Background

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

In its preamble, the 2030 Agenda states already that “[t]he interlinkages and integrated nature of the Sustainable Development Goals are of crucial importance in ensuring that the purpose of the new Agenda is realised.” In short, this means that the goals depend on each other and none can be fully realized on its own. For example, if violence is rampant in a society, this will affect people’s health and income. In turn, lagging progress on health or education or poverty more broadly may also trigger violence. 

A key lesson from the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) is that peace and responsive governance are not only important outcomes by themselves but that “[r]esponsive and effective governance is […] a critical means to achieve development” (Global Thematic Consultation on Governance and the Post-2015 Development Framework, 2012). Many actors thus advocated for a goal on peace and governance in the 2030 Agenda and member states responded to this call by crafting SDG 16 on Peaceful, Just and Inclusive Societies.

While there has been considerable work on overall SDG interlinkages, including by a Working Group of the UN Statistical Commission’s Inter-Agency and Expert Group, evidence is particularly scarce on SDG 16 interlinkages; i.e. on the question if and how Peace, Justice and Inclusion enable or hinder progress on the other goals or if and how other goals enable or hinder progress on Peace, Justice and Inclusion.

Against this background, UNDP’s Oslo Governance Centre (OGC) and the German Development Institute / Deutsches Institut fuer Entwicklungspolitik (DIE) are collaborating to identify evidence gaps and the state of the art on the influence of SDG 16 on other SDGs. Given the vast literature on the relationship of SDG 16 with various SDG-related factors, it is necessary to pursue a comprehensive approach, which covers as many empirical analyses as possible. UNDP and DIE will thus conduct a quantitative review (overview of reviews / scoping review / systematic literature review). The results will be presented at the HLPF and subsequently be published in a report co-authored by UNDP/DIE and the consultant. They will also inform UNDP’s programmatic work going forward.

The main aim of this review will be the identification of a selection of relevant factors outlined in the targets of SDG 16 (for instance, inclusive governance, peace, participation etc.) and their influence on a selection of other SDGs. The main research question is defined as “How can progress on SDG 16 targets - or lack thereof - potentially impact the achievement of other SDGs?” The consultant should focus on studies that show either the causal factors or present evidence of mixed-methods studies that explain why certain SDG16-related factors contribute or do not contribute to specific SDGs. Once a decision has been taken on the selection of the SDG-related factors, the consultant, together with DIE and UNDP, will choose the appropriate method. The consultant should additionally utilize non-peer reviewed literature such as reports and policy documents. The search should focus on English language publications. Additional languages are an advantage. The consultant should further chart information from documents considered in a Microsoft Excel sheet. Furthermore, she/he will apply content analysis to summarise key results emerging from the studies. Results will be clustered in common themes and discussed in interlinking detail.

Institutional arrangements 

The consultant will be home-based under the supervision of the SDG 16 Policy Advisor at the UNDP Oslo Governance Centre.

Travel

No travel is foreseen during the consultancy.

APPLICATION PROCESS

The application is a two-step process. Failing to comply with the submission process may result in disqualifying the applications.

Step 1: Interested individual consultants must include the following documents when submitting the applications in UNDP job shop.

Please note that only 1 (one) file can be uploaded therefore please include all documents in one file:

• Personal History Form (P11), indicating all past experience from similar projects, as well as the contact details (email and telephone number) of the candidate and at least three (3) professional references, www.sas.undp.org/Documents/P11_Personal_history_form.doc).
• Brief description of why the individual considers him/herself as the most suitable for the assignment. Please indicate available start date.
• Two writing samples (e.g. reports, policy briefs, etc on a topic addressed by SDG 16).

Step 2: Financial Proposal.

Scope of Price Proposal and Schedule of Payments:

The financial proposal should state the all-inclusive, lump sum offer in USD, supported by a breakdown of costs (Table A1). The term ‘all inclusive” implies that all costs (professional fees, communications, utilities, consumables, insurance, travel as per ToR etc.) that could possibly be incurred by the Contractor are already factored into the final amounts submitted in the proposal. The form can be found here: http://procurement-notices.undp.org/view_file.cfm?doc_id=45780

The financial proposal should be sent separately to this email address: oslo.governance.centre@undp.org, with subject line: “Financial proposal SDG16 Literature Review”

If an offeror 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 offeror must indicate this at in the Financial Proposal, and ensure that all such costs are duly incorporated in the financial proposal submitted to UNDP.   The consultant will be paid only after approving authority confirms the successful completion of each deliverable as stipulated under chapter 3.

