Background

Albania is one of eight countries around the world selected in January 2007 to pilot the ‘One UN” Programme. So far, Albania’s has undertaken three programme cycles- the first One UN Programme signed in October 2007 until 2011, the second, the so called Programme of Cooperation 2012-2016, and the current Programme of Cooperation for Sustainable Development 2017-2021. During this period, the three programme documents have served as the main strategic result framework to guide UN integrated actions in support to country’s development priorities. Achievements and lessons learnt during the implementation period, have served to strengthening joint UN agencies work around key priority areas.

A comprehensive development context of the country is provided in the MAPS Report[1] (September 2018), Voluntary National Review on Sustainable Development Goals[2] (July 2018), the 2018 Government of Albania and United Nations Progress Report[3] and several reports/assessments conducted by UN agencies and development partners in the country that are included in Annex 1 – Desk Review Materials of this ToRs.

The results framework of the PoCSD 2017-2021 outlines 4 outcomes and 17 outputs that respond to country
needs and make use of the UN’s comparative advantages. The outcomes Outcome 1 Governance and Rule of Law; Outcome 2 Social Cohesion; Outcome 3 Economic Growth, Labour and Agriculture; Outcome 4 Environment and Climate Change, are guided by EU integration and SDG Agencies, whilst applying the ‘delivering-as-one’ approach.

Key elements of the approach include: Outcome level work, led by inter-agency Results Groups responsible for development of biennial Joint Work Plans, including their implementation, monitoring, and reporting with Implementing Partners, under the guidance of UN Country Team and the Joint Executive Committee (JEC) that provides formal oversight and management direction. At the strategic level, the JEC is co-chaired by the Deputy Prime Minister and the UN Resident Coordinator, while at the technical level it is co-chaired by the RC and the Director of the Department for Development and Good Governance (DDGG) at the Prime Minister’s Office.

One level down, each outcome is comprised of specific outputs varying 2-6 per each Outcome. The Programme’s outputs are made operational through the development of joint biannual work plans (JWPs) which form an agreement between the UN agencies and implementing partners on the use of resources. The JWP identifies the exact deliverables, responsible parties as well as the exact costs and the available resources. The design, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of JWPs are coordinated at the technical level by the output working groups, which are co-chaired by the Government and the United Nations, and at the strategic level by the Outcome Groups, co-chaired by 2 UN HoAs and a senior government representative (Minister or Deputy Minister of key implementing line ministry for the respective Outcome). The Programme also envisages joint programme reviews, mid-year and annual, that allow for timely measurement of progress and performance thereby allowing for adjustment of programme implementation. The UN programme supports the government of Albania to roll out the national development agenda by mainstreaming international norms and values such as human rights, gender and the social inclusion into its interventions.

The key partners in the implementation of the PoCSD are the Government, namely the Deputy Prime Minister’s Office, Department for Development and Good Governance (DDGG) within the Prime Minister Office and line Ministries, UN Agencies, development partners, civil society organisations, and the private sector. While the management processes are implemented by the UNCT, which is supported by inter-agency advisory bodies, including: (i) the Operations Management Team; (ii) the Communications Team; (iii) the Gender Working Group; iv) Data Working Group and (v) the SDG Task Force.

The agencies participating in the current programme, which represent the UNCT in Albania members are 16 specialised UN agencies and programmes: Resident Agencies include UNDP, UNICEF, UNWomen, IOM, UNFPA, UNHCR, WHO and FAO; Non-resident Agencies include IAEA, ILO, UNCTAD, UNECE, UNEP, UNESCO, UNIDO and UNODC.

At the onset, full implementation of the PoCSD 2017-2021 was estimated to require a total of USD 109 million. This included USD 15 million from regular or core resources and USD 22 million from other or non-core resources. During the first two years of PoCSD implementation (2017-2018), the PoCSD has (as indicated in the signed Joint Work Plans) contributed USD 65 million, of which USD 48 million (74%) were mobilized from non-core resources; while core resources have surpassed the preliminarily budgeted level (USD 17 million compared to USD 15 million projected at the start of the 5-year programme). Thus, by end 2019, the UN has implemented already approximately 60% of the total PoCSD plan, leaving 40% or USD 44 million to be deployed in 2020-2021.

One key financial funding mechanism, to support financing of joint work is the One Fund. Its purpose has evolved, since its establishment in 2007. At the time, the so called the One Coherence Fund aimed to provide un-earmarked, long term predictable financial resources, serving as the main financing source in support of One Programme outcome work. Through the years, the mechanism served as a driving force to incentivize integrated work through soft-earmarked funding, which compliments agency specific funding.

