Background

Background:

This is the Terms of Reference (ToR) has been produced for the Mid Term Review (MTR) of the full size GEF project tilted as ‘Integrating Community-based Adaptation into Afforestation and Reforestation (ICBA-AR) Progreammes in Bangladesh (PIMS # 4878)’ which is to be under taken in October 2018. The project is being executed by the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) of the Bangladesh Government. The project started in July 2016 and currently it is in its second year of implementation. This ToR sets out the expectations from the MTR. The MTR must be carried according to the guidance outlined in Guidance for Conducting Midterm Reviews of UNDP-Supported, GEF-Financed Projects (http://web.undp.org/evaluation/documents/guidance/GEF/mid-term/Guidance_Midterm% 20Review%20_EN_2014.pdf)”.

Coastal greenbelts have long been seen as an important strategy for reducing the vulnerability of coastal populations to climate-related hazards in Bangladesh. Since 1960s the country has planted nearly 200,000 ha. of mangrove along the coast. However, due to a number of institutional, technical, policy related and socio-economic factors long term sustainability of coastal greenbelt could not be ensured. To address the sustainably issues of coastal greenbelt ‘the Community Based Adaptation to Climate Change through Coastal Afforestation in Bangladesh (CBACC) Project’ was implemented between 2009 to 2015 with support from UNDP-GEF (LDCF). The CBACC project was aimed at reducing the vulnerability of coastal communities to the impacts of climate change through coastal afforestation and livelihood diversification. Later in July 2016 UNDP Bangladesh with GEF/LDCF funding has taken up the ‘Integrating Community Based Adaptation into Afforestation and Reforestation (ICBA-AR) Programmes’ to be implemented by MoEF to further strengthen and expand the efforts of previously implemented CBACC project in addressing the barriers to sustainability of coastal mangrove forests. The ICBA-AR project is expected to bring revolutionary advancement in the country’s coastal greenbelt management system by linking it with livelihood aspirations of coastal communities and reducing their climate change vulnerabilities. The project will end in June 2020. Total financial resource allocated for the project is US $ 5,650,000.

The project is being implemented in eight climate vulnerable coastal Upazilas of five districts. It has the following Objectives and outcomes and outputs.

The overall objective of the project is to reduce climate vulnerability of local communities in the project areas through participatory planning, community-based management, and integration of livelihood with coastal afforestation and reforestation.

The project has the following three outcomes. The Outcome-1 addresses existing barriers relating to lack of livelihood diversification and lack of coastal forest diversification, both of which adversely impact coastal forest sustainability. Thus outcome-1 seeks to reduce the vulnerability of local communities in new afforestation and reforestation sites through livelihood diversification more effective greenbelts, by a) linking livelihood diversification interventions to improved coastal forest stewardship and b) diversifying coastal plantations to increase their ecological and social sustainability by, respectively becoming more heterogenous and dense and by increasing the range of tangible benefits the forests can provide. The Outcome-2 seeks to strengthen community engagement and ownership of forestry-based adaptation and climate risk reduction programmes by developing and demonstrating effective co-management and benefit-sharing for coastal greenbelt plantations. Finally, while mangrove greenbelts are a vitally important adaptation measure for coastal areas, there will always remain a need for complementary measures to further protect human lives and livelihoods assets in the face of extreme climate events. In recognition of this, the Outcome-3 of the project focuses on protecting communal livelihood assets in afforestation and reforestation sites from extreme climate events through effective early warning and preparedness planning. Altogether, over 60,000 vulnerable people will benefit from a range of LDCF-supported interventions. Capacity development of local communities and key government actors is central to the project approach and will enhance the long-term sustainability of project impacts.

Duties and Responsibilities

OBJECTIVE AND SCOPE

The MTR will assess progress towards the achievement of the project objectives and outcomes as specified in the Project Document and assess early signs of project success or failure with the goal of identifying the necessary changes to be made in order to set the project on-track to achieve its intended results. The MTR will also review the project’s strategy, its risks to sustainability.

