- UNDP around the world
Many of UNDP's relationships with countries and territories on the ground exceed 60 years. Find details on our successes and ongoing work.
- Bosnia and Herzegovina
- Burkina Faso
- Cape Verde
- Central African Republic
- Congo (Dem. Republic of)
- Congo (Republic of)
- Costa Rica
- Côte d'Ivoire
- Democratic People's Republic of Korea
- Denmark (Rep. Office)
- Dominican Republic
- E.U (Rep. Office)
- El Salvador
- Equatorial Guinea
- Fiji (Multi-country Office)
- Finland (Rep. Office)
- Geneva (Rep. Office)
- Iraq (Republic of)
- Kosovo (as per UNSCR 1244)
- Lao PDR
- Mauritius & Seychelles
- Norway (Rep. Office)
- Papua New Guinea
- Programme of Assistance to the Palestinian People
- Russian Federation
- Samoa (Multi-country Office)
- São Tomé and Principe
- Saudi Arabia
- Sierra Leone
- South Africa
- South Sudan
- Sri Lanka
- Sweden (Rep. Office)
- The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia
- Tokyo (Rep. Office)
- Trinidad and Tobago
- United Arab Emirates
- About Us
- News Centre
Consultant (2) positions – Lead Consultant (1) and Consultant (1) for conducting the Terminal Evaluation of the project on “Enhancing Institutional and Community Resilience to Disasters and Climate Change”
|Location :||Home based (with flexible working arrangement to travel to UNDP Delhi Office; meetings with Govt partners in Delhi), INDIA|
|Application Deadline :||15-Oct-20 (Midnight New York, USA)|
|Type of Contract :||Individual Contract|
|Post Level :||National Consultant|
|Languages Required :||English|
|Duration of Initial Contract :||1.5 Month (26 days during the contract)|
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.
The second phase of the USAID funded project on “Enhancing Institutional and Community resilience to disasters and climate change” will be ending in December 2020. As per the UNDP evaluation guidance, conducting a “Terminal Evaluation” during project closure is mandatory. The evaluation must aim to address the extent to which the project has been able to develop resilient cities through risk reduction in the context of disaster and climate change. The evaluation must provide evidence-based information that is credible, reliable and useful. The evaluator is expected to follow a participatory and consultative approach ensuring close engagement with government counterparts The results of the terminal evaluation will be presented to the Implementing partner (Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India) and will be used to highlight success stories and lesson learning for future endeavours.
Duties and Responsibilities
Objectives: The objectives of the terminal evaluation is to assess the achievement of project results, and to draw lessons that can both improve the sustainability of benefits from this project, and aid in the overall enhancement of UNDP programming. Accordingly, proposed evaluation of the project will undertake:
Scope: Project intervention areas include six cities- Cuttack, Navi Mumbai, Shimla, Shillong, Vishakapatnam and Vijayawada.
Review Criteria and key guiding questions
An assessment of project performance will be carried out, based against expectations set out in the Project Logical Framework/Results Framework, which provides performance and impact indicators for project implementation along with their corresponding means of verification. The evaluation will cover the criteria of: relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, sustainability and impact. Ratings must be provided on the following performance criteria.
As of 11 March 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared COVID-19 a global pandemic as the new coronavirus rapidly spread to all regions of the world. If it is not possible to travel to or within the country for the evaluation then the evaluation team is expected to develop a methodology that takes this into account the conduct of the evaluation virtually and remotely, including the use of remote interview methods and extended desk reviews, data analysis, surveys and evaluation questionnaires. This should be detailed in the Inception report and agreed with the Evaluation Manager. If all or part of the evaluation is to be carried out virtually then consideration should be taken for stakeholder availability, ability or willingness to be interviewed remotely. In addition, their accessibility to the internet/ computer may be an issue as many government and national counterparts may be working from home. These limitations must be reflected in the evaluation report. If a data collection/field mission is not possible then remote interviews may be undertaken through telephone or online (skype, zoom etc.)
The evaluation should employ a combination of both qualitative and quantitative evaluation methods and instruments.
It is preferable that the interviews/questionnaires with the Ministry of Home Affairs will need to take place on a face to face basis in Delhi. Interviews will also be held with the following organizations and individuals at a minimum:
1- Evaluation products (deliverables)- refer to Annex for templates.
The evaluation team will comprise of 2 team members (all national) as follows:
Key technical and core competencies:
Knowledge of the political, social, cultural, and economic context of the Country; Ability to lead informed and strategic discussions with government counterparts and stakeholders;
The evaluators selected should not have participated in the project preparation and/or implementation and should not have conflict of interest with project related activities.