In the case of unforeseeable travel, payment of travel costs including tickets, lodging and terminal expenses will be agreed upon, between UNDP and Individual Consultant, prior to travel and will be reimbursed. In general, UNDP will not accept travel costs exceeding those of an economy class ticket.  Should the IC wish to travel on a higher class he/she should do so using their own resources.

Criteria for selection of individual consultant for award of contract:

Only those candidates who meet the minimum level of education and relevant years of experience requirements will be considered for the technical evaluation. The technical evaluation will include a desk review and interviews with shortlisted candidates. With weight of 50% desk review and 50% interview of the total technical score.

The combine scoring method will be used to evaluate proposals:

Combined scoring method – the qualifications will be weighted a maximum of 70% and combined with the price offer which will be weighted a maximum of 30%.

Technical criteria weight: 70 (70% of total obtainable scores). Only candidates obtaining a minimum of 49 (70%) points on technical part will be considered for the financial evaluation.

Financial criteria weight: 30 (30% of total obtainable scores)

When using this weighted scoring method, the award of the contract will be made to the individual consultant whose offer has been evaluated and determined as:

• responsive / compliant / acceptable; and
• having received the highest score out of a pre-determined set of weighted technical and financial criteria specific to the solicitation.

Technical Evaluation (70 Points) 70% weight

Technical evaluations will be conducted based on the following criteria:

• Strong understanding of issues addressed by SDG16 (either one issue in-depth or strong understanding of several issues) and sustainable development; solid understanding of mainstreaming human rights and gender equality is an advantage (15 points)
• Proven ability to write engaging high-quality reports, articles, communications materials on issues addressed by SDG 16 (15 points)
• Proven ability to communicate issues effectively and with cultural and political sensitivity, both orally and in writing (10 points)
• Outstanding organizational and planning skills (10 points)
• Ability to manage large amounts of data and information and to be able to synthesize key lessons learned, best practices and recommendations (20 points)

Only Individual Consultants obtaining a minimum of 49 of the obtainable points of 70 points (70%) in technical evaluation would be considered for the Financial Evaluation.

Financial Evaluation. The following formula will be used to evaluate financial proposal:

p = y (µ/z), where

p = points for the financial proposal being evaluated;

y = maximum number of points for the financial proposal;
µ = price of the lowest priced proposal;
z = price of the proposal being evaluated

Duties and Responsibilities

SCOPE OF WORK

Tasks
The Consultant will be responsible for:

• Identifying the appropriate method for a comprehensive analysis of the literature related to the main aim of the consultancy (see above) and discuss with DIE and UNDP the method to be used;
• Preparing the literature review, including by drafting a literature review protocol, definition of key terms;
• Conducting the literature review;
• Reviewing and evaluating the literature;
• Drafting a report on the results of the literature review with feedback from DIE and UNDP;
• Integrating feedback from an advisory group;.
• Finalize a co-authored results report in close coordination with DIE and UNDP

The consultant works in close cooperation with UNDP and DIE, in particular when milestones of the review process are reached.

 Outputs

• Search protocol;
• Draft report, including generalisations on basis of evidence found in review;
• Report with main findings.                                                                    

The timeframe above includes time to review documents, closely cooperate with UNDP and DIE colleagues and incorporate feedback on drafts

Competencies

• Strong understanding of issues addressed by SDG16 and their linkages with other policy areas of addressed by the SDGs; solid understanding of mainstreaming human rights and gender equality is an advantage;
• Proven experience with quantitative literature reviews, in particular meta-reviews of reviews; scoping reviews and systematic literature review
• Proven ability to communicate issues effectively and with cultural and political sensitivity, both orally and in writing;
• Good organizational and planning skills;
• Ability to manage large amounts of data and information and to be able to synthesize key results and recommendations.

Required Skills and Experience

Education:

• Advanced university degree in social sciences and trained in quantitative methods.

 Experience:

• Proven experience with conducting quantitative literature analysis such as meta-review of reviews; scoping review or systematic literature review, preferably in the field of governance, peacebuilding, rule of law, human rights or other issues addressed by SDG 16 and their linkages with other SDG-related policy areas.
• Experience working collaboratively in a team structure in a multicultural environment.
• Experience working under minimum supervision and tight deadlines.
• Prior experience with UN agencies, other multilateral or bilateral agencies or INGOs is an advantage.
• Literate in software necessary for the respective quantitative review, experience with producing info graphics is an advantage.

 Languages:

• Fluency in spoken and written English is a must.
• Knowledge of other UN Languages is an advantage.