The MTR will be carried out by a MTR team which will comprise of an International Consultant (Team Leader) having experience of evaluative projects and programs at international level, and a National Consultant having experience of national level project/program evaluation. The MTR team will assess the following four aspects of project progress. See the ‘Guidance For Conducting Midterm Reviews of UNDP-Supported, GEF-Financed Projects’ for extended descriptions.

i)    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.
• Assess 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?
• Assess 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?
• Assess 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/Logframe:

• Undertake a critical analysis of the project’s logframe 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.

ii.  Progress Towards Results

Progress Towards Outcomes Analysis:

• Review the logframe 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” (red).

Table. Progress Towards Results Matrix (Achievement of outcomes against End-of-project Targets)

Indicator Assessment Key

 In addition to the progress towards outcomes analysis:

• Compare and analyse the GEF Tracking Tool at the Baseline with the one completed right before the Midterm Review.
• 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.

iii.   Project Implementation and Adaptive Management

 Management Arrangements:

• 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/ logframe 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 Evaluation 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 evaluation budget.  Are sufficient resources being allocated to monitoring and evaluation? 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.

iv.   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 based on the data analysis conducted in the MTR. Recommendations need to be practical and applicable for actual project implementation, as they intended to be used for adaptive programming and course correction. 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.

Table. MTR Ratings and Achievement Summary Table for ICBA-AR Project

Approach & Methodology: The MTR must provide evidence-based information that is credible, reliable and useful. 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 submitted to the GEF at CEO endorsement, and the midterm GEF focal area Tracking Tool that must be completed before the MTR field mission begins.  

While the MTR needs to employ various types of data as well as data collection tools, the MTR team is highly encouraged to use as much quantitative data as possible to make the analysis more objective and evidence-based. Qualitative approaches, including the document reviews and interviews, are required for this MTR, but it is strongly discouraged to use only qualitative data/ methods

The MTR team 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 (UNDP CO), 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 concern representatives of implementing and executing agencies, NPD, DNPD, PDs of Partner Agencies, representatives of Project Board and PMU, key experts and consultants in the subject area, local level stakeholders including local government, academia and CSOs, etc. Additionally, the MTR team is expected to carryout field missions to more than one of the following project sites, namely Bhola, Borguna, Noakhali, Patuakhali and Pirojpur districts of Bangladesh.  

The MTR team will develop detailed evaluation methodologies and tools in a separate methodology note (in English and, if necessary, in Bengali), including for data collection, data quality control, and data analysis, and share with the UNDP Country Office for clearance.

The final MTR report should be prepared maintaining enough quality and it 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.

Arrangements for the MTR: The principal responsibility for managing this MTR resides with the MTR Commissioning agency, i.e., the UNDP Bangladesh Country Office (CO). UNDP CO will contract the consultant – after review of the selected candidate by UNDP CO together with the Project Management Unit- and ensure the timely provision of per diems and travel arrangements to all countries to be visited for the MTR Consultant.  The MTR consultant will work under over all supervision of the UNDP Country office and in collaboration with the PMU. UNDP CO and PMU will be responsible for liaising with the MTR Consultant to provide all relevant documents, set up stakeholder interviews, and arrange field visits.

(1) Populate with data from the Logframe and scorecards

[2] Populate with data from the Project Document

[3] If available

[4] Colour code this column only

[5] Use the 6 point Progress Towards Results Rating Scale: HS, S, MS, MU, U, HU

[6] Alternatively, MTR conclusions may be integrated into the body of the report.

[7] For ideas on innovative and participatory Monitoring and Evaluation strategies and techniques, see UNDP Discussion Paper: Innovations in Monitoring & Evaluating Results, 05 Nov 2013.

[8] For more stakeholder engagement in the M&E process, see the UNDP Handbook on Planning, Monitoring and Evaluating for Development Results, Chapter 3, pg. 93.

DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

The evaluator is expected to frame the evaluation effort using the criteria of relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, sustainability, and impact, as defined and explained below, as defined and explained in the UNDP Guidance for Conducting Terminal Evaluations of UNDP supported, GEF-financed Projects. The evaluation must provide evidence-based information that is credible, reliable and useful. The evaluator is expected to follow a participatory and consultative approach ensuring close engagement with government counterparts, in particular the GEF operational focal point, National Implementing Partner of the Project, UNDP Country Office, project team, UNDP GEF Technical Adviser based in the region and key stakeholders. The evaluation team is expected to deliver the following:

Inception Report: Evaluator provides clarifications on timing and method no later than 2 weeks before the evaluation mission.

