Background

Kosovo has a rich and diverse cultural and religious heritage, which requires preservation, protection and promotion. The damaging of sites, insufficient urban development and limited awareness of cultural and religious heritage protection puts this heritage at risk. 
Despite the lapse of time since the developments in the 1990’s and encouraging recent progress in the normalization of relations between the governing authorities in Kosovo and Serbia, inter-community trusts needs strengthening further. In addition, insufficient trust between communities and local institutions persists, especially in the field of rule of law and law enforcement. As such it is vitally important to strengthen the confidence at the community level, to promote cultural tolerance and to engage communities directly in the repair and protection of cultural heritage for all communities in Kosovo.
The damaging of sites, insufficient urban development and limited awareness of cultural and religious heritage protection puts this heritage at risk. There is an overdue need to foster a shared sense of ownership of cultural heritage in Kosovo. There is a pressing need to develop municipal capacities to manage cultural heritage and to directly engage community representatives in the renovation and protection of their own living spaces, particularly when these communities host sites of religious and cultural significance for other communities. In reciprocating respect for the sites of other communities, inter-community confidence will be promoted.
UNDP is currently implementing the “Confidence Building through Cultural Protection in Kosovo” (CBCPK) project which is funded by the European Commission. 
The overall objective of the project is:
To contribute to improved inter-community tolerance and respect for the cultural identity and heritage.
This objective will be achieved through pursuit of the following specific objectives: 

  • To improve inter-community trust at municipality level as well as trust between communities and municipal authorities. 
  • To increase engagement of the communities in the protection of religious and cultural heritage. 
  • To improve the capacity of law-enforcement bodies to protect sites of religious and cultural significance.

Partners include: Kosovo Police Unit for the Security of Buildings and Cultural Heritage; Ministry of Environment and Spatial Planning; Ministry of Culture, Youth and Sports/Department of Cultural Heritage Protection.
Working closely with municipal officials and religious communities, this EU funded project is focused on renovation, beautification and rehabilitation of selected sites and establishing mechanisms to protect and preserve cultural heritage.  The project also has a strong youth engagement component and aims to raise awareness about cultural diversity and shared responsibility for protecting and promoting cultural heritage. In close cooperation with EULEX, the project also supports the capacity development of the Kosovo Police Unit for the Protection of Cultural and Religious Heritage.

Objective of the Assignment

The objective of the assignment is to conduct a final evaluation of the project outputs in terms of their Relevance, Impact, Effectiveness, Efficiency, Sustainability Gender, Theory of Change or Results/Outcome Map, and Stakeholders and Partnership Strategy, and provide recommendations for any improvemets that can be made for future projects with a similar outcome. The evaluation should enables UNDP Kosovo, the donor and other stakeholders to draw lessons from the evaluation for future similar undertakings. 

The consultant will work under direct supervision of the Project Manager, in close consultation with the Programme Team. The project team will provide administrative and logistical support as needed. 

Duties and Responsibilities

  • In order to achieve the above objective, the main tasks of the International Consultant are to:
  • Desk Review Phase; - Conduct a comprehensive desk review of relevant project-related documents and draft and submit an inception report, with appropriate methodology to be applied during the evaluation, as well as the work plan and any technical instruments to be used during the course of the assignment, while being guided by the set of evaluation questions as presented below
  • Field Visit; - Carry out field visits to undertake interviews with relevant stakeholders (relevant ministries – Ministry of Culture- Department of Cultural Heritage, Institute for Monuments Preservation, Ministry of Environment and Spatial Planning/ Institute for Spatial Planning, Kosovo Council for Cultural Heritage, Kosovo Police, EULEX, including the donor (EU)  and project beneficiaries (relevant municipalities (Rahovec/ Orahovac, Lipjan/ Lipljan. Ferizaj/ Urosevac, Gjilan/ Gnjilane and Kamenice/a Municipality as well as religious leaders (Islamic Community, Catholic Community and Orthodox Community). 
  • Draft Report; - Draft a first draft evaluation report. The final evaluation report must include, but not necessarily be limited to, the following: 
  • Title and opening pages
  • Table of contents
  • List of acronyms and abbreviations
  • Executive summary
  • Introduction
  • Description of the intervention
  • Evaluation scope and objectives
  • Evaluation methodology 
  • Data analysis 
  • Findings and conclusions  
  • Recommendations   
  • Lessons learned 
  • Report annexes
  • Final report ; - Based on the draft report and the comments provided by UNDP, and donors, the evaluator will produce a final report. The final report provides the complete content of the report as per the main outline proposed above. Upon completion of the draft final report, UNDP and other stakeholders’ feedback will provide additional feedback.The final report will be completed by the evaluator 10 days after UNDP provides the feedback.

