Background

Background and Context: 

The Support to Public Administration Project – RSS/IGAD Regional Initiative for Capacity Enhancement in South Sudan- Phase II was designed in line with the 2012-2016 South Sudan Development Plan (SSDP) and the annexed Medium-Term Capacity Development Strategy (MTCDS). The project aimed to support South Sudan in building its civil service capacity for equitable, responsive, and accountable service delivery. It addressed three levels of capacity: enabling environment (policy, legal, regulatory and institutional); organizational (work procedures and operational arrangements); and individual (skills development) levels. The project was funded by the Government of Norway while three IGAD countries; Ethiopia, Kenya and Uganda contributed experienced civil servants who spent two years in South Sudan’s national and subnational government institutions. The project was implemented in Aweil, Juba, Kapoeta, Kuajok, Rumbek, Terekeka, Wau. Yambio and Yei.  

The project was initially aligned to the United Nations Development Assistance Framework (UNDAF) and the UNDP Country Programme Document (January 2012 - June 2016); Outcome 1: Core governance and civil service functions are established and operational, then to the UN Interim Cooperation Framework (ICF)/ Country Programme Document (CPD) (2016-2018) Outcome 3: Peace and governance strengthened, and lastly to the current 2019-2021 UN Cooperation Framework and CPD Outcome 1 Strengthened peace infrastructures and accountable governance at the national, state and local levels. 

The following were some of the key achievements of the Support to Public Administration project;

• 92 percent of host institutions reported improved capacity of civil servants.
• 19 gender responsive institutional policies, manuals and SOPs were developed, approved and are in use.
• Six institutional policies were developed and operationalized. 
• Twenty strategic frameworks were developed and submitted for approval. 
• 96 percent of targeted institutions reported improved work-related performance by the twins. 
• 93 percent of twinned civil servants expressed satisfaction over the twinning arrangements. 
• 90 percent of targeted institutions reported improved services delivery. 

 Purpose of the Evaluation: 

The Support Public Administration Project ended on 31 July 2019.  This evaluation is being conducted to assess the project’s contributions towards supporting South Sudan in building its civil service capacity for equitable, responsive, and accountable service delivery. 

UNDP commissions this final 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. Key stakeholders include relevant ministries, department and agencies of the Government of the Republic of South Sudan, Government of Norway, IGAD contributing countries – Ethiopia, Kenya and Uganda, UNDP, UN agencies, UN Mission in South Sudan, civil society organisations, think tanks and other actors. 

Duties and Responsibilities

Evaluation scope and objectives: 

Scope: 

The end-line evaluation will cover the period of 1 October 2013 to 31 July 2019, covering all the project locations; Aweil, Juba, Kapoeta, Kuajok, Rumbek, Terekeka, Wau. Yambio and Yei. . 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 to improving 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 civil service capacity and public 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 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.
• Assess the overall contribution of the project to the state of good governance and public administration in the country.

Evaluation questions: 

• The project review 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 for the evaluation:

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 will 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 should 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 evaluator will be expected to deliver the following: 

• Evaluation inception report (10-15 pages). The inception report should be carried out following and based on preliminary discussions with UNDP 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 and findings.
• Draft evaluation report (max 40 pages). UNDP and stakeholders will review the draft evaluation report and provide an amalgamated set of comments to the evaluator within 10 days, addressing the content required (as agreed in the inception report) and quality criteria as outlined in the UNDP evaluation guidelines.
• 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 comments.
• Final evaluation report.
• Presentations to stakeholders and the evaluation reference group.
• Evaluation brief and other knowledge products agreed in the inception report. 

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

Education: 

• Minimum Master’s degree in Law, 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 similar public administration and governance initiatives in post-conflict settings;
• At least 10 years’ experience in the fields of public administration, institutional capacity building, governance, and 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.

Implementation arrangements: 

The UNDP South Sudan Country Office will select a qualified and experienced evaluation consultant through UNDP procurement processes in consultation with the partners. UNDP will be responsible for the management of the consultant and will in this regard designate an evaluation manager and focal point. Project staff will assist in facilitating the process (e.g., providing relevant documentation, arranging visits/interviews with key informants). 

The project manager and evaluation manager will convene an evaluation reference group comprising of technical experts from partners and UNDP to enhance the quality of the review. This reference group will review the inception report and the draft evaluation report to provide detailed comments related to the quality of methodology, evidence collected, analysis and articulation of findings and approve the final report. The reference group will also advise on the conformity of processes to UNDP and UNEG standards.

The consultant will take responsibility, with assistance from the project team, for setting up meetings and conducting the review, subject to advanced approval of the methodology submitted in the inception report. The consultant will report directly to the designated evaluation manager and focal point and work closely with the project team. The consultant will work full time, based in UNDP South Sudan and will be required to travel to the five conflict clusters as part of the evaluation. Office space and limited administrative and logistical support will be provided.  The consultant will use her/his own laptop and cell phone.  

UNDP will develop a management response to the evaluation within 2 weeks of report finalization.

Timeframe for the evaluation process:  

The evaluation will be carried out over a period of 30 working days broken down as follows:

Activity Deliverable Days: 

• Evaluation design, methodology and detailed work plan Inception report 5 days
• Documents review and stakeholder consultations, initial briefing
• Data collection analysis, debriefing and presentation of draft evaluation report Draft report: 20 days

Validation workshop: 

• Finalization of evaluation report incorporating additions and comments provided by all stakeholders and submission to UNDP South Sudan. Evaluation report 5 days

Total number of working days 30 days.

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:

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%:

Evaluation criteria: 

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