International Consultant-Terminal Evaluation

Location : CHINA
Application Deadline :05-Mar-21 (Midnight New York, USA)
Time left :9d 10h 28m
Additional Category :Sustainable Development and Poverty Reduction
Type of Contract :Individual Contract
Post Level :International Consultant
Languages Required :
Starting Date :
(date when the selected candidate is expected to start)
Duration of Initial Contract :3 months
Expected Duration of Assignment :3 months

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.



In accordance with UNDP and GEF M&E policies and procedures, all full- and medium-sized UNDP-supported GEF-financed projects are required to undergo a Terminal Evaluation (TE) at the end of the project.  This Terms of Reference (ToR) sets out the expectations for the TE of the full-sized project titled UPOPs Reduction through BAT/BEP and PPP-based Industry Chain Management in Secondary Copper Production Sector in China (PIMS #5383) implemented through the FECO/Ministry of Ecology and Environment of China. The project started on the 3rd August 2016 and is in its 5 year of implementation.  The TE process must follow the guidance outlined in the document ‘Guidance For Conducting Terminal Evaluations of UNDP-Supported, GEF-Financed Projects’

Project Description 

Project period:

60 months

Allocated resources from GEF:




  • UNDP:


  • Government:


  • Private Sector:


  • Others:


The project will achieve its objectives through the introduction and demonstration of BAT/BEP technologies and sound process control, to increase China’s capability in meeting its obligations under the Stockholm Convention. The overall project strategy is to blend GEF funding into the overall national secondary copper production management system development process to address the issues and barriers, specifically ensuring that international best practice experience and technology options are considered. At the macro level, it will take in international experience to develop and improve the national management and supervision system for the secondary copper production sector. National technical standards will be adopted and implemented, particularly on UPOPs emission. Public awareness activities will be conducted to promote implementation of full process UPOPs reduction system. Through demonstration activities at two selected locations in Jiangxi Province and actions to be taken at selected enterprises, pre-treatment, smelting, alloying, casting, electrolysis, gas treatment and fly ash disposal will be conducted in an environmentally sound manner utilizing demonstrated BAT/BEP that will result in achieving reduction of UPOPs release.

In detail, the project will achieve reduction of UPOPs release through four comprehensive and targeted components. The project as outlined is structured with four components:

Component 1 will support the development and improvement of regulatory framework, strengthen institutional and management capacities, and enhance coordination with other multilateral environmental conventions;

Component 2 covers the development of the required infrastructure and the demonstration of BAT/BEP technologies and PPP-based industry chain management with the UNDP-GEF support focused on introduction of international technology;

Component 3 will develop a national replication plan of BAT/BEP for the secondary copper smelting industry on the demonstration results and experience gained, with PPP joint governance and management structure established;

Component 4 supports the monitoring and evaluation of the project and dissemination of experience and lessons learned, something that is seen as useful for other developing countries dealing with the issue globally. In addition; project management capacity will be strengthened to achieve implementation effectiveness and efficiency.

TE Purpose

The TE report will assess the achievement of project results against what was expected to be achieved, and draw lessons that can both improve the sustainability of benefits from this project, and aid in the overall enhancement of UNDP programming. The TE report promotes accountability and transparency, and assesses the extent of project accomplishments.

Duties and Responsibilities

The TE will be conducted according to the guidance, rules and procedures established by UNDP and GEF as reflected in the UNDP Evaluation Guidance for GEF Financed Projects. The objectives of the evaluation are 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. 

TE Approach & Methodology

The TE must provide evidence-based information that is credible, reliable and useful.

The TE team will review all relevant sources of information including documents prepared during the preparation phase (i.e. PIF, UNDP Initiation Plan, UNDP Social and Environmental Screening Procedure/SESP) the Project Document, project reports including annual PIRs, project budget revisions, lesson learned reports, national strategic and legal documents, and any other materials that the team considers useful for this evidence-based evaluation. The TE team will review the baseline and midterm GEF focal area Core Indicators/Tracking Tools submitted to the GEF at the CEO endorsement and midterm stages and the terminal Core Indicators/Tracking Tools that must be completed before the TE field mission begins. 

The TE team is expected to follow a participatory and consultative approach ensuring close engagement with the Project Team, government counterparts (the GEF Operational Focal Point), Implementing Partners, the UNDP Country Office(s), the Regional Technical Advisors, direct beneficiaries and other stakeholders.