Presentation: Initial Findings has to be presented at the end of evaluation mission.

Draft Report: Full report with annexes (and data where applicable) within 7 days of the evaluation mission/presentation.

Final Report: Revised report within 3 days of receiving UNDP comments on draf

SUPERVISION AND PERFORMANCE EVALUATION

The International Consultant will work closely with UNDP Bangladesh and Under the overall guidance from Assistant Country Director, UNDP Bangladesh, the consultant will directly report to and Program Specialist and Project Manager of UNDP. The Consultant will work with the Integrating Community-based Adaptation into Afforestation and Reforestation (ICBA-AR) Programmes. 

TIMEFRAME AND DEADLINE

Expected duration of the assignment is 25 days over a time period of 7 of weeks starting from early Oct 2018.

Including 1 Mission in Bangladesh: The Consultant is required to visit Bangladesh including the project Office in Dhaka and other project sites to see field level interventions of Project. So total Mission in Bangladesh will be at least 15 Days.  Rest 10 days will be work from home for Inception and MTR methodology (5 days) and finalization of MTR (5 days).

The tentative MTR timeframe is as follows:

Options for site visits should be provided in the Inception Report. The final MTR report must be in English.

DOCUMENTS

The Consultant will prepare and submit the above-mentioned documents during the assignment period. The format for the GEF Midterm Evaluation should be agreed on at the beginning of the assignment and cleared by the task force. Further work or revision of the documents may be required if it is considered that the documents do not meet the ToR, errors of fact or the documents are incomplete or not of an acceptable standard.

INPUTS

Project office will arrange the office space for the consultant and also assist in arranging meetings, consultations and interviews and ensure access to key officials as mentioned in the proposed methodology.

Travel:

All envisaged travel costs must be included in the financial proposal. This includes all travel to join duty station/repatriation travel. In general, UNDP should not accept travel costs exceeding those of an economy class ticket. Should the IC wish to travel on a higher class he/she should do so using their own resources. In the case of unforeseeable travel, payment of travel costs including tickets, lodging and terminal expenses should be agreed upon, between the respective business unit and Individual Consultant, prior to travel and will be reimbursed.

Including 1 Mission in Bangladesh: The Consultant is required to visit Bangladesh including the project Office in Dhaka and other project sites to see field level interventions of Project. So total Mission in Bangladesh will be at least 15 Days.  Rest 10 days will be work from home for Inception and MTR methodology (5 days) and finalization of MTR (5 days).

PAYMENT MILESTONE FOR SERVICE

Competencies

Technical competencies: Expertise in Environment or Natural Resources or Biodiversity or Climate Change or Development Studies or in closely related field with special reference to data and information Management. Evaluation experience related to the national level multi-disciplinary projects.

b. Partnerships:

• Displays cultural, gender, religion, race, nationality and age sensitivity and adaptability;

• Maturity and confidence in dealing with senior members of national institutions;

• Excellent written communication skills, with analytical capacity and ability to synthesize relevant collected data and findings for the preparation of quality analysis for the project evaluation.

C. Results:

• Promotes the vision, mission, and strategic goals of UNDP;

• Builds strong relationships with clients, focuses on impact and result for the client and responds positively to feedback;

• Good team player who has ability to maintain good relationships.

Consultant Independence:

The Consultant cannot have engaged in the project preparation, formulation, and/or implementation (including the writing of the Project Document) and should not have a conflict of interest with project’s related activities.

Required Skills and Experience

REQUIRED SKILLS AND EXPERIENCES

Qualifications

The evaluator must present the following qualifications:

Education:

A Master’s degree in Environment or Natural Resources or Biodiversity or Climate Change or Development Studies or in closely related field.

