UNDP Jobs - 88161- Summative Evaluation of the Public Financial Manag

Summative Evaluation of the Public Financial Management Project

Location :

States in South Sudan, SOUTH SUDAN

Type of Contract :

Individual Contract

Starting Date :

28-Oct-2019

Application Deadline :

23-Oct-19 (Midnight New York, USA)

Post Level :

International Consultant

Duration of Initial Contract :

30 days

Languages Required :

English

Expected Duration of Assignment :

30 days

UNDP is committed to achieving workforce diversity in terms of gender, nationality and culture. Individuals from minority groups, indigenous groups and persons with disabilities are equally encouraged to apply. All applications will be treated with the strictest confidence. UNDP does not tolerate sexual exploitation and abuse, any kind of harassment, including sexual harassment, and discrimination. All selected candidates will, therefore, undergo rigorous reference and background checks.

Background

The 2011 Transitional Constitution of the Republic of South Sudan specifies a three-tiered system of decentralized government: national, state and local governments. While most high-yielding revenues are collected by the national government, the rest are given to state and local governments. The Constitution, together with the Local Government Act of 2009, devolve responsibility for the provision of primary public service delivery and infrastructure development to states and counties. However, at the states and counties levels; financial resources at disposal and its fiscal space are most limited and public financial management capacity is very low. In addition, the fall in oil revenue receipts caused by the volatilities in the global oil market coupled with the impact of the internal conflict exacerbated poor public service delivery at the subnational levels due to inadequate revenue flowing to the states. This further worsen the capacity of the subnational governments to deliver basic social services to their people.

UNDP believes that building strong institutions is the pathway for developing a progressive society where people can access services when they need them and have confidence living in an area where their welfare is ensured. Recognizing the importance of improved public financial management and accountability, UNDP with financial assistance from the government of Japan and African Development Bank, provides technical assistance to build the capacity for domestic non-oil revenue generation and accountability in Aweil, Bor, Gbudue, Gogrial, Jubek and Torit states.

The project contributes towards the UN Cooperation Framework 2019-2021 Outcome 2: Local economies are recovered, and conditions and coping strategies are improved to end severe food insecurity, and UNDP Country Programme Document (CPD) 2019 – 2021 Output 2.4. National and subnational governments capacities developed for tax and trade policy harmonization, revenue diversification, expansion of fiscal space and more transparent utilization of public resources.

Towards improving the capacity of local government to generate, manage resources in a transparent and equitable manner, the programme supported establishment of regulatory, legal framework, and unified institutional tax structures and system for tax systems in six states; enhanced capacity of state revenue officials from Aweil, Bor, Gbudue, Gogrial, Jubek and Torit, and on non-oil revenue management which has led to increased revenues collection; increased capacity of members of State Legislative Assemblies from the six states on public financial management procedures, gender-sensitive budgeting and oversight.

Purpose of the evaluation:

The current phase of Support to Public Financial Management Project in South Sudan ends in March 2020. This evaluation is being conducted to assess the project’s contributions towards the enhancement of capacity of states in non-oil revenue management and accountability for improved service delivery.

UNDP commissions this summative evaluation to provide UNDP, donors, national stakeholders and partners with an impartial assessment of the results generated by the project. The evaluation will assess the project’s relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, impact, sustainability contributions towards gender equality and women empowerment; identify and document lessons learned; and provide stakeholders with recommendations to inform the design and implementation of other related ongoing and future projects. The evaluation will also assess linkages and coherence with other initiatives like AfDB’s Non-Oil Revenue Management and Accountability (NORMA) project. Key stakeholders are State Revenue Authorities, State Ministries of Finance, State Legislative Assemblies in Aweil, Bor, Gbudue, Gogrial, Jubek and Torit, funding partners (Japan, AfDB), UNDP and other actors.

Duties and Responsibilities

Scope:

The summative evaluation will cover the period from March 2016 to date, covering all the project locations; Aweil, Bor, Gbudue, Gogrial, Jubek and Torit. The evaluation will cover programme conceptualisation, design, implementation, monitoring, reporting and evaluation of results and will engage all project stakeholders. The evaluation will assess the relevance, effectiveness, efficiency of the project; explore the key factors that have contributed to the achieving or not achieving of the intended results; and determine the extent to which the project is contributing towards strengthening state governments’ capacity for resource management and public service delivery; addressing crosscutting issues of gender equality and women’s empowerment and human rights; and forging partnership at different levels, including with government, donors, UN agencies, and communities.

