTRs, this ToR sets out the expectations and its process will follow the guidance outlined on http://web.undp.org/review/documents/guidance/GEF/mid-term/Guidance MidtermReview_EN_2014.pdf

Over 80% of the entire population in Uganda depend on biomass as the main source of energy for cooking. Charcoal is most preferred in most urban centres due to its higher energy density, easier storage and transportation. Recent estimates indicate that the demand for charcoal has been increasing steadily at an estimated 6% per annum.

The industry also faces challenges relating to inadequate mechanisms for regulation and conflicting policy provisions besides no designate policy for the country hence making it difficult for Local Governments to perform their roles. The industry also experiences challenges such as; poor production methods and lack of sustainable supplies, exuberated by low capacities of Local Governments to address the current management challenges within the industry including enforcement of regulations governing the production and utilization of biomass energy and the demand for commercialization of charcoal. Eventually, the growing demand for charcoal if not properly managed may translate into dis-incentives that may escalate the degradation of the charcoal sources (forests/woodlands).

Since July 2014, the Government of Uganda through MEMD with support from UNDP/GEF has implemented the Green Charcoal project supporting institutional and capacity development at the district level on both policy and policy adaptation/implementation, delved into transfer of technologies for efficient charcoal production and sustainable land management practices, and enhanced tree stocks with NFA.

Being half –way the project life, this MTR will help to document the progress made so far, recommend strategies that will enhance delivery of intended project results commensurate with the investments made. According to the GEF guidance notes, MTRs are a monitoring tool to assess project status and challenges, identify corrective actions to ensure that projects are on track to achieve planned outcomes. As such, MTRs are required for full-sized UNDP supported projects with GEF financing such as this one.

Objectives of the assignment

The MTR will review the project design and strategy, assess progress towards the achievement of the project objectives and outcomes as specified in the Project Document, assess early signs of project success, or failure including risks to sustainability. The goal will be to identify and recommend the changes necessary to set the project on-track to achieve its intended results.

Approach and Methodology

The MTR shall provide evidence based information that is credible, reliable and useful. The International Consultant will work with a counterpart National Consultant; the latter to support provide the local content while the former will be the lead Consultant to ensure the deliverables are realized. The MTR team will review all relevant sources of information including documents prepared during the preparation phase (i.e. PIF, UNDP Initiation Plan, UNDP Environmental & Social Safeguard Policy, the Project Document, project reports including Annual Project Review/PIRs, project budget revisions, lesson learned reports, national strategic and legal documents, and any other materials that the team considers useful for this evidence-based review). The MTR team will review the baseline GEF focal Area Tracking Tool (AMAT) submitted to the GEF at CEO endorsement, and the midterm GEF focal area Tracking Tool.

The MTR is expected to follow a collaborative and participatory approach ensuring close engagement with the Project Team, government counterparts (the GEF Operational Focal Point), the UNDP Country Office(s), UNDP-GEF Regional Technical Advisers, and other key stakeholders.

Engagement of stakeholders is vital to a successful MTR.Stakeholder involvement should include interviews with stakeholders who have project responsibilities, including but not limited to: executing agencies, senior officials and task team leaders, key experts and consultants in the subject area, Project Steering Committee, project stakeholders, academia, local government and CSOs, etc. Additionally, the MTR team is expected to conduct field missions to selected 4 districts (Kiryandongo, Kiboga, Mubende and Nakaseke) where the MTR team should be able to meet the project responsible parties and conduct site verification.

The final MTR report should describe the full MTR approach taken and the rationale for the approach making explicit the underlying assumptions, challenges, strengths and weaknesses about the methods and approach of the review.