Professional Experiences:

• Minimum 10 years of experience of in the field of development project evaluation.
• Demonstrated experience of evaluating at least 3 development projects and programs of considerable size related to rural community-based Environment or Natural Resources or Biodiversity or Climate Change or livelihood related projects.
• Experience of evaluating GEF and UN financed projects and programs of similar nature;

Additional Competency

• Demonstrated experience of working with UN, development partners, national level and local level governmental and non-governmental agencies, and rural communities in one or more developing country

• Proven experience with quantitative and qualitative data collection and analysis; evaluation methodologies, tools and sampling;
• Proven ability to produce analytical reports and high quality academic publications in English;
• Experience of managing evaluation teams, and the capability to handle necessary logistics.
• Experiences in using results-based management principles, theory of change /logical framework analysis for programming;
• Ability to bring gender dimensions into the evaluation, including data collection, analysis and report writing;
• Experience of communicating a wide range of partners and stakeholders.
• Experience of working in the South or South East Asia.

Language requirements

Fluency of English and Bangla language is required;

Price Proposal and Schedule of Payments

Consultant must send a financial proposal based on Lump Sum Amount. The total amount quoted shall be all-inclusive and include all costs components required to perform the deliverables identified in the TOR, including professional fee, travel costs, living allowance (if any work is to be done outside the IC´s duty station) and any other applicable cost to be incurred by the IC in completing the assignment. The contract price will be fixed output-based price regardless of extension of the herein specified duration. Payments will be done upon completion of the deliverables/outputs and as per below percentages-

In general, UNDP shall not accept travel costs exceeding those of an economy class ticket. Should the IC wish to travel on a higher class he/she should do so using their own resources. Lodging, meals and transport cost for field visit related to this assignment will be paid by the project as per UN standard.

In the event of unforeseeable travel not anticipated in this TOR, payment of travel costs including tickets, lodging and terminal expenses should be agreed upon, between the respective business unit and the Individual Consultant, prior to travel and will be reimbursed.

Travel and DSA:

No DSA will be paid at the duty station. If unforeseen travel outside the duty station not required by the Terms of Reference is requested by UNDP, and upon prior agreement/approval, such travel shall be UNDP’s expenses and the individual contractor shall receive a per-diem not to exceed United Nations daily subsistence allowance rate in such other location(s).

Including 1 Mission in Bangladesh: The Consultant is required to visit Bangladesh including the project Office in Dhaka and other project sites to see field level interventions of Project. So total Mission in Bangladesh will be at least 15 Days.  Rest 10 days will be work from home for Inception and MTR methodology (5 days) and finalization of MTR (5 days).

Evaluation Method and Criteria:

Individual consultants will be evaluated based on the following methodology.

Cumulative analysis-

The award of the contract will be made to the individual consultant up on Cumulative Analysis/evaluation and determined as:

1. Responsive/compliant/acceptable; and
2. 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 70% mark in technical evaluation will be considered eligible for financial evaluation.

Technical Criteria for Evaluation (Maximum 70 points)

• Criteria 1 Year of experience of in the field of development project evaluation- 25 Marks
• Criteria 2 Experience of evaluating at least 3 development projects and programs of considerable size related to rural community-based Environment or Natural Resources or Biodiversity or Climate Change adaptation or livelihood related projects in Asia and Pacific Region – 25 Marks
• Criteria 3 Experience of evaluating GEF and UN financed projects and programs of similar nature- Max 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/

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 proposals:

Interested individual consultants must submit the following documents/information to demonstrate their qualifications. Proposers who shall not submit below mentioned documents will not be considered for further evaluation.

• 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; P11 can be downloaded from the link below: http://www.bd.undp.org/content/bangladesh/en/home/operations/jobs/
• Technical proposal, including a) a brief description of why the individual considers him/herself as the most suitable for the assignment; b) a brief methodology, on how you will approach and complete the assignment, including a tentative table of contents for the final report; and c) a list of similar assignment with topic/name of the assignment, duration, role of consultant and organization/project
• Financial Proposal: Financial Proposal has to be submitted through a standard interest and availability template which can be downloaded from the link below:

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

Please combine all your documents into one (1) single PDF document as the system only allows to upload maximum one document.