Safeguarding diverse ecosystems ensures invaluable services essential for sustainable development and improvements in human wellbeing. The livelihoods of individuals and the economic productivity of firms are highly dependent on sustainable supplies of water, forests, ­fisheries, fertile soils, pollinators, coral reefs, mangroves and other forms of biodiversity. This is especially the case for the poorest people directly dependent on natural resources and those enterprises active in economic sectors such as agriculture, hydropower, and tourism. Biodiversity thus plays a central role in achieving the Sustainable Development Goals.

The Biodiversity Finance Initiative (BIOFIN) is a global partnership addressing the biodiversity ­finance challenge in a comprehensive manner. The Initiative provides an innovative methodology enabling countries to measure their current biodiversity expenditures, assess their ­financial needs in the medium term and identify the most suitable ­finance solutions to bridge their national biodiversity ­finance gaps. The BIOFIN methodology includes the following main steps:

• Policy and Institutional Review
• Biodiversity Expenditure Review
• Finance Needs Assessment
• Biodiversity Finance Plan
• Implementing Finance Solutions

Implemented from 2012 to 2018, thirty countries participated in the first phase of BIOFIN, coordinated by a global UNDP-managed team supporting the development and use of the methodology. The global team works with interdisciplinary national teams, customizing the methodology to the national context in each country. At the national level, BIOFIN works under the leadership of ministries of ­finance (treasury), economy, planning, and environment to bring together a core group of national stakeholders, including the private sector, to rethink the most suitable finance modalities for biodiversity. Activities are implemented through in-depth consultation with a strong focus on capacity development. Partnerships are another essential feature of the BIOFIN methodology in each country, in particular with related initiatives such as WAVES, TEEB, UN PEI, UN-REDD, GIZ ValuES and relevant conservation ­finance projects including those under the UNDP-GEF portfolio. At the regional and global level, BIOFIN enables participating countries to exchange experiences through a variety of South-South cooperation mechanisms such as regional and global workshops, the BIOFIN website, dedicated webinars, and other platforms.

The first phase of BIOFIN is supported by the European Union (EU) and the Governments of Germany, Switzerland, Norway, and Flanders. As a multi-donor initiative, BIOFIN phase I includes around US$ 29 million.

In 2018, BIOFIN started a second phase, geared towards the implementation of Biodiversity Finance Plans and finance solutions. It will run through the end of 2022 and involve at least 27 countries.

In this light, UNDP-GEF is seeking the service of an evaluation expert to conduct the final evaluation for Phase I of the Biodiversity Finance Initiative (BIOFIN).

Scope of the assignment:

This evaluation aims to review the efficiency, effectiveness, relevance, sustainability, and impact of Phase I of project implementation and, more particularly, document the results the project attained.

The evaluation will place a significant emphasis on identifying lessons learned and good practices that derive from the project’s implementation.

The evaluation will cover the period 2012-2018 as it will address the results of BIOFIN implementation during phase 1. The central research question of the evaluation is:

To which extent did BIOFIN achieve the expected results?

The evaluator is expected to frame the evaluation effort using the criteria of relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, sustainability, and impact as defined and explained in the  UNDP Guidance for Conducting Terminal Evaluations of UNDP-supported Projects. An overall approach and method for conducting project terminal evaluations of UNDP-supported projects can be found in the Handbook on Planning, Monitoring and Evaluating for Development Results.  

Evaluation consultants will be held to the highest ethical standards and are required to sign a Code of Conduct upon acceptance of the assignment. UNDP evaluations are conducted in accordance with the principles outlined in the UNEG 'Ethical Guidelines for Evaluations'

Project evaluation criteria and questions:

The evaluation will follow the UNDP and EU evaluation criteria:

• Relevance: Relevance looks at the relationship between the needs and problems identified and the objectives of the intervention.  The extent to which the objectives of a development intervention are consistent with beneficiaries’ requirements, country needs, global priorities and partners’ and donors’ policies.
•  Effectiveness: The extent to which the development intervention’s objectives were achieved. The evaluation should form an opinion on the progress made to date and the role of BIOFIN in delivering the observed changes. If the objectives have not been achieved, an assessment should be made of the extent to which progress has fallen short of the target and what factors have influenced why something hasn't been successful or why it has not yet been achieved.
• Efficiency: A measure of how economically resources/inputs (funds, expertise, time, etc.) are converted into results.
• Sustainability: The continuation of benefits from BIOFIN after the project ends. The probability of continued long-term benefits.
• Impact: Positive and negative, primary and secondary long-term effects produced by BIOFIN, directly or indirectly, intended or unintended (in this case early effects and foreseen mid-term or long-term changes).

