Background

Introduction

In accordance with UNDP and GEF M&E policies and procedures, all full and medium-sized UNDP support GEF financed projects are required to undergo a terminal evaluation upon completion of implementation. These terms of reference (TOR) sets out the expectations for a Terminal Evaluation (TE) of the medium-sized project titled Conserving Habitats for Globally Important Flora and Fauna in Production Landscapes (PIMS#4839)

The essentials of the project to be evaluated are as follows:

Project Summary Table

Duties and Responsibilities

Objective and Scope

The project was designed to mainstream the conservation of globally important and endangered biodiversity into the management of production landscapes through improved management of critical habitats. At the national level, it will develop a legislative, regulatory and enforcement framework to guide endangered species (ES) and critical habitat conservation and management. This will be supported by capacity building within key ministries and agencies to enhance cross sector coordination in critical habitat management, and to effectively monitor critical habitats and ES to better inform decision makers.

These approaches will be piloted for three species namely the Eastern Sarus Crane (Grus antigone sharpii), the Spoon-billed Sandpiper (Eurynorhynchus pygmeus) and the Water Lily (Crinum thaianum) in three distinct geographical locations. Within each location the project will also build the capacity of local authorities, communities, private sector groups, and NGOs to develop environmentally friendly goods and services, which can provide a sound economic basis for ongoing critical habitat management and economic development.

The TE will be conducted according to the guidance, rules and procedures established by UNDP and GEF as reflected in the UNDP Evaluation Guidance for GEF Financed Projects.

The objectives of the evaluation are to assess the achievement of project results, and to draw lessons that can both improve the sustainability of benefits from this project, and aid in the overall enhancement of UNDP programming.

Evaluation Approach and Method

An overall approach and method[1] for conducting project terminal evaluations of UNDP supported GEF financed projects has developed over time. 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, GEF-financed Projects.    A  set of questions covering each of these criteria have been drafted and are included with this TOR (Annex C) The evaluator is expected to amend, complete and submit this matrix as part of  an evaluation inception report, and shall include it as an annex to the final report.

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, UNDP Country Office, project team, UNDP GEF Technical Adviser based in the region and key stakeholders. The evaluator is expected to conduct a field mission in Thailand including the following project sites

• Khok Kham sub-district Samut Sakorn Province;
• Kaper and Suk-Samran Districts in Ranong Province, and the Kuraburi district in Phang Nga Province;
• Buriram Province.

Interviews will be held with the following organizations and individuals at a minimum:

• Project Director (ONEP)
• Project Manager and Project Coordinator

• Field Coordinators
• Representatives from pilot areas

• Project Administrative/Financial Officer
• Members of Project Board
• IUCN (Responsible Party)
• Thailand Environment Institute (TEI)
• Bird Conservation Society of Thailand
• Tambon Administrative Officers
• The provincial branch of DTCP and PONRE
• Department of Local Administration (DLA)
• Other project consultants as appropriate
• UNDP Thailand Country Office in Bangkok

The evaluator will review all relevant sources of information, such as the project document, project reports – including Annual APR/PIR, project budget revisions, midterm review, progress reports, GEF focal area tracking tools, project files, national strategic and legal documents, and any other materials that the evaluator considers useful for this evidence-based assessment. A list of documents that the project team will provide to the evaluator for review is included in Annex B of this Terms of Reference.

Evaluation Criteria & Ratings

An assessment of project performance will be carried out, based against expectations set out in the Project Logical Framework/Results Framework (  Annex A), which provides performance and impact indicators for project implementation along with their corresponding means of verification. The evaluation will at a minimum cover the criteria of: relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, sustainability and impact. Ratings must be provided on the following performance criteria. The completed table must be included in the evaluation executive summary.   The obligatory rating scales are included in  Annex D.

 Project Finance / Cofinance

The Evaluation will assess the key financial aspects of the project, including the extent of co-financing planned and realized. Project cost and funding data will be required, including annual expenditures.  Variances between planned and actual expenditures will need to be assessed and explained.  Results from recent financial audits, as available, should be taken into consideration. The evaluator(s) will receive assistance from the Country Office (CO) and Project Team to obtain financial data in order to complete the co-financing table below, which will be included in the terminal evaluation report.

