Background

The Delivering Results Together Fund (DRT-F) is a global pooled funding mechanism established by the United Nations Development Group (UNDG) in 2013 to support integrated policy work. It has provided financial and methodological support to 45 integrated policy initiatives in 12 countries.  Having the QCPR as its primary mandate, the DRT-F was designed to support countries applying the Delivering as One approach. The DRT-F aimed to increase UN coherence at country level and promote strengthening of linkages between normative and operational development work of the UN. It also aimed to increase the focus on partnerships both at global and country levels. The underpinning principle for the DRT-F was a strong tripartite partnership between programme countries, donor partners and the UN organizations.

The DRT-F aimed to “influence greater policy coherence through strengthened integration of the normative frameworks across development dimensions to achieve transformative changes in DaO countries.” The attainment of this main outcome was to be pursued through the achievement of three inter-related outputs, specifically, increased coherence of the UN system’s development response at the national level, strengthened partnerships between governments, the UN system and donor partners and stronger normative and operational linkages within One Programmes in selected DaO countries.

The DRT-F was governed by a Steering Committee at the global level having oversight and management responsibilities. Counselling and strategic advisory support was to be performed by the DRT-F Consultative Group. Coordination and technical support was provided by the DRT Fund Secretariat performed by UN DOCO, and the administrative and financial management function was to be fulfilled by the DRT-F Administrator – UNDP Multi-Partner Trust Fund Office.

We are seeking a consultant who will assess the effectiveness and efficiency of the DRT-F, and to identify best practices that can be applied to future pooled funding mechanisms.

Duties and Responsibilities

The DRT-F Evaluation will serve three purposes:

1. To assess the relevance of the DRT-F outcomes and outputs, the effectiveness and efficiency by which the DRT-F results were achieved, their sustainability and contribution to national priorities and goals.
2. To determine how the DRT-F helped UN agencies to contribute more effectively and efficiently to national development efforts and capacity building.
3. To learn from experiences of the DRT-F, and identify issues and opportunities emerging from the implementation of the DRT-F, to inform the design of the Joint Fund for the 2030 agenda.

The objectives of the evaluation are:

1. Determine the extent to which the outcome and related outputs have been achieved and the extent of participating UN agencies’ contributions.
2. Determine the impact, both positive and negative, from achievement of the outcome and its related outputs.
3. Assess the relevance of the outputs to the effective achievement of the outcome.
4. Examine and analyse factors that facilitate and/or hinder the progress in achieving the outcome by the participating UN agencies, individually, both in terms of the external environment and those internal to the portfolio interventions including: weakness in design, management, human resource skills and resources.
5. Assess how the participating UN agencies worked together jointly in the planning, implementation and reporting of the outcome.
6. Document lessons learnt from the implementation of the interventions.
7. Make recommendations for the UN to improve the achievement and sustainability of the outcome, partnership arrangements, mainstreaming of cross-cutting issues and resource mobilization strategies.

Evaluation scope:

The evaluation will cover all countries that participated in the DRT-F, specifically, Albania, Bhutan, Cape Verde, Ethiopia, Malawi, Montenegro, Mozambique, Pakistan, Papua New Guinea, Rwanda, Tanzania and Viet Nam.

Evaluation questions and criteria:

To fulfil the purpose and objectives stated above, the evaluation shall address the following specific questions:

1. Whether the Joint Programmes supported by the DRT-F were properly designed and achieved their objectives
2. Whether the DRT-F facilitated closer collaboration and joined up work of UN agencies at the national level, improving cohesion and the strategic use of resources for inter-sectoral policy support.
3. Whether greater collaboration and joined up work of UN agencies, through the DRT-F, was advantageous for governments in their efforts to tackle the complex challenges posed by the 2030 agenda.
4. Whether the level of financial resources available were sufficient for successful implementation of the outcome.
5. What were the main factors (positive and negative) affecting the achievement of the outcomes? How have these factors limited or facilitated progress towards the outcome?

Evaluation Criteria

The evaluation of performance of the DRT-F will be made using the standard criteria: relevance; effectiveness; efficiency; impact and sustainability.

Methodology:

The evaluator should provide details in respect of:

1. Review of project documentation. Review of key project documents such as approved program documents, recent studies, evaluations and reviews, project monitoring documents, disbursement reports, progress reports and other information available implementing agencies or participating UN agency offices.
2. Construct a theory, identify detailed evaluation questions, methods (mixed methods) and instruments, stakeholder mapping, etc.
3. Data collection: (i) visits to two project countries, to carry out in depth interviews, inspection, and analysis of the project activities; (ii) skype/ phone interviews and performance data surveys of institutions not visited in person; (iii) interviews with the implementing agencies and participating UN agencies.  For each of these interviews, the consultant should first develop and present their ideas for the content and format of the interview forms that will be applied to capture the information required, as well as the method to be used in administering them and tabulating the results.

Analysis: Data triangulation and analysis triangulation to validate evidence and arrive at findings.

The evaluator will be expected to develop and present detailed statement of evaluations methods/approaches in an inception report to show how each objective, evaluation question and criterion will be answered.