Objectives:

Specific evaluation objectives are:

To assess the relevance and strategic positioning of the project to South Sudan’s public financial management and improved service delivery needs;
Assess a) the progress made towards project results and whether there were any unintended results and b) what can be captured in terms of lessons learned for ongoing and future UNDP’s public financial management and institutional capacity enhancement initiatives in South Sudan;
Assess whether the project management arrangements, approaches and strategies were well-conceived and efficient in delivering the project;
Analyse the extent to which the project enhanced application of a rights-based approach, gender equality and women’s empowerment, social and environmental standards and participation of other socially vulnerable groups such as children and the disabled;

Evaluation Questions:

The summative evaluation seeks to answer the following questions, focused around the evaluation criteria of relevance, effectiveness, efficiency and sustainability.

Relevance:

To what extent was the project in line with the national development priorities, the country programme’s outputs and outcomes, the UNDP Strategic Plan and the SDGs;
To what extent does the project contribute to the theory of change for the relevant country programme outcome;
To what extent were lessons learned from other relevant projects considered in the project’s design;
To what extent does the project contribute to gender equality, the empowerment of women and the human rights-based approach;

Effectiveness:

To what extent did the project contribute to the country programme outcomes and outputs, the SDGs, the UNDP Strategic Plan and national development priorities;
To what extent were the project outputs achieved;
What factors have contributed to achieving or not achieving intended country programme outputs and outcomes;
To what extent has the project been appropriately responsive to the needs of the national constituents and changing partner priorities;
To what extent has the project contributed to gender equality, the empowerment of women and the realization of human rights;

Efficiency:

To what extent was the project management structure as outlined in the project document efficient in generating the expected results;
To what extent have the UNDP project implementation strategy and execution been efficient and cost-effective;
To what extent has there been an economical use of financial and human resources; Have resources (funds, human resources, time, expertise, etc.) been allocated strategically to achieve outcomes;
To what extent do the M&E systems utilized by UNDP ensure effective and efficient project management;

Sustainability:

Are there any financial risks that may jeopardize the sustainability of project outputs;
To what extent will financial and economic resources be available to sustain the benefits achieved by the project;
Are there any social or political risks that may jeopardize sustainability of project outputs and the project’s contributions to country programme outputs and outcomes;
To what extent are lessons learned being documented by the project team on a continual basis and shared with appropriate parties who could learn from the project;
To what extent do UNDP interventions have well-designed and well-planned exit strategies;

Human rights:

To what extent have poor, indigenous and physically challenged, women and other disadvantaged and marginalized groups benefited from the work of UNDP in the country;

Gender equality:

To what extent have gender equality and the empowerment of women been addressed in the design, implementation and monitoring of the project;
Is the gender marker data assigned to this project representative of reality;
To what extent has the project promoted positive changes in gender equality and the empowerment of women? Were there any unintended effects;

Guiding evaluation questions will be further refined by the evaluation team and agreed with UNDP evaluation stakeholders.

Methodology:

The evaluation will be carried out in accordance with UNDP evaluation guidelines and policies, United Nations Group Evaluation Norms and Ethical Standards; OECD/DAC evaluation principles and guidelines and DAC Evaluation Quality Standards. The evaluation may employ a combination of both qualitative and quantitative evaluation methods including:

Document review of all relevant documentation. This would include a review of inter alia; project document (contribution agreement); theory of change and results framework; programme and project quality assurance reports; annual workplans; consolidated quarterly and annual reports; results-oriented monitoring report; highlights of project board meetings; and technical/financial monitoring reports;
Semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders including key government counterparts, donor community members, representatives of key civil society organizations, UNCT members and implementing partners;
Development of evaluation questions around relevance, effectiveness, efficiency and sustainability and designed for different stakeholders to be interviewed.
Key informant and focus group discussions with men and women, beneficiaries and stakeholders.
All interviews should be undertaken in full confidence and anonymity. The final evaluation report will not assign specific comments to individuals;
Surveys and questionnaires including participants in development programmes, UNCT members and/or surveys and questionnaires involving other stakeholders at strategic and programmatic levels;
Field visits and on-site validation of key tangible outputs and interventions. The evaluator is expected to follow a participatory and consultative approach that ensures close engagement with the evaluation managers, implementing partners and direct beneficiaries;
Other methods such as outcome mapping, observational visits, group discussions, etc.
Data review and analysis of monitoring and other data sources and methods;

The final methodological approach including interview schedules, field visits and data to be used in the evaluation will be clearly outlined in the inception report and be fully discussed and agreed between UNDP, stakeholders and the evaluators;

Evaluation Products/Deliverables:

The evaluators will be expected to deliver the following:

Evaluation inception report (10-15 pages). The inception report will be drafted following and based on preliminary discussions with after the desk review and should be produced before the evaluation starts (before any formal evaluation interviews, survey distribution or field visits) and prior to the country visit in the case of international evaluators;
Evaluation debriefings. Immediately following an evaluation, UNDP may ask for a preliminary debriefing;
Draft evaluation report (up to 40 pages including executive summary). UNDP will review the draft evaluation report and provide an amalgamated set of comments to the evaluators within an agreed period, addressing the content required (as agreed in the TOR and inception report) and agreed quality criteria;
Evaluation report audit trail. Comments and changes by the evaluator in response to the draft report should be retained by the evaluator to show how they have addressed commen;.
Final evaluation report;
Presentations to stakeholders

Competencies

Core Competencies and values:

Demonstrates integrity and fairness by modelling UN values and ethical standards;
Demonstrates professional competence and is conscientious and efficient in meeting commitments, observing deadlines and achieving results;
Display cultural, gender, nationality, religion and age sensitivity and adaptability;
High sense of relational skills, including cultural, gender, religion, race, nationality and age sensitivity and adaptability, with a demonstrated ability to work in a multidisciplinary team.

Functional Competencies:

Good knowledge and understanding of the UN system, familiarity with UNDP mandate an asset;
Knowledge of issues concerning institutional/capacity assessment, organization development, etc;
Thorough knowledge of results-based management and strategic planning processes;
Excellent facilitation and communication skills;
Wide experience in quantitative and qualitative data collection methods and –analysis including surveys, focus group discussions, key informant interviews etc;
Ability to deal with multi-stakeholder groups;
Ability to write focused assessment reports;
Strong interpersonal and managerial skills, ability to work with people from different backgrounds and evidence of delivering good quality assessment and research products in a timely manner.

Required Skills and Experience

The end line evaluation will be conducted by an independent consultant (an international evaluation expert) with support from a national evaluation associate. The international consultant must have extensive experience in strategic programming of development assistance in post-conflict countries within the broader areas of public administration and public financial management in post conflict settings. Preferably, the consultant should also have substantial knowledge of and experience with the monitoring and evaluation of similar initiatives in volatile environments. The required qualifications and technical competencies are listed below:

Education:

Minimum Master’s degree in Economics, Public Policy and Management, Public Administration, Development Studies, International Development, or any other relevant educational background .

Experience:

At least 7 years (and recent – latest should have been conducted within the past 2 years) professional experience in conducting evaluations of public financial management, public administration and economic governance initiatives in post-conflict settings.
At least 5 years’ experience in the fields of public financial management, public administration, institutional capacity building, economic governance, gender mainstreaming and human rights promotion.
Excellent writing skills with a strong background in report drafting.
Demonstrated ability and willingness to work with people of different cultural, ethnic and religious background, different gender, and diverse political views.

Language:

Fluency in English with excellent oral, written, communication and reporting skills is required.

Technical Evaluation Criteria:

Minimum Master’s degree in Economics, Public Policy and Management, Public Administration, Development Studies, International Development, or any other relevant educational background 20 points
At least 7 years (and recent – latest should have been conducted within the past 2 years) professional experience in conducting evaluations of public financial management, public administration and economic governance initiatives in post-conflict settings. 40points
At least 5 years’ experience in the fields of public financial management, public administration, institutional capacity building, economic governance, gender mainstreaming and human rights promotion. 20 points
Excellent writing skills with a strong background in report drafting. 10 points
Demonstrated ability and willingness to work with people of different cultural, ethnic and religious background, different gender, and diverse political views. 10 points

Total 100

Technical proposal:

Duly accomplished Letter of Confirmation of Interest and Availability using the template provided by UNDP;
Personal CV or P11, indicating all past experience from similar projects, as well as the contact details (email and telephone number) of the Candidates and at least three (3) professional references indicating the last experience in the domain
Brief description of why the individual considers him/herself as the most suitable for the assignment, and a methodology on how they will approach and complete the assignment;
Qualification documents of the consultant. These include certified degrees and certificates;
A detailed clear methodology will be applied to make the functional assessment more successful and the planning of activities which will be followed during this assessment exercise. The consultants wishing to submit his/her offer must note that this is the crucial part of his/her offer;
At least 3 certificates of good completion of similar tasks. Note: any certificate without the client’s name, address, stamp and signature will not be accepted;
Any other document deemed relevant to this consultancy service.

Financial proposal:

A Financial Proposal must be submitted that indicates the all-inclusive fixed total contract price supported by a breakdown of costs as per template provided.

Criteria for selection of the consultants:

The offer will be evaluated by using the Best value for money approach (combined scoring method). Technical proposal will be evaluated on 70%. Whereas budget proposed will be evaluated on 30% based on sufficiency for applying the data gathering techniques and for obtaining reliable data for the Capacity Assessment in the timeframe indicated. Below is the breakdown of technical proposal on 100% which will be brought to 70%: