Background
The Governance for Inclusive Development Programme (GIDP) is a joint programme of the government of Lao PDR, UNDP, UNCDF and other development partners. The GIDP has been formulated under the framework of the National Governance and Public Administration Reform Programme (NGPAR) of the Government of Lao PDR and built on the established partnerships through two programmes within the government’s NGPAR - Strengthening Capacity and Service Delivery of Local Administration (GPAR SCSD 2012-December 2016) and the National GPAR Programme Support Programme (GPAR NGPS 2012- June 2016).
The GIDP, led by the Ministry of Home Affairs (MoHA) and with formal cross-sector cooperation and implementation by Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Planning and Investment, and provincial and district administrations. This programme is responsive to the growing emphasis on the need for multi-sector planning and the use of data/information to inform the content, nature and scope of district plans. It seeks to promote wider governance improvements, strengthen public administration’s ability to achieve better service delivery and increase citizens’ systematic engagement, especially at the local levels where basic services are coordinated, planned, financed and reported. GIDP has a particular focus on the inclusion of less-advantaged people and groups. GIDP will also enhance partnerships at the national level through the Governance Sector Working Group, to promote multi-stakeholder policy dialogue on good governance and gender policies. The three GIDP components are interrelated and designed to create a virtuous loop that promotes good governance and accountability as well as sub-national and national partnerships and policy dialogue. To achieve these objectives, three inter-related outputs have been conceived:
- Output 1: Targeted local administrations are able to develop and finance the implementation of multi-sector work plans based on community priorities
- Output 2: Accountability framework applied at the district level to capture and use citizens’ feedback on provision of basic services
- Output 3: Enhanced multi-stakeholder governance processes promoting dialogue and feeding into good governance-related policies including the delivery of basic services
The GIDP Result Framework was updated to include the final outcome statement with qualitative indicators; reviewed in terms of expected impact/results, key indicators, activities, and timelines.
The mid-term evaluation is planned to assess the programme in such areas as efficiency, effectiveness, and relevance at the output level and their contributions to outcome level goals, to analyse budget and resource allocations in terms of emerging issues that the project needs to address and to capture lessons and recommendations for the future.
During the mission/assignment, the Mid-Term Evaluation team will be joined by a SDC appointed consultant with specific reporting obligations to SDC as the main development partner of GPAR/GIDP.
Duties and Responsibilities
The consultant will act as a leader of the mid-term evaluation team and will participate in the management of all aspects of evaluation work. In particular, the consultant will:
- Manage the entire evaluation process including planning, managing and delivering evaluations of the project in line with UNDP’s requirements;
- Lead and supervise the evaluation team comprising of a national consultant;
- Document, review and frame approach and questions for the evaluation;
- Discuss the inception report and finalise mission plan;
- Lead the review on the performance of the programme in achieving the outputs as per the Programme Document and their contributions to outcome level goals;
- Undertake field mission to interview concerned stakeholders including development partners and beneficiaries, and facilitate communication between stakeholders and the evaluation team to gather feedback;
- Present findings and recommendations and evaluation evidence to management and Governing Bodies to enhance use by relevant decision-makers and stakeholders in appropriate ways;
- Provide coaching and mentoring to staff within his/her evaluation team; and
- Ensure the effective and efficient use of evaluation resources, timely implementation of evaluation process and submission of reports according to deadlines, ensuring standards and processes for evaluation integrity and credibility;
- Perform other related duties and assignments as and when required.
More specifically, the following criteria are covered by this Review:
Relevance : The extent to which the aid activity is suited to the priorities and policies of the target group, recipient and donor. The following questions will be considered:
- To what extent are the objectives of the programme still valid?
- Are the activities and outputs of the programme consistent with the overall goal and the attainment of its objectives?
- Are the activities and outputs of the programme consistent with the intended impacts and effects?
- Is the project pro-actively addressing emerging demands and opportunities unforeseen during the project development, adapting its theory of change to respond to changes in the country context and stakeholder landscape, including changing national priorities, legislative and policy updates, changes in power relation among key stakeholders?
- Effectiveness : A measure of the extent to which an aid activity attains its objectives. The following questions will be considered:
- To what extent were the objectives achieved / are likely to be achieved?
- What were the major factors influencing the achievement or non-achievement of the objectives?
- What are lessons learnt from previous phases of GPAR and how are they reflected and implemented in GIDP?
- Have there been regular reviews of the work to ensure that the project is on track to achieve the desired results, and to inform course corrections if needed?
- Is project’s governance mechanism (i.e., the project board or equivalent) functioning well? If not, commentary and recommendations shall be provided.
- Are the outcome indicators measured against baseline and target values (if available) and reflects quantitative and qualitative dimensions of the achievement?
- Efficiency : Efficiency measures the outputs - qualitative and quantitative - in relation to the inputs. It is an economic term which signifies that the aid uses the least costly resources possible in order to achieve the desired results. This generally requires comparing alternative approaches to achieving the same outputs, to see whether the most efficient process has been adopted. The following questions will be considered:
- Were activities cost-efficient?
- Were objectives achieved on time?
- Was the programme or project implemented in the most efficient way compared to alternatives?
- Are budget deviations, be it over/under spending, well-recorded? Is the budget outlook for the rest of the phase well assessed (Potential) Impact : The positive and negative changes produced by a development intervention, directly or indirectly, intended or unintended. This involves the main impacts and effects resulting from the activity on the local social, economic, environmental and other development indicators. The examination should be concerned with both intended and unintended results and must also include the positive and negative impact of external factors, such as changes in terms of trade and financial conditions. The following questions will be considered:
- What would be expected to happen as a result of the programme or project?
- What real difference has the activity made or is expected to make to the beneficiaries?
- How many people have been / are expected to be affected?
- Sustainability : Sustainability is concerned with measuring whether the benefits of an activity are likely to continue after donor funding has been withdrawn. Projects need to be environmentally as well as financially sustainable. The following questions will be considered:
- To what extent did the benefits of a programme or project will be able to continue after donor funding ceased?
- What were the major factors which influenced the achievement or non-achievement of sustainability of the programme or project?
- Is there an exit strategy / transition plan from DP funded project to GoL endeavor, with a special focus on the funding status?
- Is there a actionable exit plan to transit the DP funded project to a national government initiative, and is the plan regularly reviewd and adjusted according to the project progress, including its financial commitments and capacity?
- Are stakeholders and national partners fully engaged in the decision-making, implementation and monitoring of the project?
The aim of asking these questions is to ensure that the evaluator can assess the information and formulate conclusions and recommendations concerning:
- The Overall Results: How successful was the undertaking? Why? Do impacts and effects justify costs? Were the objectives achieved within time and within the budget? Were there any major shortcomings? Were there major achievements?
- Sustainability: The question of whether achievements are sustainable in the longer run is of critical importance.
- Alternatives: Are there better ways of achieving the results?
- Lessons Learned: What are the general lessons which can be drawn and which should be borne in mind when embarking on future programmes that has been/ to be applied within current phase of GIDP.
- Phase out recommendations
During the mission/assignment, the Mid-Term Evaluation team will be joined by a SDC appointed consultant with specific reporting obligations to SDC as the main development partner of GPAR/GIDP. Said consultant will be part of the evaluation team and participate in the evaluation process including meetings and discussions and may contribute to the evaluation report as appropriate based on discussion with the team leader.
The evaluation should be undertaken with the guidance of the 2009 UNDP Handbook on Planning, Monitoring and Evaluating for Development Results (ADDENDUM June 2011), available here:
http://web.undp.org/evaluation/handbook/documents/english/pme-handbook.pdf
http://web.undp.org/evaluation/documents/handbook/addendum/Evaluation-Addendum-June-2011.pdf
Competencies
- Demonstrated strong knowledge of public administration and governance development
- Excellent analytical skills and ability to synthesise research and reach empirically-based conclusions on related subject
- Displays capacity to provide experienced advice on best practices
- Focuses on result for the client and responds positively to feedback
- Strong writing skills with proven capacity to produce evaluation reports
- Good communication, coordination and facilitation skills
- Good application of Results-Based Management
- Consistently ensures timeliness and quality of work
- Ability to deliver when working under pressure and within changing circumstances
- Ability to provide guidance and training to a team member
- Excellent interpersonal, communications and facilitation skills
- Cultural and gender sensitivity and ability to work with people from different backgrounds
- Familiarity with the UN(DP) norms and standards
Language requirements
- Fluency of English language is required
- Knowledge of Lao would be an asset
Required Skills and Experience
Education
- Advanced University degree in public administration, public policy and management, development studies, political science, social science or other relevant fields
Work Experience
- At least 7 years of increasingly responsible professional experience in the field of monitoring and evaluation, including a track record of conducting M&E of technical cooperation, development activities and projects related to social inclusion and/or gender, preferably in the South East Asia region
- Recognised expertise in M&E preferably in Public Administration and/or Governance including sub-national administrations combined with a solid understanding of the use of rubrics analysis
- Strong track record of innovative leadership in managing evaluations, and proven ability to produce demonstrable results
- Sound knowledge and understanding of political context and working culture in Lao PDR and/or ASEAN region is an asset
- Evaluation Method and Criteria
Applicants will be evaluated based on the following methodology:
Combined Scoring method:
The award of the contract shall be made to the applicant whose offer has been evaluated and determined as a) responsive/compliant/acceptable; and b) having received the highest score out of set of weighted technical criteria (70%) and combined with the financial offer which will be weighted a max of 30%.
Technial: 70 points
a. Relevance of education: 10 points
b. Direct experience: 25 points
c. Expertise and knowledge: 20 points
d. Interview: 15 points
Financial: 30 points