Evaluation questions:

Relevance: [Rating: 2. Relevant (R), 1. Not-relevant (NR)]

• To what extent is BIOFIN still relevant?
• To what extent have the (original) objectives proven to have been appropriate for the focused countries?
• How flexible has BIOFIN been in response to changing environments?
• How aligned is BIOFIN with the countries’ needs, as well as the donors’ and UNDP objectives?
• Are there lessons learned which would improve the work of BIOFIN on gender mainstreaming in the future?

Effectiveness: [Ratings: 6: Highly Satisfactory (HS): no shortcomings; 5: Satisfactory (S): minor shortcomings; 4: Moderately Satisfactory (MS); 3. Moderately Unsatisfactory (MU): significant shortcomings; 2. Unsatisfactory (U): major problems; 1. Highly Unsatisfactory (HU): severe problems]

• To what extent have the objectives been achieved?
• What are the expected and non-expected results observed by the evaluation?
• What have been the tangible and intangible effects of the intervention?)
• To what extent can these changes/effects be credited to BIOFIN?
• What factors influenced the achievements observed?

Efficiency: [Ratings: 6: Highly Satisfactory (HS): no shortcomings; 5: Satisfactory (S): minor shortcomings; 4: Moderately Satisfactory (MS); 3. Moderately Unsatisfactory (MU): significant shortcomings; 2. Unsatisfactory (U): major problems; 1. Highly Unsatisfactory (HU): severe problems]

• How has BIOFIN established synergies with the related initiative at the global and national level and what have been its results?
• To what extent are the costs involved justified, given the changes/effects which have been achieved?
• To what extent are the costs proportionate to the benefits achieved? What factors are influencing any particular challenges?
• What factors influenced the efficiency with which the achievements observed were attained?
• To what extent has the intervention been cost-effective?

Sustainability [Ratings: 4. Likely (L): negligible risks to sustainability; 3. Moderately Likely (ML): moderate risks; 2. Moderately Unlikely (MU): significant risks; 1. Unlikely (U): severe risks

• Will BIOFIN benefits continue in time once the first phase is over?
• Are there any policy frameworks/policy results to sustain BIOFIN in time?
• What are the main alliances/partnerships from BIOFIN?
• Is there any potential for replicability of the processes?
• Has any capacity been built?
• What evidence can be observed toward a shift in thinking about the benefits of the application of the BIOFIN methodology and the relevance of adopting additional finance solutions?

Impact

• Global and national level impacts [Ratings: 3. Significant (S), 2. Minimal (M), 1. Negligible (N)]

Additional question

• What lessons can be drawn from the early results from the implementation of finance solutions for BIOFIN Phase II

Additional ratings where relevant:

• Not Applicable (N/A)
• Unable to Assess (U/A)

Specific evaluation tasks:

The evaluation will use the following data collection methods to assess the impact of the work of the project:  

1. Desk review and secondary data collection analysis: The evaluator will review all relevant sources of information, such as the project document, Logical Framework, project Annual Work Plans, country reports, project budget and financial reports, progress reports, project files, national strategic and legal documents, and any other materials that the evaluator considers useful for this evidence-based assessment (all provided by UNDP). The Evaluation will assess they key financial aspects of the project, including the extent of co-financing planned and realized. Project costs and funding data will be required. The evaluator will receive assistance from the BIOFIN team and Country Offices (CO) to obtain financial data. 
2. Self-administered surveys: Surveys to key stakeholders in the different participating countries covered by the project should be considered as part of the methodology. The BIOFIN M&E advisor can provide support to manage the online surveys through SurveyMonkey. If this procedure is agreed upon with the evaluator, BIOFIN will distribute the surveys among project beneficiaries to the revised lists facilitated by the consultant. BIOFIN will finally provide the evaluator with the consolidated responses.
3. Semi-structured interviews and focus groups to validate and triangulate information and findings from the surveys and the document reviews, a limited number of interviews (structured, semi-structured, in-depth, key informant, focus group, etc.) may be carried out via tele- or videoconference with project partners to capture the perspectives of managers, beneficiaries, participating ministries, departments and agencies, etc.
4. Field visits: The consultant in charge of the evaluation will visit BIOFIN headquarters (Istanbul, Turkey) and three (3) beneficiary countries in the different regions - (1) Latin-America and the Caribbean; (2) Africa; (3) EurAsia-Pacific - to gauge the opinion of key actors and authorities with regards to the relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, impact, and sustainability of the interventions of BIOFIN.

Methodological triangulation is an underlying principle of the approach chosen. Suitable frameworks for analysis and evaluation are to be elaborated, based on the questions to be answered.

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 and consultations with all key stakeholders and government counterparts in the countries visited during field missions. Additional project participants and other key stakeholders from the remaining participating countries will be consulted by email and telephone, as well as, through appropriate survey techniques.

Outputs to be delivered:

• Work Plan. No later than five days after the signature of the contract, the consultant must deliver to BIOFIN a detailed Work Plan of all the activities to be carried out as part of the evaluation, schedule of activities and outputs detailing the methodology to be used, etc. This workplan should include suggested countries to visit. (by 11 February 2019)

• Inception Report. The consultant should deliver the inception report, which should include a detailed evaluation methodology including the evaluation matrix, types of data collection instruments that will be used and a full analysis of the stakeholders and partners that will be contacted to obtain the evaluation information. First drafts of the instruments to be used for the evaluation such as surveys, focus groups, and interviews should also be included in this first report. (by 20 February 2019)

• Field Visit and preliminary findings Report. The consultant should deliver the field visit and preliminary findings report which should include the main results of the field visits and the preliminary findings based on data analysis of surveys, interviews and focus groups. (by 20 March 2019)

• Draft final evaluation Report. The key product expected from the terminal evaluation is a comprehensive analytical report written in English. The terminal evaluation Report will be a stand-alone document that substantiates its findings, conclusions, recommendations and lessons learned. The report will provide convincing evidence to support its findings/ratings. The report, together with its annexes, will be submitted in electronic format in both, MS Word and PDF format. When submitting the final evaluation report, the evaluator is also required to provide an 'audit trail,' detailing how all received comments have (and have not) been addressed in the final evaluation report. (by 1 April 2019)

• Final Evaluation Report. The consultant should deliver the final evaluation report which should include the revised version of the preliminary version after making sure all the comments and observations from BIOFIN. (by 15 April 2019)

• Presentation of the results of the evaluation. A final presentation of the main results of the evaluation to BIOFIN staff involved in the project will be delivered at the same time of the delivery of the final evaluation report. (by 30 April 2019)

Payment Method:

1. Work Plan, 10%;
2. Inception Report, 10%;
3. Field Visit and preliminary findings Report, 15%;
4. Draft final evaluation Report, 30%;
5. Final Evaluation Report, 30%;
6. Presentation of the results of the evaluation, 5%.

Information on working arrangements:

• Estimated level of effort including travel: 50 days;
• The consultant will be home-based with missions to 3 countries and Istanbul, Turkey;
• The Consultant will be given access to relevant information necessary for the execution of the tasks under this assignment;
• The consultant will engage with the Supervisor by email and Skype on an as-needed basis;
• The Consultant will be responsible for providing her/his working station (i.e., laptop, internet, phone, scanner/printer, etc.) and must have access to a reliable internet connection;
• Given the regional consultations to be undertaken during this assignment, the consultant is expected to be reasonably flexible with his/her availability for such consultations taking into consideration different time zones;
• Payments will be made upon submission of the deliverables, a detailed time sheet and certification of payment form, and acceptance and confirmation by the Supervisor on days worked (with a “day” calculated as 8 hours of work) and satisfactory delivery and acceptance of outputs.

Travel:

• Missions to 3 selected BIOFIN countries, and Istanbul, Turkey to meet the BIOFIN management.  Missions will be selected by region and decided at a later stage based on potential value for learning, with approximately four working days in each country;
• Any necessary mission travel must be approved in advance and writing by the Supervisor;
• The Advanced and Basic Security in the Field II courses must be completed before the commencement of travel;
• Individual Consultants are responsible for ensuring they have vaccinations/inoculations when traveling to certain countries, as designated by the UN Medical Director;
• Consultants are also required to comply with the UN security directives set forth under https://dss.un.org/dssweb/; 
• The consultant will be responsible for making his/her mission travel arrangements in line with UNDP travel policies;
• All travel expenses related to mission travels will be supported by the project travel fund and will be reimbursed as per UNDP rules and regulations for consultants. Costs for mission airfares, terminal expenses, and living allowances should not be included in financial proposal.