In 2018, the Fund was re-branded to Albania SDG Acceleration Fund to better respond to Agenda2030 priorities. Currently the SDG AF includes funding from government of Albania, Sweden, Switzerland and Norway. Any allocation from the SDG Acceleration Fund to participating UN agencies is based on the budget information provided by the signed JAWPs.

A Resource Mobilization Strategy 2017-2021 has been developed (2019) and serves as a guiding tool in support of UNCT resource mobilization efforts. Key strategic considerations and specific actions to be taken are identified in order to target the most viable donors and/or other partners to UN resource mobilization potential in a challenging and evolving development landscape.

An interim BOS (transition document until receipt of new UN reform operational guidelines) is adopted by UNCT Albania in October 2018.

[1] https://www.un.org.al/sites/default/files/MAPS_Report_web.pdf

[2] https://www.un.org.al/sites/default/files/20257ALBANIA_VNR_2018_FINAL2.pdf

[3] https://www.un.org.al/sites/default/files/GoA-UN-Progress%20Report%202018_1.pdf

The UNCT Albania in close partnership with the Government and other National Counterparts is currently in process of preparing the UNDAF/PoCSD 2017-2021 Evaluation (summative), which is mandatory in the penultimate year of the UNDAF cycle and should serve as a major input for the planning process of next United Nations Sustainable Development Cooperation Framework (UNSDCF) cycle.

Duties and Responsibilities

PURPOSE

The rationale for this UNDAF/PoCSD evaluation is twofold: 1) will examine whether the UN Country Team (UNCT) is collectively prioritizing support and contributing to the country’s development. The evaluation will also identify synergies, gaps, overlaps and missed opportunities, ultimately assessing overall UNCT contribution to country’s achievement of SDGs. 2) will assess the leadership of the UN Resident Coordinator in addressing the political challenges faced by UNCT, as well as the UNCT’s support for collective objectives on programming and resource mobilization 3) will use the findings strategically to inform the next programme cycle, to better integrate Agenda 2030 and the SDGs, to better align and target UN interventions that will support the country in reaching its 2030 commitments; to help UNCT to adjust to new generation of UNDAFs and the wide UN system reforms. Using a logic model (assumptions-causal links) of the Theory of Change, a common understanding of what determinded the expected change, including the inputs and outputs delivered, as well as the external factors that may have influenced progress and opportunities by the UN at country level.  

National counterparts will be major partners in the evaluation contributing both through data from national systems and validation of UNDAF evaluation results. The main users of the UNDAF Evaluation will be the UN partners, i.e. the Government, UNCT, other development partners and civil society participating in UN programmes.

The UNDAF evaluation process will also seek to capitalise on other evaluations that took place earlier or at the same time, including Mid Term Reviews, Annual Reviews and Progress Reports. Human rights and gender equality assessments will be mainstreamed throughout all aspects of the UNDAF evaluation.

The UNDAF evaluation will be independent. It will adhere to the highest possible professional standards in evaluation. It will be responsive to the needs and priorities of the Republic of Albania and provide accountability and learning opportunities to the UN system. The evaluation will be conducted in a consultative manner and will engage the participation of a broad range of stakeholders. The geographical coverage of the evaluation will be national - Albania.

SCOPE

The evaluation will cover the implementation period 2017 to present, at all levels- outcome, output, deliverable/activity, assessing the contribution from all UN agencies which are part of the Programme of Cooperation for Sustainable Development 2017-2021. The scope covered by the evaluation includes examining UNDAF programming principles (human rights-based approach, gender equality, environmental sustainability, results-based management, capacity development), overall strategies and outcome/output specific strategies included in the UNDAF itself. 

OBJECTIVES

The objectives of UNDAF evaluation are:

•  Assess performance against Programme of Cooperation for Sustainable Development 2017-2021 framework, its strategic intent, objectives and outcomes contained in the results framework, including UNCT contribution to such contribution.

•  Based on this assessment, the evaluators will provide actionable recommendations, and identify lessons learned and good practices that will inform new Coherence Framework cycle 2022-2026, in line with the newly emerged guidelines for the UNSDCF development.

These evaluation objectives are defined by the structured set of evaluation questions (See Annex 3) and incorporate the cross-cutting dimensions of gender, equity, and child rights.

METHODOLOGY AND APPROACH

The UNDAF Evaluation will be conducted in close collaboration with the UN Resident Coordinator’s Office, UNCT, Result Groups, and national counterparts.

Methodology:

Once the Evaluation team for the UNDAF evaluation has been selected, a thorough preparatory work should be conducted by the team to define the specific evaluation strategies, data collection methods and required evaluation tools. An Evaluation Plan will be developed accordingly.