Implementation Arrangements

1. An Evaluation Management Task Force will be established to manage the evaluation process. Participating UN Agencies will appoint an evaluation focal point who will be members of the task force.  The task force will assist in key aspects of the evaluation process including providing documents, providing detailed comments on the inception and draft evaluation reports and dissemination of evaluation findings, lessons learnt and recommendations.  
2. The evaluation coordinating office, UN DOCO, will provide the necessary guidance on the process and in reviewing reports.
3. A UN DOCO focal point will be identified to support the selected consultant on a regular basis with respect to providing background information and progress reports and other documentation, setting up stakeholder meetings and interviews and arranging the country visit.
4. The consultant will have the overall responsibility for the evaluation exercise as well as quality and timely submission of the final evaluation report to the UN.
5. The consultant will be expected to be fully self-sufficient in terms of office equipment and supplies, communication, accommodation and transport.  Furthermore the consultant will be expected to familiarise themselves with the United Nations Evaluation Group’s standards and norms for conducting project evaluations.
6. The consultant will provide the UN DOCO focal point with regular reports and feedback on the progress of the evaluation process. UNDOCO reserves the right to rescind this agreement due to unsatisfactory performance by the contractor. 

Deliverables

To be delivered over 40 working days.

1. Inception report – within 5 days of the start of the assignment with UN DOCO.  The report will include a detailed approach and methodology, schedule, draft data collection protocols and an evaluation matrix. 
2. Draft evaluation report – The Evaluator will present a Draft Report within 30 days of the commencement of the assignment after presentation of the inception report.
3. Final Evaluation Report. (max 60 pages). The evaluator will present a Final Report within 40 days of the assignment after consolidating feedback and comments from the Evaluation Task Team.

Draft timeline

Duty Station: Home- based with mission travel as per below

Brief missions to 2 selected programme countries (TBC) of approximately 4-5 days are envisaged for this consultancy.  Travel will be reimbursed to the consultant in accordance with UNDP Rules and Regulations (based on the most direct lowest economy fare, prevailing DSA rates and corresponding terminal expenses).  This will be confirmed and agreed upon with consultant prior to undertaking mission travel and will be reimbursed based on actual travel.  Travel may be undertaken consecutively depending on feasibility; actual travel arrangements will be confirmed in advance.

Payment:

Payments will be made following UNDOCO certification of the satisfactory delivery of the outputs as per the following terms:

• 20% upon satisfactory delivery of an inception report;
• 20% upon delivery of a satisfactory draft report;
• Remaining 60% will be payable upon satisfactory delivery of the final report

Competencies

Required Skills and Experience

QUALIFICATIONS:

Education: 

• Minimum of Master’s degree in in economics, political science, public administration, regional development/planning, or other social science;  

Experience: 

• Minimum of 10 years of professional experience in international development;
• Proven track record of conducting evaluation of governments and international aid agencies;
• Experience with and in-depth understanding of the UN (or similar organization) at the country level;
• Excellent skills in report writing and presentation of research and evaluation projects. 

Language Requirements: 

• Excellent command of English is essential

APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS:

• Duly completed Letter of Confirmation of Interest and Availability which includes a financial proposal based on an “all inclusive” lump sum fee based on the deliverables (please find Letter of Confirmation of Interest and Availability template attached)
• CV and/or P11 indicating all past experience from similar projects, as well as the contact details (email and telephone number) of the consultant; short-listed candidates will be asked to submit their P11 and at least three (3) professional references;
• Brief description (cover letter) of why the individual considers him/herself as the most suitable for this assignment, which addresses the required qualifications and evaluation criteria, in particular, experience in the area of evaluations.
• Short-listed candidates will be requested to submit excerpts in PDF from two (2) recently written reports (maximum 10 pages)
• Interviews for short-listed candidates may be conducted to assess candidates against competencies outlined in TORs 

(*)“all-inclusive” implies that all costs (excluding mission travel) that could possibly be incurred by the Contractor are already factored into the final amounts submitted in the proposal

Incomplete submissions may not be considered. Please make sure you have provided all requested materials.

EVALUATION: 

Individual consultants will be evaluated using the Cumulative Analysis methodology.

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, and having received the highest score out of a pre-determined set of weighted technical and financial criteria specific to the solicitation;

Technical Criteria (100 points):

• Relevant background in terms of educational and professional experience; (20%)
• Excellent report writing skills; (20%)
• Experience with and in-depth understanding of the UN (or similar organization) at the country level; (25%)
• Demonstrated knowledge and sound understanding of evaluations; (30%)
• Demonstrated understanding of assignment: (5%)

Only candidates obtaining a minimum of 70% of 100 points in the Technical Evaluation will be considered for the Financial Evaluation.

• Technical Criteria weight overall: 70%;
• Financial Criteria weight overall: 30%.

OTHER:

ANNEX 1- GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS_ INDIVIDUAL CONSULTANT (IC)

http://www.undp.org/content/dam/undp/documents/procurement/documents/IC%20-%20General%20Conditions.pdf