Duties and Responsibilities

Scope of work and Deliverables

Scope

The MTR team will assess the following four categories of project progress;

Project Strategy

Project design:

Review the problem addressed by the project and the underlying assumptions. Review the effect of any incorrect assumptions or changes to the context to achieving the project results as outlined in the Project Document;
Review the relevance of the project strategy and assess whether it provides the most effective route towards expected/intended results. Were lessons from other relevant projects properly incorporated into the project design?
Review how the project addresses country priorities. Review country ownership. Was the project concept in line with the national sector development priorities and plans of the country (or of participating countries in the case of multi-country projects)?
Review decision-making processes: were perspectives of those who would be affected by project decisions, those who could affect the outcomes, and those who could contribute information or other resources to the process, taken into account during project design processes?
Review the extent to which relevant gender issues were raised in the project design. See Annex 9 of Guidance For Conducting Midterm Reviews of UNDP-Supported, GEF-Financed Projects for further guidelines;
If there are major areas of concern, recommend areas for improvement.

Results Framework/Log-frame:

Undertake a critical analysis of the project’s log-frame indicators and targets, assess how “SMART” the midterm and end-of-project targets are (Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Relevant, Time-bound), and suggest specific amendments/revisions to the targets and indicators as necessary;
Are the project’s objectives and outcomes or components clear, practical, and feasible within its time frame?
Examine if progress so far has led to, or could in the future catalyse beneficial development effects (i.e. income generation, gender equality and women’s empowerment, improved governance etc...) that should be included in the project results framework and monitored on an annual basis;
Ensure broader development and gender aspects of the project are being monitored effectively.? Develop and recommend SMART ‘development’ indicators, including sex-disaggregated indicators and indicators that capture development benefits.

Progress towards Results

Progress towards Outcomes Analysis:

Review the log-frame indicators against progress made towards the end-of-project targets using the Progress Towards Results Matrix and following the Guidance For Conducting Midterm Reviews of UNDP-Supported, GEF-Financed Projects; colour code progress in a “traffic light system” based on the level of progress achieved; assign a rating on progress for each outcome; make recommendations from the areas marked as “Not on target to be achieved.

In addition to the progress towards outcomes analysis:

Compare and analyse the GEF Tracking Tool at the Baseline with the one completed right before MTR;
Identify remaining barriers to achieving the project objective in the remainder of the project;
By reviewing the aspects of the project that have already been successful, identify ways in which the project can further expand these benefits.

Project Implementation and Adaptive Management

Review overall effectiveness of project management as outlined in the Project Document.? Have changes been made and are they effective?? Are responsibilities and reporting lines clear? Is decision-making transparent and undertaken in a timely manner?? Recommend areas for improvement;
Review the quality of execution of the Executing Agency/Implementing Partner(s) and recommend areas for improvement;
Review the quality of support provided by the GEF Partner Agency (UNDP) and recommend areas for improvement.

Work Planning:

Review any delays in project start-up and implementation, identify the causes and examine if they have been resolved;
Are work-planning processes results-based?? If not, suggest ways to re-orientate work planning to focus on results?
Examine the use of the project’s results framework/ log-frame as a management tool and review any changes made to it since project start.?

Finance and co-finance:

Consider the financial management of the project, with specific reference to the cost-effectiveness of interventions;
Review the changes to fund allocations as a result of budget revisions and assess the appropriateness and relevance of such revisions;
Does the project have the appropriate financial controls, including reporting and planning, that allow management to make informed decisions regarding the budget and allow for timely flow of funds?
Informed by the co-financing monitoring table to be filled out, provide commentary on co-financing: is co-financing being used strategically to help the objectives of the project? Is the Project Team meeting with all co-financing partners regularly in order to align financing priorities and annual work plans?

Project-level Monitoring and Review Systems:

Review the monitoring tools currently being used:? Do they provide the necessary information? Do they involve key partners? Are they aligned or mainstreamed with national systems?? Do they use existing information? Are they efficient? Are they cost-effective? Are additional tools required? How could they be made more participatory and inclusive?
Examine the financial management of the project monitoring and review budget.? Are sufficient resources being allocated to monitoring and review? Are these resources being allocated effectively?

Stakeholder Engagement:

Project management: Has the project developed and leveraged the necessary and appropriate partnerships with direct and tangential stakeholders?
Participation and country-driven processes: Do local and national government stakeholders support the objectives of the project?? Do they continue to have an active role in project decision-making that supports efficient and effective project implementation?
Participation and public awareness: To what extent has stakeholder involvement and public awareness contributed to the progress towards achievement of project objectives?