Data collection - The UNDAF evaluation will use a multiple method approach, which could include the following: desk reviews of reference material, semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders, including key government counterparts (central and local level), MPs, donor community members, representatives of key civil society organisations, UNCT members, and implementing partners; surveys and questionnaires including participants in development programmes, UNCT members, and /or surveys and questionnaires involving other stakeholders; Focus Group discussions involving groups and sub-groups of stakeholders, decision-makers; Other methods such as outcome mapping, observational visits, etc.                                                 

Stakeholder participation – The UNDAF evaluation will be conducted in a participatory manner, ensuring the involvement of key stakeholders (e.g. government, civil society organisations, beneficiary/vulnerable groups[1], and donors) in all phases of the evaluation, based on a comprehensive in country visit/mission agenda prepared by UN RCO and UNCT.

Validation - All findings should be supported with evidence. Triangulation will be used to ensure that the information and data collected are valid. A report will be prepared including identified constrains, lessons and challenges in relations to the priority interventions as well as specific recommendations made both to the UNCT and to individual agencies.

In general, the evaluation approach should follow the UNEG guidance on integrating human rights and gender equality, UNEG norms and standards and international principles for development evaluation[2]. In particular, in line with the UN System-Wide Action Plan (UN-SWAP)[3] on gender equality, data collection methods and process should consider gender sensitivity. The final report should be compliant with UNEG quality checklist of evaluation reports[4] and acknowledge how inclusive stakeholder participation was ensured during the evaluation process and any challenges to obtaining the gender equality information or to addressing these issues appropriately. Data should be systematically disaggregated by sex and age and, to the extent possible, disaggregated by geographical region, ethnicity, disability, migratory status and other contextually-relevant markers of equity. Adherence to a code of ethics and a human right based and gender sensitive approach in the gathering, treatment and use of data collected should be made explicit in the inception report. Perspective from both rights holders and duty bearers shall be collected.

Processes:

The evaluation will be conducted in three phases:

Phase 1- Preparation:

         i.            Collection of reference material: The UN RC Office in close consultations with UNCT members will compile a list of background material, documents, and reports relevant to the UNDAF evaluation.

        ii.            Identification and selection of an Evaluation Team: The UNCT will jointly identify and select the appropriate consultants, one international and one local, for the UNDAF evaluation. The UN RC Office will take the lead, jointly with UNCT, in soliciting CVs of consultants.

       iii.            Development of inception report: To be conducted prior to the main data collection phase and after the Desk Review - the UNDAF Evaluation team, facilitated by UNCT, will  a) develop an operational plan (an evaluation plan), which will include a design matrix, data collection and analysis methods, potential sites for field visits, b) assess the availability of logistical and administrative support; and v) further identify and collect relevant reference material. This evaluation plan will be shared with the UNRC and the UNCT for approval.

Phase 2 – Conduct of data collection activities and the preparation of the evaluation reports:

         i.            Desk review of reference material: The evaluation team is responsible for reviewing the reference documents, reports and any other data and information provided by the UN RC Office.

       ii.            Main data collection: The evaluation team will conduct data collection activities as guided by the evaluation plan. They will conduct agreed-upon interviews with stakeholders and site visits. At the end of the data collection activities, a meeting will be organized by the evaluation team, participated by key stakeholder representatives, to present preliminary findings and obtain feedback from the stakeholders.

       iii.            Data analysis and reporting: The evaluation team will conduct further data analysis based on all information collected and prepare a draft evaluation report for the UNDAF Evaluation within three weeks upon completion of the main data collection and analysis activities. The UNDAF Evaluation team will submit the report to the UNCT.

      iv.            Review of the draft report and finalization of the report: the draft UNDAF Report will be submitted for factual correction and feedback to key stakeholders, including the PSG. The UNDAF Evaluation team, in consultation with the UNCT, will prepare an audit trail to indicate how the comments were taken into account, and will finalize the UNDAF evaluation report.

 Phase 3 - Follow-up:

The UNCT together with the UNRC Office will conduct follow-up activities, as guided by their respective processes and mandates.

In the context of the UNDAF Evaluation:

1. Preparation of the Management Response - once the report is finalized, the Steering Committee and the UNCT must coordinate to prepare the formal Management Response to the evaluation. It should contain general remarks from the Steering Committee and the UNCT on the content of the report, followed by a response to each recommendation (normally prepared in tabular format) and a follow-up mechanism.
2. Dissemination of the evaluation findings and recommendations through the stakeholder workshop - an opportunity to generate buy-in of the evaluation findings, conclusions and recommendations, as well as the management response. Through open discussion, the workshop ensures the UNCT, national counterparts and development partners to be on the same page in terms of future strategic direction. The participation of the team leader in the workshop is advisable. A broad range of partners should be invited to the workshop. These include high-level government officials, representatives of funding partners and civil-society organisations, local-government officials from areas where there were programme activities and representatives of other stakeholder groups, as appropriate. Ideally, the invitation should be extended by the highest-ranking government official possible, together with the RC, to encourage participation. The evaluation report and the management response should be presented at the workshop and the way forward should be discussed.