Mainstreaming

UNDP supported GEF financed projects are key components in UNDP country programming, as well as regional and global programmes. The evaluation will assess the extent to which the project was successfully mainstreamed with other UNDP priorities, including poverty alleviation, improved governance, the prevention and recovery from natural disasters, and gender.

Impact

The evaluators will assess the extent to which the project is achieving impacts or progressing towards the achievement of impacts. Key findings that should be brought out in the evaluations include whether the project has demonstrated: a) verifiable improvements in ecological status, b) verifiable reductions in stress on ecological systems, and/or c) demonstrated progress towards these impact achievements.[2]

Conclusions, Recommendations, Lessons

The evaluation report must include a chapter providing a set of conclusions, recommendations and lessons.  Conclusion should build on findings and be based in evidence.  Recommendations should be prioritized, specific, relevant, and targeted, with suggested implementers of the recommendations.  Lessons should have wider applicability to other initiatives across the region, the area of intervention, and for the future.

Implementation Arrangements

The principal responsibility for managing this evaluation resides with the UNDP CO in Thailand.  The UNDP CO will contract the evaluators. The evaluation team will make  both international and domestic travel arrangements as per applicable. The Project Team will be responsible for liaising with the Evaluators team to set up stakeholder interviews, coordinate the field visits and coordinate with the Government etc.
 

Evaluation Timeframe

The total duration of the evaluation will be 24 days according to the following plan from 1 September -25 December 2019:

Evaluator Ethics

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

Evaluation Deliverables

The evaluation team is expected to deliver the following:

*When submitting the final evaluation report, the evaluator is required also to provide an 'audit trail', detailing how all received comments have (and have not) been addressed in the final evaluation report.

Institutional Arrangement

The Consultant will report to the assigned UNDP-GEF Regional Technical Advisor Ecosystems and Biodiversity    for Asia and the Pacific and Team Leader of the Inclusive Green Growth and Sustainable Development (IGSD) Unit of UNDP Thailand Country Office.

Duration of the Assignment and Duty Station

The total duration of the contract will be approximately 24 working days from plan from 1 September -25 December 2019:

Duty Station: home-based with one mission to Bangkok and three missions the project sites in Buriram, Ranong, Phang Nga and Samut Sakhon, Thailand. The tentative MTR timeframe is as follows:

[1] For additional information on methods, see the Handbook on Planning, Monitoring and Evaluating for Development Results, Chapter 7, pg. 163

[2] A useful tool for gauging progress to impact is the Review of Outcomes to Impacts (ROtI) method developed by the GEF Evaluation Office:  ROTI Handbook 2009

Competencies

Corporate Competencies:

• Demonstrates integrity by modelling 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 favouritism.

Technical Competencies:

• Analytic capacity and demonstrated ability to process, analyse and synthesise complex, technical information;
• Proven ability to support the development of high quality knowledge and training materials, and to train technical teams;
• Proven experience in the developing country context and working in different cultural settings.

Communication:

• Communicate effectively in writing to a varied and broad audience in a simple and concise manner.

Professionalism:

• Capable of working in a high pressure environment with sharp and frequent deadlines, managing many tasks simultaneously;
• Excellent analytical and organizational skills.

Teamwork:

• Projects a positive image and is ready to take on a wide range of tasks;
• Focuses on results for the client;
• Welcomes constructive feedback.

Required Skills and Experience

The evaluation team will be composed of an International and a national evaluator.   The consultants shall have prior experience in evaluating similar projects.  Experience with GEF financed projects is an advantage. The international evaluator will be designated as the team leader and will be responsible for finalizing the report. The evaluators selected should not have participated in the project preparation and/or implementation and should not have conflict of interest with project related activities.

The International Lead Evaluator must present the following qualifications:

• A Master’s degree in Natural Sciences, Environmental Management, Environmental Studies, Development studies, Social Sciences and/or other related field.
• Minimum of 8 years accumulated and recognized experience in biodiversity conservation and management, biodiversity conservation and sustainable utilisation areas, and sustainable livelihoods.
• Minimum of 5 years of project evaluation and/or implementation experience in the result-based management framework, adaptive management.
• Very good report writing skills in English.
• Familiarity in similar country or regional situations relevant to that of FF is an advantage.
• Some experience working with the GEF or GEF-evaluations is an advantage;
• Demonstrated understanding of issues related to gender and biodiversity, experience in gender sensitive evaluation and analysis.
• Excellent communication skills.
• Demonstrable analytical skills.

Responsibilities:

• Documentation and review
• Leading the TE team in planning, conducting and reporting on the evaluation
• Deciding on division of labour within the Team and ensuring timeliness of reports
• Use of best practice evaluation methodologies in conducting the evaluation
• Leading the drafting and finalization of the Inception Report for the Terminal Evaluation
• Leading presentation of the draft evaluation findings and recommendations in-country
• Conducting the de-briefing for the UNDP Country Office in Thailand and Core Project Management Team
• Leading the drafting and finalisation of the Terminal Evaluation report

Price Proposal and Schedule of Payment :

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

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 costs shall be reimbursed at actual but not exceeding the quotation from UNDP approved travel agent.  The provided living allowance will not be exceeding UNDP Living Allowance rates.

Criteria for Evaluation of Proposal

 Only those applications which are responsive and compliant will be evaluated.  Offers will be evaluated according to the Combined Scoring method – where the educational background and experience on similar assignments will be weighted at 70% and the price proposal will weigh as 30% of the total scoring.  The applicant receiving the Highest Combined Score that has also accepted UNDP’s General Terms and Conditions will be awarded the contract.

Only candidates obtaining a minimum of 70% of the total technical points would be considered for the Financial Evaluation. UNDP applies a fair and transparent selection process that will take into account the competencies/skills of the applicants as well as their financial proposals. Qualified women and members of social minorities are encouraged to apply.

Evaluation criteria

Recommended Presentation of Proposal: 

Interested individual consultants must submit the following document’s information to demonstrate their qualifications; Please group them into one 1  single PDF document as the application only allows to upload maximum on document:

a) Letter of Confirmation of Interest and Availability and Financial Proposal using the template provided by UNDP

b) CV indicating all past experiences from similar projects, as well as the contact details (email and telephone number) of the Candidate and at least three (3) professional references.

c) Brief description of approach to work/technical proposal of why the individual considers

him/herself as the most suitable for the assignment, and a proposed methodology on how they will approach and complete the assignment; (max 1 page)

d) Financial Proposal that indicates the all-inclusive fixed total contract price and all other travel related costs (such as flight ticket, per diem, etc), supported by a breakdown of costs, as per template attached to the Letter of Confirmation of Interest template.  If an applicant is employed by an organization/company/institution, and he/she expects his/her employer to charge a management fee in the process of releasing him/her to UNDP under Reimbursable Loan Agreement (RLA), the applicant must indicate at this point, and ensure that all such costs are duly incorporated in the financial proposal submitted to UNDP.

Incomplete proposals may not be considered. The shortlisted candidates may be contacted and the successful candidate will be notified

ANNEXES

Annex I -General Condition of Contract

Annex II- TOR Evaluation Terms of Reference (International Consultant)

                Annex A: Project Logical Framework

                Annex B: List of Documents to be reviewed by the Evaluators

Annex C: Evaluation questions

Annex D: Rating Scales

Annex E: Evaluation Consultant Code of Conduct and Agreement Form

Annex F: Evaluation Report Outline

Annex G: Evaluation Report Clearance Form

Annex III: Offeror’s letter to UNDP Confirming Interest and Availability for the individual IC, including Financial Proposal Template

All documents can be downloaded at :http://procurement-notices.undp.org/view_notice.cfm?notice_id=57798