Reporting:

Assess how adaptive management changes have been reported by the project management and shared with the Project Board;
Assess how well the Project Team and partners undertake and fulfil GEF reporting requirements (i.e. how have they addressed poorly-rated PIRs, if applicable?)
Assess how lessons derived from the adaptive management process have been documented, shared with key partners and internalized by partners.

Communications:

Review internal project communication with stakeholders: Is communication regular and effective? Are there key stakeholders left out of communication? Are there feedback mechanisms when communication is received? Does this communication with stakeholders contribute to their awareness of project outcomes and activities and investment in the sustainability of project results?
Review external project communication: Are proper means of communication established or being established to express the project progress and intended impact to the public (is there a web presence, for example? Or did the project implement appropriate outreach and public awareness campaigns?)
For reporting purposes, write one half-page paragraph that summarizes the project’s progress towards results in terms of contribution to sustainable development benefits, as well as global environmental benefits.

Sustainability

Validate whether the risks identified in the Project Document, Annual Project Review/PIRs and the ATLAS Risk Management Module are the most important and whether the risk ratings applied are appropriate and up to date. If not, explain why;
In addition, assess the following risks to sustainability:

Financial risks to sustainability:

What is the likelihood of financial and economic resources not being available once the GEF assistance ends (consider potential resources can be from multiple sources, such as the public and private sectors, income generating activities, and other funding that will be adequate financial resources for sustaining project’s outcomes)?

Socio-economic risks to sustainability:

Are there any social or political risks that may jeopardize sustainability of project outcomes? What is the risk that the level of stakeholder ownership (including ownership by governments and other key stakeholders) will be insufficient to allow for the project outcomes/benefits to be sustained? Do the various key stakeholders see that it is in their interest that the project benefits continue to flow? Is there sufficient public / stakeholder awareness in support of the long term objectives of the project? Are lessons learned being documented by the Project Team on a continual basis and shared/ transferred to appropriate parties who could learn from the project and potentially replicate and/or scale it in the future?

Institutional Framework and Governance risks to sustainability:

Do the legal frameworks, policies, governance structures and processes pose risks that may jeopardize sustenance of project benefits? While assessing this parameter, also consider if the required systems/ mechanisms for accountability, transparency, and technical knowledge transfer are in place.

Environmental risks to sustainability:

Are there any environmental risks that may jeopardize sustenance of project outcomes?

Conclusions & Recommendations:

The MTR team will include a section of the report setting out the MTR’s evidence-based conclusions, in light of the findings. Recommendations should be succinct suggestions for critical intervention that are specific, measurable, achievable, and relevant. A recommendation table should be put in the report’s executive summary. See the Guidance For Conducting Midterm Reviews of UNDP-Supported, GEF-Financed Projects for guidance on a recommendation table.? The MTR team should make no more than 15 recommendations total.

Ratings:

The MTR team will include its ratings of the project’s results and brief descriptions of the associated achievements in a MTR Ratings & Achievement Summary Table in the Executive Summary of the MTR report. See Annex E for ratings scales. No rating on Project Strategy and no overall project rating is required.

Timeframe:

The total duration of the MTR will be approximately 25 working days over a time period of 5-6 weeks. A National Consultant will complement the Lead/International Consultant for a period of 15 working days over the 6 weeks period.

Deliverables:

Participate in preparation and ensuring timely submission of? inception report;
Supports data collection, analysis and presentation by MTR? Lead consultant, presents to UNDP internal Review Committee and, Project Coordinating Unit;
Supports filling of any gaps identified by review committees prior to final submission by MTR? lead consultant’s presentation to stakeholders including Project Board, Technical Committee and Responsible Parties ;
Participate in finalisation of report to be sent to the UNDP? for review by UNDP Regional Technical Advisor, GEF Operational Focal Point.

Institutional Arrangement:

The international consultant will work under the daily supervision of the Project Manager and the overall guidance of the Practice Specialist at UNDP Country Office. Overall, the Consultant will report to the UNDP Country Director, with regular working relationship with the Project Coordinator MEMD. The Lead Consultant will report to MEMD on technical obligations and to UNDP on all contractual obligations.

Logistics and Administration support:

The UNDP Uganda and MEMD through the Project Management Unit will make available all the transport and ensure that the consultant has access to resources, key partners and sites as planned. The Project Management Unit will facilitate the MTR team to meet with interact with the stakeholders at the national level and in the Districts/communities.

UNDP will support the Consultant in the following areas:

Access to required information (copy of project document, Annual Work plans, Progress reports and other project related reports).
Access to UNDP Office and its infrastructure (e.g. conference room and internet while at UNDP);
Support and assistance to gain access to relevant stakeholders for consultations;

UNDP Kampala and the Project Office will coordinate the study and keep abreast of the Mission’s activities during the Consultant’s stay.

Competencies

Competence in adaptive management, as applied to climate change adaptation;
Demonstrated understanding of issues related to gender and climate change adaptation; experience in gender sensitive review and analysis;
Excellent communication skills;
Demonstrable analytical skills;
Project review/review experiences within United Nations system will be considered an asset.

Required Skills and Experience

Education:

Masters Degree or equivalent in Environment or Natural resources Management or other closely related fields.

Experience:

Work experience in relevant technical areas for at least 10 years;
Of which a minimum of 3 years in similar or closely related projects review. Working experience in the Engineering sector and with Monitoring and Evaluation of donor funded projects will be an added advantage;
Recent experience with result-based management review methodologies;
Experience applying SMART indicators and reconstructing or validating baseline scenarios;
Experience working with the GEF or GEF-reviews;
Experience working in Uganda or Eastern Africa;
Work experience in relevant technical areas for at least 10 years;

Language

Proficiency in both spoken and written English.

Price Proposal and Schedule of Payments

Payment to the Consultant will be made in three instalments upon satisfactory completion of the following deliverables;

First Instalment - 20% upon approval by UNDP and MEMD of the final MTR Inception Report;
Second Instalment - 30% upon submission of the draft MTR report to UNDP;
Third Instalment - 50% upon finalization of the MTR report approved by UNDP and MEMD.

Evaluation of proposals (Method and Criteria):

The Individual Consultant will be evaluated based on the following methodology;

Cumulative analysis

The award of the contract shall 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. 70%-30%;
Technical Criteria weight; [70%];
Financial Criteria weight; [30%].

Only candidates obtaining a minimum of 49 points (70% of the total technical points) would be considered for the Financial Evaluation
Technical Criteria – Maximum 100 points;

Understanding the Scope of Work; comprehensiveness of the methodology/approach; and organization & completeness of the proposal? - 30 points;
Minimum educational back ground - 20 points;
Minimum years of experience - 30 points;
Additional competences (energy engineering /M&E) - 20 points.

NB: It is a mandatory criteria and shall have a minimum of 50%.

Application Procedure:

The candidate is required to submit an electronic application directly uploaded on the UNDP jobs website with all the requirements as listed here below. Annexes and further information may be downloaded on http://procurement-notices.undp.org/. (Reference # 31437)

Interested individual consultants must submit the following documents/information to demonstrate their qualifications in one single PDF document to this website - http://jobs.undp.org (Ref no.67585).

Documents to be included when submitting the proposals

Duly accomplished Letter of Confirmation of Interest and Availability using the template provided by UNDP (Annex II);
Personal CV, 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:

Brief description of why the individual considers him/herself as the most suitable for the assignment;
A methodology, on how they will approach and complete the assignment;
Financial proposal that indicates the all-inclusive fixed total contract price, supported by a breakdown of costs, as per template provided (Annex II);
Annexes 1 and II - may be downloaded from the UNDP Procurement Notices Website - http://procurement-notices.undp.org/ - under reference # 31437. For further clarifications, please contact; fredah.zawedde@undp.org; and diana.nabbanja@undp.org

Interested applicants should submit applications through uploading of all their required documentation in one single pdf document on this website only.