1. Implementation of a follow-up plan, in particular focusing on the design of a new UNSDCF cycle.

EVALUATION TEAM STRUCTURE FOR THE UNDAF EVALUATION

The PoCSD evaluation Steering Committee will be the body responsible for the proper conduct of PoCSD evaluations. The Joint Executive Committee (JEC) of PoCSD, co-chaired by the RC and a government representative, will typically assume this role.

The Steering Committee will appoint an Evaluation Manager. The Evaluation Manager should not be responsible for implementing a programme or a project to be evaluated and should have some knowledge of the evaluation process and methodology. This role will be carried out by the Resident Coordinator’s Office.

The Steering Committee will invite government counterparts of UNCT agencies to form a Consultative Group. The Consultative Group should be sufficiently inclusive to represent various sectoral interests. In Albania’s PoCSD, this role will be carried out by the Outcome Groups. The key roles of the Consultative Group are to ensure that 1) the evaluation process meets UNEG Norms, Standards and Ethical Guidelines and that 2) the evaluation findings are relevant and recommendations are implementable and that 3) the evaluation findings are disseminated and available for use and learning from the evaluation.

The Evaluation Team comprises independent external evaluators. It will have a team leader (international) with extensive evaluation expertise and one member (local expert).

Each UNSDCF evaluation should have a designated Evaluation Advisor in UNDCO[5] to safeguard the independence and quality of the evaluation and to intervene in case of dispute.

Evaluation Team Roles and responsibilities

The Steering Committee is responsible for ensuring the PoCSD evaluation is conducted in a timely manner and through proper process, so as to meet quality standards and be useful to the UNCT and to stakeholders. Specifically, the Steering Committee will:

• decide on the timing of the evaluation in consultation with government counterparts and invite the counterpart officials to form a Consultative Group;
• inform UNDCO of the launch of the evaluation, so that an Evaluation Advisor can be designated, and inform UNEG in order to obtain necessary support;
• appoint the Evaluation Manager;
• provide sufficient resources to conduct the evaluation, based on estimates provided by the Evaluation Manager;
• ensure that office staff give the Evaluation Team their full support;
• approve the Evaluation Team proposed by the Evaluation Manager;
• ensure the Evaluation Team has access to information and stakeholders;
• comment on the draft report, using an audit trail;
• approve the final report;
• prepare the Management Response, in consultation with all UNCT members;
• organize a stakeholder workshop once the final report is ready (please see Section 13 on Stakeholder workshop);
• transmit the report to UNDCO to be placed on global/regional platforms and to relevant offices at regional level, at the agency headquarters; and
• take measures to promote the use of evaluation and lesson learning.

The Evaluation Manager is responsible for managing the entire process: ensuring that the evaluation is properly conducted, managing the validation and quality-control process, and making sure that the report fulfils the terms of reference. The Evaluation Manager will:

• conduct the preparatory work needed to define the scope and the evaluation questions by mapping activities, stakeholders and available secondary data (such as evaluation reports, results monitoring data and statistics);
• draft the terms of reference, circulate them to the Steering Committee and Consultative Group for comment and obtain clearance from the Steering Committee and the Evaluation Advisor at UNDCO;
• draw-up the initial budget estimate based on the number and levels of Evaluation Team members, the estimated cost of activities required and the availability of secondary data, and obtain clearance from the Steering Committee (see Section 16 on Budget);
• recruit the Evaluation Team and obtain approval of Team choices from the Steering Committee and the Evaluation Advisor at UNDCO;
• provide the Evaluation Team with all the information it needs to conduct the evaluation efficiently and effectively (activity map, stakeholder map, secondary data, etc.) and arrange briefings by UNCT members and Programme Managers on their respective programmes and activities;
• organize theory-of-change workshops with the Evaluation Team and UNCT members (see Section 9 on Theory-of-change workshops);
• receive and review the inception report prepared by the Evaluation Team and advise the Evaluation Team on revisions, if needed;
• facilitate evaluation activities, assist the Evaluation Team in gaining access to stakeholders and additional information, and arrange meetings and logistics;
• receive the consolidated first draft of the evaluation and conduct a pro forma quality check (structure and format, compliance with the terms of reference);
• send the first draft to the Evaluation Advisor at UNDCO for the record;
• manage the validation process by circulating the draft for comment to the Steering Committee, Consultative Group and any other key stakeholders, ensuring all comments and responses are properly recorded, using an audit trail;
• send comments to the Evaluation Team for draft revision;
• send the revised draft and the audit trail to the Evaluation Advisor for an external quality check and request that the Evaluation Team revise the report if necessary;
• send the final report to the Evaluation Advisor and obtain clearance for payment of the Evaluation Team (if the report has met the criteria of the external quality check);
• prepare for and manage the stakeholder workshop (see Section 13 on Stakeholder workshop);
• arrange a debriefing of individual UNCT members to obtain Evaluation Team feedback in a safe space;
• complete the Evaluation Report for publication and dissemination; and
• support the dissemination activities of the Steering Committee.

The Consultative Group will support the evaluation process, ensuring, in particular, that the evaluation properly reflects the views of the government involved and that the evaluators gain access to relevant informants and information sources in government. In addition to promoting ownership of and buy-in to the evaluation results, the Consultative Group will also:

• review and comment on the terms of reference;
• facilitate the evaluation process, helping the team to identify and gain access to government stakeholders;
• comment on the draft report;
• support the organisation of the stakeholder workshop; and
• facilitate maximum in-country dissemination of the report.

The Evaluation Advisor will oversee the process to ensure the independence and quality of the evaluation. The Evaluation Advisor will:

• approve the selection of the Evaluation Team, confirming the professional credentials of the team members and the absence of any conflicts of interest;
• establish a hotline for the Evaluation Team, to be used if the Team encounters risks to the independent conduct of the evaluation;
• receive the first and final draft of the report and the audit trail to ensure the transparency of the process and ascertain that the Evaluation Team was not subject to undue pressure to alter the contents of the report; and
• conduct an external quality check of the draft report and clear payment to the Evaluation Team once any outstanding issues have been addressed satisfactorily.

Furthermore, UNDCO should:

• provide a global platform for the public dissemination of the report;
• occasionally synthesize findings and compile lessons learned from UNSDCF evaluations and feed them back into advice to UNCTs, agency management and governing bodies, as appropriate; and
• keep a record of the drafts and audit trail in a depository.

UNEG, in its supporting role, will:

• provide technical advice for guidance materials, as well as for individual cases, on request;
• support UNDCO in its oversight role, if necessary providing in-kind support (staff time) from its members during the transition period;
• support the development of further guidance materials, tools and templates, a draft policy framework and other supporting materials during and after the transition period; and
• coordinate agency evaluations, to the extent possible, as inputs to the UNSDCF evaluations.

EXPECTED DELIVERABLES

The evaluation team is expected to produce the following deliverables:

• Desk Review & Inception report (7 days) produced by the Evaluation Team to elaborate on how it will conduct the evaluation. It normally contains: an elaboration of the evaluation questions into methodological sub-questions (by programme or project, by data-collection method, etc.); sources and methods for collecting data for each methodological sub-question; and a concrete plan of evaluation activities and a timeline, possibly with a tentative list of interviews to be arranged or plans for travel to other locations (e.g. municipalities, project sites). Specific stakeholder contributions are mapped out and presented in the inception report
• Data collection & Field visit (10 days) - Evaluation Team will gather data through group and individual interviews, including visits outside of Tirane; at the end of the mission, presentation with preliminary findings and recommendations will be presented to the UNCT/UNDAF Evaluation Steering Committee. Details of how this process will be conducted/handled will be included in the Evaluation Team inception report. 
• A theory-of-change workshop during the first week of the in-country work - a great opportunity for the Evaluation team and the UNCT members to develop a common understanding of what ought to happen to achieve the goals, what the UN’s activities are expected to achieve, what interaction will be required with other actors, including government, and so on. Having a common understanding of this kind at the start of the exercise is critical to avoiding dispute at a later date.
• A presentation with preliminary findings to be shared in a JEC meeting;
• Evaluation Report (40-60 pgs) (15 days- draft and 6 days- final) - A first draft report for circulation and identification of factual corrections from stakeholders; A second draft report for circulation to the external Evaluation Advisor for quality assurance; A final review report and presentation to be shared with the Evaluation Advisor. The evaluation report should be written in a clear and concise manner that allows readers to easily follow its logic. It should not be overly filled with factual descriptions, especially those available elsewhere. The focus of the report should be to present the findings, the conclusions and the recommendations in a logical and convincing manner. It should contain:
  • Title Page
  • List of acronyms and abbreviations
  • Table of contents, including list of annexes
  • Executive Summary
  • Introduction: background and context of the programme
  • Description of the program – its logic theory, results framework, assumptions and external factors likely to affect success
  • what was evaluated and why (purpose and scope with information on limitations and de-limitations);
  • how the evaluation was conducted (objectives, approach and methodology);
  • what was found and on what evidence (findings and evidences/analysis and interpretation);
  • what was concluded from the findings and in response to the main evaluation questions (conclusions);
  • what was recommended (recommendations); and
  • what could be usefully learned, if any (lessons learned)
  • Annexes
• Preparation of the Management Response (2 days) - Once the report is finalized, the evaluation team should assist the Steering Committee and the UNCT to prepare the formal Management Response to the evaluation. It should contain general remarks from the Steering Committee and the UNCT on the content of the report, followed by a response to each recommendation (normally prepared in tabular format) and a follow-up mechanism.
• Dissemination of the evaluation findings and recommendations (2 days) in the Stakeholder Workshop to generate buy-in of the evaluation findings, conclusions and recommendations, as well as the management response.

TIMEFRAME

DURATION OF THE CONSULTANCY

The UNDAF Evaluation will be undertaken by a team of international and national consultants between January - February 2020 with an indicative time frame of 40 working days for each consultant.

BUDGET & SUPPORT

Funding for the PoCSD evaluation will be provided by the Special Purpose Trust Fund (SPTF) allocation to the RC Office.

The UNDAF Evaluation will be commissioned by RC Office and overseen by the UNCT and Joint Executive Committee. Day-to-day management will be ensured through the RC Office. 

Support of the RC Office/UNCT to the evaluation process

The RC Office/UNCT will support the Evaluation Consultant with the following:

• Securing relevant background documentation required for a comprehensive desk review
• Provision of list of contacts in advance and additional upon request
• Provision of vehicle and driver for field visits –
• Organisation of group consultative meetings, briefing and debriefing sessions
• Provision of office/working space during the assignment. The consultant will however have to use his/her own computer/laptop

[1] The consultants will work with UN agencies to identify beneficiary/vulnerable groups at focus.

[2] http://www.uneval.org/document/guidance-documents

[3] http://www.unwomen.org/en/how-we-work/un-system-coordination/promoting-un-accountability

[4] http://www.unevaluation.org/document/detail/607

[5] The UN Evaluation Group upon request can allocate an evaluation advisor to the exercise while awaiting a decision on where this capacity will be located in the UN Secretariat.

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.

Core Competencies:

• Communication - Facilitate and encourage open communication and strive for effective communication.
• Organizational Awareness - Demonstrate corporate knowledge and sound judgment.
• Teamwork - Demonstrate ability to work in a multicultural, multi-ethnic environment and to maintain effective working relations with people of different national and cultural backgrounds.
• Accountability – Takes ownership of all responsibilities and delivers outputs in accordance with agreed time, cost and quality standards.

Required Skills and Experience

QUALIFICATIONS OF THE CONSULTANT – TEAM LEADER

One international consultant, in her/his role as the UNDAF Evaluation Team Leader, is needed with the following skills and experience:

• Advanced university degree (Masters and equivalent) in development studies, economics, international relations, or related field; PhD an asset.
• 10 years of relevant professional  experience is  highly  desirable,  including  previous substantive involvement in evaluations and/or reviews at programme and/or outcome levels in related fields with international organisations, preferably in DaO countries.
• Specialized experience  and/or  methodological/technical  knowledge,  including  some specific  data  collection  and  analytical  skills,  particularly  in  the  following  areas: understanding  of  human  rights-based  approaches  to  programming;  gender considerations;  environmental sustainability, Results  Based  Management  (RBM)  principles;  logic  modelling/logical framework analysis; quantitative and qualitative data collection and analysis; participatory approaches; including also on political economy and financing for development;
• Good understanding of the SDGs and their implications for development cooperation;
• Good understanding of the role of the UN System in development cooperation in the context of the country in question;
• Sound knowledge of the country context and an in-depth understanding of at least one area of work of UNCT members; collectively, Evaluation Team members should broadly cover all areas of UNCT activity;
• Demonstrated ability to write and communicate clearly in languages appropriate for the country; and an absence of conflicts of interest (never employed by UNCT members or implementing partners, nor expected to be employed in the near future, no private relationships with any UNCT members).
• Excellent written and spoken English.
• Excellent report writing skills as well as communication and interviewing skills.

Evaluation Procedure

UNDP applies a fair and transparent selection process that would consider both the technical qualification of Individual Consultants as well as their financial proposals. The contract will be awarded to the candidate whose offer:

• Is deemed technically responsive / compliant / acceptable (only technically responsive applications / candidates will be considered for the financial evaluation)
• And has obtained the highest combined technical and financial scores.