Required Skills and Experience
Evaluation Method & Criteria:
The consultant would be selected based on the following criteria:
Technical: 70 points
Financial: 30 points
Criteria for Technical Evaluation would be as under:
* Educational Qualification, relevant development and work experience – 50 marks
* Technical Proposal – 20 marks
Technically qualified consultants will be requested to submit their daily fee rate i.e. consultants who score more than 70% i.e. 49 marks with respect to the above-mentioned evaluation criteria. Consultant should not specify their consultancy fee on their CV or with the submission. The CV will not be evaluated further in case the consultant submits the same.
The Consultant is required to submit the following documents, in a single combined PDF file, as the system has provision for uploading only one attachment:
- Indicate upfront the position for which you are applying (i.e. Lead Consultant (or) Consultant)
- Personal CV with relevant experience to the TOR; and at least 3 professional references
- Short technical proposal (max 2-pages) including methodology, approach & assessment criteria, process followed, data collection and analytical tools.
- No Financials (Daily Fee) to be submitted at this stage.
This evaluation will be conducted in accordance with the principles outlined in the UNEG ‘Ethical Guidelines for Evaluation’. The consultant must safeguard the rights and confidentiality of information providers, interviewees and stakeholders through measures to ensure compliance with legal and other relevant codes governing collection of data and reporting on data. The consultant must also ensure security of collected information before and after the evaluation and protocols to ensure anonymity and confidentiality of sources of information where that is expected. The information knowledge and data gathered in the evaluation process must also be solely used for the evaluation and not for other uses with the express authorization of UNDP and partners
The Consultants will be held to the highest ethical standards and are required to sign a Code of Conduct upon acceptance of the assignment.
Outcome evaluation sample questions
• To what extent is the initiative in line with the UNDP mandate, national priorities of Disaster Management and the requirements of the Urban Local bodies.?
• To what extent is UNDP support relevant to the achievement of the SDGs in the country?
• To what extent is UNDP engagement a reflection of strategic considerations, including the role of UNDP in a particular development context and its comparative advantage?
• To what extent was the method of delivery selected by UNDP appropriate to the development context?
• To what extent was the theory of change presented in the outcome model a relevant and appropriate vision on which to base the initiatives?
• To what extent has progress been made towards outcome achievement? What has been the UNDP contribution to the observed change?
• What have been the key results and changes attained? How has delivery of country programme outputs led to outcome-level progress?
• Have there been any unexpected outcome-level results achieved beyond the planned outcome?
• To what extent has UNDP improved the capacities of national implementing partners to advocate on environmental issues, including climate change issues and disaster risk reduction?
• To what extent has UNDP partnered with civil society and local communities to promote environmental and disaster risk awareness in the country?
• To what extent have the results at the outcome and output levels generated results for gender equality and the empowerment of women?
• To what extent have marginalized groups benefited?
• To what extent have triangular and South-South cooperation and knowledge management contributed to the results attained?
• Which programme areas are the most relevant and strategic for UNDP to scale up or consider going forward?
• To what extent have the programme or project outputs resulted from economic use of resources?
• To what extent were quality country programme outputs delivered on time?
• To what extent were partnership modalities conducive to the delivery of country programme outputs?
• To what extent did monitoring systems provide management with a stream of data that allowed it to learn and adjust implementation accordingly?
• To what extent did UNDP promote gender equality, the empowerment of women, human rights and human development in the delivery of country programme outputs?
• To what extent have UNDP practices, policies, processes and decision-making capabilities affected the achievement of the country programme’s outcomes?
• To what extent did UNDP engage or coordinate with beneficiaries, implementing partners, other United Nations agencies and national counterparts to achieve outcome-level results?
• To what extent did UNDP establish mechanisms to ensure the sustainability of the country programme outcomes?
• To what extent do national partners have the institutional capacities, including sustainability strategies, in place to sustain the outcome-level results?
• To what extent are policy and regulatory frameworks in place that will support the continuation of benefits?
• To what extent have partners committed to providing continuing support (financial, staff, aspirational, etc.)?
• To what extent do mechanisms, procedures and policies exist to carry forward the results attained on gender equality, empowerment of women, human rights and human development by primary stakeholders?
• To what extent do partnerships exist with other national institutions, NGOs, United Nations agencies, the private sector and development partners to sustain the attained results?
Evaluation cross-cutting issues sample questions
Note: Please ensure that all the documents to be uploaded should be combined in a single PDF file before uploading as the system has provision of uploading only one document.
General Conditions for Individual Contract-
For any clarifications, please write to: email@example.com
Please apply online by visiting www.in.undp.org (Careers).