Corporate:

• Demonstrates integrity by modeling the UN’s values and ethical standards;
• Promotes the vision, mission, and strategic goals of UNDP;
• Displays cultural, gender, religion, race, nationality and age sensitivity and adaptability;
• Treats all people fairly without favoritism.

Technical:

• Good knowledge in the planning, management, monitoring and evaluation of development projects;
• Adequate understanding of environmental finance concepts and programming;
• High degree of familiarity with UNDP and EC monitoring and evaluation concepts;
• Proven experience and good track record of final project evaluations.

Professionalism:

• Capable of working in a high-pressure environment with sharp and frequent deadlines, managing many tasks simultaneously;
• Excellent analytical and organizational skills;
• Exercise the highest level of responsibility and be able to handle confidential and politically sensitive issues in a responsible and mature manner.

Communication:

• Excellent writing and verbal communication skills;
• Communicate effectively in writing to a varied and broad audience simply and concisely;
• Good command of video communication software packages, such as GoToMeeting and Skype.

Teamwork:

• Works well in a team to advance the priorities of BIOFIN and UNDP as a whole;
• Projects a positive image and is ready to take on a wide range of tasks;
• Focuses on results for governments requesting support;
• Welcomes constructive feedback.

Education:

Master’s degree or higher in development studies, statistics, economics, environmental studies or another relevant field (max 5 points).

Experience:

• At least five years’ demonstrated expertise in the area of project and programme cycle management (max 5 points);
• Demonstrated experience through two writing samples of past evaluations of similar projects (max 10 points);
• At least 10-15 evaluations conducted on development projects/programmes (mid-term and/or final evaluations) (max 10 points);
• Experience with evaluations of global or regional projects/programmes is a strong asset (max 5 points); 
• Experience in biodiversity and sustainable development finance related projects is an advantage (max 5 points);
• Experience with UNDP policies, procedures, and practices particularly about project development and implementation and working experience in an international organization is an advantage (max 5 points);

Languages:

• Excellent oral and written communication skills in English language (max 3 Points);
• Good command of Spanish and/or Russian is an asset (max 2 points).

Evaluation method:

• Only those applications which are responsive and compliant will be evaluated;

• Offers will be evaluated according to the Combined Scoring method – where the technical criteria will be weighted at 70%, and the financial offer will be weighted at 30%;
• The technical criteria [education, experience, languages (max 50 points) and interview (max 30 points)] will be based on a maximum 80 points;
• Only the top three candidates obtaining 35 points or higher from the review of qualifications (education, experience, languages) will be considered for the interview;
• Candidates obtaining 21 points or higher in the interview will be deemed technically compliant and considered for financial evaluation;
• Financial score (max 100 points) shall be computed as a ratio of the proposal being evaluated and the lowest priced proposal of those technically qualified;
• The financial proposal shall specify a lump-sum fee.  To assist the requesting unit in the comparison of financial proposals, the financial proposal must additionally include a breakdown of this fee (including all foreseeable expenses to carry out the assignment);
• Applicant receiving the Highest Combined Score and has accepted UNDP’s General Terms and Conditions will be awarded the contract.

Documentation to be submitted:

• Applicants must submit a CV shall including Education/Qualification, Professional Certification, Employment Records /Experience;
• Two examples of past evaluations of similar projects
• Applicants must reply to the mandatory questions asked by the system when applying.
• Applicants must submit a duly completed and signed Annex II Offeror´s letter to UNDP confirming interest and availability for the Individual Contractor (IC) assignment to be downloaded from the UNDP procurement site

Kindly note you can upload only one document to this application (scan all documents in one single PDF file to attach).

General Conditions of Contract for the ICs:

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

Annex II Offeror´s letter to UNDP confirming interest and availability for the Individual Contractor (IC) assignment

http://procurement-notices.undp.org/view_notice.cfm?notice_id=51863