Technical Criteria - 70% of total evaluation – max points: 70

Criteria A: Education Background – max points: 20

Criteria B: Relevance of work experience – max points: 30

Criteria C: Expertise in conducting UNDAF evaluations/and or other programme reviews - max points 20

Financial Criteria - 30% of total evaluation – max points: 30

Application Procedure

The application should contain:

• Cover letter explaining why you are the most suitable candidate for the advertised position. Please paste the letter into the "Resume and Motivation" section of the electronic application.
• Letter to UNDP Confirming Interest and Availability-please fill in the attached form... www.un.org.al/sites/default/files/IC_Offerors%20Letter%20to%20UNDP%20Confirming%20Interest%20and%20Availability.docx
• Latest personal CV, including past experience from similar projects or completed and signed UN Personal History Form (P11) for Service Contracts (SC) and Individual Contracts (IC) – Blank form Download here.
• Financial Proposal - specifying a total lump sum amount in USD for completion of the tasks specified in this announcement. The financial proposal should indicate an 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. http://www.un.org.al/doc/Financial%20Offer%20template.doc 
• Copy of Diplomas and copy of Passport.

How to Submit the Application:

To submit your application online, please follow the steps below:

• Merge your CV or P11, Financial Proposal Letter to UNDP Confirming Interest and Availability and cover letter into a single file. The system does not allow for more than one attachment to be uploaded;
• Click on the Job Title (job vacancy announcement);
• Click “Apply Now” button, fill in necessary information on the first page, and then click “Submit Application;”
• Upload your application/single file as indicated above with the merged documents (underlined above);
• You will receive an automatic response to your email confirming receipt of your application by the system.

Due to a large number of applications we receive, we are able to inform only the successful candidates about the outcome or status of the selection process

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.

Annex 1: PoCSD 2017-2021 Evaluation - Desk Review of Reference Materials

Annex 2: Outcomes and Outputs Structure

Annex 3: Evaluation Questions

For evaluations, the evaluation questions should assess the following four dimensions.

i. Relevance and coherence: Are we doing the right things?

• Has the UNCT been addressing the most pressing needs of the people and the country, strategically and collectively, as identified by CCA and other relevant sources, in design and in implementation?
• Have the resources been mobilized and used to meet the priorities of the UNCT, proportionately rather than opportunistically (i.e. based on funding availability and the agenda of each agency)?

?ii. Results: Have we made a difference?

1. What has been achieved for each UNSDCF outcome and where were the gaps? Identify factors that have affected UNCT's implementation (enabling factors and bottlenecks) and on that basis provide actionable recommendations for improving UNCT's contribution to results in the future. Provide an overview of the assumptions underlying the causal links between the outputs and outcomes.
2. What are the changes observed at national level, including changes in relevant statistical indicators, and what is the UN’s plausible contribution to these changes? Validate the suitability of indicators and other verification tools used to measure progress towards results.

• Have the UN RC’s leadership and the collective effort of the UNCT helped to overcome political challenges to pursuing the UN agenda?
• Have the synergies between UNCT agencies helped to achieve broader-based results and greater value for money than would have been the case, had the work been done individually?

iii. Transformation: Have we made long-lasting, systemic and society-wide changes?

• Has the UNCT’s work ensured national and local ownership, so that the changes will last beyond UNCT intervention?
• Has the UNCT’s work brought about systemic changes (for example, changes in the legal framework, institutions, social and economic structure)?
• Has the UNCT’s work been systemic, scaled up or replicated to ensure its effects are not limited in scope, but nation- or society-wide?

iv. Normative: Have we left no one behind?

1. Has the UNCT prioritized the needs of those who need assistance most (for instance, the most vulnerable, the poor and the marginalized)? Assess the differential progress made by the UNCT in addressing the most marginalized segments of population (e.g. marginalized women and children, persons with disabilities, Roma community, older persons, refugees/ asylum seekers, migrants, low income families, LGBTI community etc.)

• Has the UNCT’s work properly mainstreamed gender?
• Has the UNCT’s work properly addressed human-rights issues?
• Has the UNCT ensured that unintended or negative effects on the population or social groups outside the programme’s scope have been properly addressed and/or minimized?