The following evaluation criteria and related evaluation questions are proposed for the evaluation process; however these can be expanded and modified by the evaluator:

 

Relevant evaluation criteria

Key questions suggested

Relevance

  • Is the project  relevant for the main beneficiary
  • Has the initiative tackled key climate change issues?
  • How relevant was the choice of capacity on climate change interventions for the stakeholders?

Effectiveness

  • To what level the project has reached the results stated in the project document?

Sustainability

  • Will the project results last in time?
  • Are there jeopardizing aspects that have not been considered or abated by the project actions?
  • Has ownership of the actions and impact been transferred to the corresponding stakeholders?
  • Have the beneficiaries the capacity to take over the results of the project and maintain and further develop the results
  • Which measures to ensure sustainability have proved more effective?
  • What capacity on climate change products and/or measures are available/easily replicated by the municipality

Impact

  • Is there evidence of long lasting desired changes?
  • Has the initiative influenced policy making at different levels? 
  • Has the project impacted the desired target actors and how?
  • To what degree the project contributed to the development taken place in regards the project goals?
  • Is there evidence that institutional systems/mechanisms are in place  which:
  1. Supports further capacity for climate resilient development at national and local level;
  2. Implement the low emission climate resilient strategy and action plans; and
  3. promotes sustainable energy policies and programs and enhance public awareness in municipalities concerning energy efficiency

Efficiency

  • Have resources been used efficiently?
  • Have efforts for integrated approach been made appropriately?

Stakeholders and Partnership Strategy

  • Who are the major actors and partners involved in the project and how were their roles and interests?
  • Was the partnership strategy effective?

 Evaluation

  • Can the project be evaluated credibly?
  • Were intended results (outputs, outcomes) adequately defined, appropriate and stated in measurable terms, and are the results verifiable?
  • Were monitoring systems in place?

Theory of Change or Results/Outcome Map

 

  • What are the underlying rationales and assumptions or theory that defines the relationships or chain of results that lead initiative strategies to intended outcomes?
  • What are the assumptions, factors or risks inherent in the design that may influence whether the initiative succeeds or fails?

Gender

  • What effects were realized in terms of gender equality, if any?
  • Were women and men distinguished in terms of participation and benefits within project?
  • The response to the above questions should be followed by specific short and long term recommendations that could be undertaken by UNDP or the stakeholders.
  • These analyses have to be done for each output and for the overall project.
  • The evaluator is responsible for refining the evaluation methodology, evaluation questions, carrying out the evaluation and delivering UNDP Kosovo with a draft report and a final report.
  • The key stakeholders, those involved in the implementation, those served or affected by the project and the users of the evaluation should be involved in the evaluation process.
  • Finalize the evaluation report, including incorporation of feedback from UNDP, the donor  and stakeholders. 

Methodology and Evaluation Ethics

The Consultant may employ any relevant and appropriate quantitative or qualitative methods it deems appropriate to conduct the project final evaluation. Methods should include: desk review of documents; interviews with stakeholders, partners, and beneficiaries; field visits; use of questionnaires or surveys, etc. However, a combination of primary and secondary, as well as qualitative and quantitative data should be used. The International consultant is expected to revise the methodological approach in consultation with key stakeholders as necessary. The International Consultant should present both quantitative data and qualitative findings and data.

The Consultant is expected to hold interviews and meetings with relevant staff of UNDP, municipal officials, partners, and beneficiaries. 

The International consultant is expected to share the list of interview questions and interviewee’s to be conducted beforehand, and receive feedback and clearance from  UNDP. 

The suggested methodology should be compatible with the UNDP approach to evaluations as described in the Handbook for Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation.  
 
The International Consultant is expected to use its findings and expertise to identify the lessons learned, and to propose recommendations for improving the project’s future efforts toward achieving the expected results. 

The final evaluation will be conducted in accordance with the principles outlined in the UNED ‘Ethical Guidelines for Evaluation.’ The International Consultant must address any critical issues in the design and implementation of the evaluation, including evaluation ethics and 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. 

Deliverables / Final Products Expected

  1. Inception report  including details of the methodology and work plan is drafted, submitted, and endorsed by UNDP.
  2. Final Evaluation report including incorporation of feedback from UNDP, the donor  and stakeholders.