Value addition of UNSDCF as a joint instrument 

In addition to the four dimensions highlighted above, below can be used to assess UNSDCF as a tool:

• Has the UNSDCF strengthened the position, credibility and reliability of the UN as a partner for government and other actors in their efforts to achieve the SDGs?
• Has the UNSDCF enabled the UNCT to deliver quality, integrated, SDG-focused policy support?
• Has the UNSDCF acted effectively as a partnership vehicle?
• Has the UNSDCF facilitated the identification of and access to new financing flows at scale for national partners?
• Has the UNSDCF contributed to greater clarity and transparency of results achieved and resources used?
• Has the UNSDCF enabled greater UN coherence and discipline and reduced transaction costs for partners?
• Was the UNSDCF supported by an integrated funding framework and by adequate funding instruments? What were the gaps?
• What risks and/or opportunities have materialized through the implementation of UNSDCF? How were they seized upon or addressed?

Additional evaluation topics of interest are:

• Enabling / explanatory factors: While assessing performance using the above criteria the evaluator needs to identify the various factors that can explain the performance. This will allow lessons to be learned about why the UNCT performed as it did.
• UN Coordination. Did UN coordination reduce transaction costs and increase the efficiency of UNDAF implementation? To what extent did the UNDAF create actual synergies among agencies and involve concerted efforts to optimise results and avoid duplication?
• Delivering as One. To what extent the UNCT applied UNEG Standard Operating Procedures for Delivering as One (DaO) Approach to ensure greater effectiveness and better delivery of results under such approach?
  • In the context of DaO, what is the relevance, efficiency, effectiveness and sustainability of the One Programe and its contribution and results, including any impacts on the realization of the human rights for the poor and people in vulnerable situations?
  • What is the extent of integration and mainstreaming of the United Nations programming principles and other relevant crosscutting issues in the One Programme, including its contributions to equitable, inclusive, transparent, participatory and accountable development processes?
  • What is the coherence of the United Nations system in addressing national priorities, and contributions to informed decision making and knowledge generation?
• Five UNDAF Programming Principles. To what extent have the UNDAF programming principles (human rights-based approach, gender equality, environmental sustainability, results-based management, capacity development) been considered and mainstreamed in the UNDAF chain of results? Were any shortcomings due to a failure to take account of UNDAF programming principles during implementation?
  • To what extent did the UNDAF make use of and promote human rights and gender equality standards and principles (e.g. participation, non-discrimination, accountability, etc.) to achieve its goal?
  • To what extent did UNDAF strengthen the capacities for data collection and analysis to ensure disaggregated data on the basis of race, colour, sex, geographic location, etc. and did those subjects to discrimination and disadvantage benefited from priority attention?
  • Did the UNDAF effectively use the principles of environmental sustainability to strengthen its contribution to national development results?
  • Did the UNDAF adequately use RBM to ensure a logical chain of results and establish a monitoring and evaluation framework? Validate the suitability of indicators and other verification tools used to measure progress towards results. Assess the reliability of the disaggregated data.
  • Did the UNDAF adequately invest in, and focus on, national capacity development? To what extent and in what ways did UNDAF contribute to capacity development of government, NGOs and civil society institutions?
• Other factors. A number of country-specific factors that have affected the performance of the UNCT in the framework of the UNDAF need be examined:
  • How well did the UNCT use its partnerships (with civil society/private sector/local government/ parliament/national human rights institutions/international development partners) to improve its performance?
  • Regarding ownership of objectives and achievements, to what extent was the “active, free, and meaningful” participation of all stakeholders (including non-resident agencies) ensured in the UNDAF process? Did they agree with the outcomes and continue to remain in agreement? Was transparency in policies and project implementation ensured? What mechanisms were created throughout the implementation process to ensure participation? Ensure that specific stakeholder contributions are mapped out during the inception phase and presented in the inception report.
  • Did the UNCT undertake appropriate risk analysis and take appropriate actions to ensure that results to which it contributed are not lost? To what extent are the benefits being, or are likely to be, maintained over time?
  • How adequately did the UNCT respond to change (e.g. natural disaster, elections) in planning and during the implementation of the UNDAF?
  • To what extent harmonisation measures at the operational level contributed to improved efficiency and results?
  • What are the limitations to the evaluation (methods, sources of info, disaggregated data, time, budget, in case vulnerable groups will not be actively involved, justify why).

In addition to these core questions, the evaluation team will develop context-specific sub-questions during the inception phase of the UNDAF evaluation. To this purpose, during the inception mission the evaluation team will conduct a stakeholder analysis followed by ample in-country consultations will all key response stakeholders, to ensure that their views on issues that need to be considered, potential sub-questions, etc. are incorporated into the UNDAF evaluation. The inception report will also confirm the objectives around which to assess results and consider the preparation for the new UNSDCF. The evaluation is intended to be forward looking and therefore needs to take into consideration what is important for the future, including with regard to the 2030 Agenda.

The applying condidate is invited to submit a technical and financial proposal.