Expected Results:

Deliverables/ Outputs

  • Inception report  including details of the methodology and work plan is drafted, submitted, and endorsed by UNDP.

Number of w/days

  • 4 w/days 

Tentative due dates  (2017): 

  • 4 April 2017

Review and Approvals Required

  • Project Manager

Deliverables/ Outputs

  • Field visits, meetings and interviews are conducted, to gather data to be used in the 1st draft evaluation report.

Number of w/days

  • 5 w/days 

Tentative due dates  (2017): 

  • 9 April 2017

Review and Approvals Required

  • Project Manager

Deliverables/ Outputs

  • Production of 1st draft Evaluation report. The evaluation report  should include a descrition of the methodology, the findings, lessons learned and strategic  recomedations 

Number of w/days

  • 5 w/days 

Tentative due dates  (2017): 

  • 16 April 2017

Review and Approvals Required

  • Project Manager

Deliverables/ Outputs

  • A Final Evaluation report including incorporation of feedback from UNDP, the donor  and stakeholders

Number of w/days

  • 2 w/days 

Tentative due dates  (2017): 

  • 18th April 2017

Review and Approvals Required

  • Project Manager

Scope of price proposal and schedule of payments
Remuneration - Lump Sum Amount:

The Contract is based on lump sum remuneration and shall be processed subject to deliverables as per the schedule listed below:  

  • Upon signature of the contract: 20% of the total amount of the contract
  • Deliverable 2 – Draft Evaluation report: 50% of the total amount of the contract
  • Deliverable 3 – Final Evaluation report: 30% of the total amount of the contract

Required Presentation of Offer: 

The following documents are required:

  • P11 or Resume (signed), 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 (P11 can be downloaded at UNDP web site: http://www.ks.undp.org/content/kosovo/en/home/operations/jobs/)
  • Technical proposal, a max. 2 page document briefly outlining the methodology envisaged for the assignment for delivering the expected results within the indicated timeframe 
  • Financial proposal, The consultant is expected to provide an all-inclusive lump sum amount/financial proposal. The Offeror must indicate at this point, and ensure that all such costs are duly incorporated in the financial proposal submitted to UNDP.  

Criteria for Selection of the Best Offer:

  • Offers will be evaluated utilizing a combined Scoring method – where the qualifications, technical proposal, and the interview will be weighted a max. of 70%, and combined with the price offer which will be weighted a max of 30%.

Application Instructions:

  • Click on the "Apply now" button;
  • Input your information in the appropriate Sections: personal information, language proficiency, education, resume and motivation; You can type in, or paste your short Resume into the last box;
  • Upon completion of the first page, please hit "submit application" tab at the end of the page. On the next page, you will be asked to upload your Resume;
  • System will only allow one attachment. All docs (CV; P11; financial offer; list of similar profiles should be included as one attachment).
  • Please make sure to submit all the requested documents/information; otherwise, your application will be considered incomplete.

 

Competencies

Corporate Competencies:

  • Committed to professionalism, impartiality, accountability and integrity;
  • Displays cultural, gender, religion, race, nationality, ethnicity, and age sensitivity and adaptability;
  • Demonstrates substantial experience in gender equality. Actively promotes gender equality in all activities;
  • Treats all people fairly without favouritism.

Functional Competencies:

  • Ability to work effectively within a team and develop good relationships with counterparts and stakeholders;
  • Ability to synthesise research and draw conclusion on the related subjects;
  • Ability to pay attention to details; 
  • Excellent interpersonal skills and ability to communicate effectively, both orally and in writing;
  • Ability to establish effective working relations in a multicultural team environment; 
  • Good organisational skills;
  • Commitment to accomplish work; 
  • Responds positively to critical feedback;
  • Results and task oriented. 

Required Skills and Experience

Education:

  • Master’s degree in social sciences, international development or other related qualification. 

Experience:

  • At least 5 years of demonstrated relevant work experience with evaluation of development interventions at national and/or international level is required.  
  • Experience with peacebuilding and conflict prevention work.  Previous work experience in the Western Balkans, preferably Kosovo in particular, is considered an asset. 
  • Extensive knowledge of results-based management evaluation, as well as of participatory M&E methodological and practical considerations in conducting evaluations of development interventions is required. 

Language requirements:

  • Fluent in English. Excellent analytical and report writing skills in clear and fluent English.