Engagement of stakeholders is vital to a successful TE. Stakeholder involvement should include interviews with stakeholders who have project responsibilities, including but not limited to the Implementing Partner, Local PMO and the demonstration enterprises; executing agencies, senior officials and task team/component leaders, key experts and consultants in the subject area, Project Board, project beneficiaries, academia, local government and CSOs, etc.

Considering the COVID outbreak, evaluation will take place through virtual interviews.

The specific design and methodology for the TE should emerge from consultations between the TE team and the above-mentioned parties regarding what is appropriate and feasible for meeting the TE purpose and objectives and answering the evaluation questions, given limitations of budget, time and data. The TE team must, however, use gender-responsive methodologies and tools and ensure that gender equality and women’s empowerment, as well as other cross-cutting issues and SDGs are incorporated into the TE report.

The final methodological approach including interview schedule, field visits and data to be used in the evaluation should be clearly outlined in the inception report and be fully discussed and agreed between UNDP, stakeholders and the TE team.

The final TE report should describe the full TE approach taken and the rationale for the approach making explicit the underlying assumptions, challenges, strengths and weaknesses about the methods and approach of the evaluation.

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. Travel to the country has been restricted. If it is not possible to travel to or within the country for the TE mission then the TE team should develop a methodology that takes this into account the conduct of the TE 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 TE Inception Report and agreed with the Commissioning Unit. 

If all or part of the TE 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 final TE report. 

If a data collection/field mission is not possible then remote interviews may be undertaken through telephone or online (skype, zoom etc.). International consultants can work remotely with national evaluator support in the field if it is safe for them to operate and travel. No stakeholders, consultants or UNDP staff should be put in harm’s way and safety is the key priority.

A short validation mission may be considered if it is confirmed to be safe for staff, consultants, stakeholders and if such a mission is possible within the TE schedule. Equally, qualified and independent national consultants can be hired to undertake the TE and interviews in country as long as it is safe to do so.

Detailed Scope of the TE

The TE will assess project performance against expectations set out in the project’s Logical Framework/Results Framework (see TOR Annex A). The TE will assess results according to the criteria outlined in the Guidance for TEs of UNDP-supported GEF-financed Projects (

The Findings section of the TE report will cover the topics listed below.

A full outline of the TE report’s content is provided in ToR Annex C.

The asterisk “(*)” indicates criteria for which a rating is required.


  1. Project Design/Formulation
  • National priorities and country driven-ness
  • Theory of Change
  • Gender equality and women’s empowerment
  • Social and Environmental Safeguards
  • Analysis of Results Framework: project logic and strategy, indicators
  • Assumptions and Risks
  • Lessons from other relevant projects (e.g. same focal area) incorporated into project design
  • Planned stakeholder participation
  • Linkages between project and other interventions within the sector
  • Management arrangements

Project Implementation

  • Adaptive management (changes to the project design and project outputs during implementation)
  • Actual stakeholder participation and partnership arrangements
  • Project Finance and Co-finance
  • Monitoring & Evaluation: design at entry (*), implementation (*), and overall assessment of M&E (*)
  • Implementing Agency (UNDP) (*) and Executing Agency (*), overall project oversight/implementation and execution (*)
  • Risk Management, including Social and Environmental Standards

Project Results

  • Assess the achievement of outcomes against indicators by reporting on the level of progress for each objective and outcome indicator at the time of the TE and noting final achievements
  • Relevance (*), Effectiveness (*), Efficiency (*) and overall project outcome (*)
  • Sustainability: financial (*)     , socio-political (*), institutional framework and governance (*), environmental (*), overall likelihood of sustainability (*)
  • Country ownership
  • Gender equality and women’s empowerment
  • Cross-cutting issues (poverty alleviation, improved governance, climate change mitigation and adaptation, disaster prevention and recovery, human rights, capacity development, South-South cooperation, knowledge management, volunteerism, etc., as relevant)
  • GEF Additionality
  • Catalytic Role / Replication Effect
  • Progress to impact

Main Findings, Conclusions, Recommendations and Lessons Learned

  • The TE team will include a summary of the main findings of the TE report. Findings should be presented as statements of fact that are based on analysis of the data.
  •  The section on conclusions will be written in light of the findings. Conclusions should be comprehensive and balanced statements that are well substantiated by evidence and logically connected to the TE findings. They should highlight the strengths, weaknesses and results of the project, respond to key evaluation questions and provide insights into the identification of and/or solutions to important problems or issues pertinent to project beneficiaries, UNDP and the GEF, including issues in relation to gender equality and women’s empowerment.
  • Recommendations should provide concrete, practical, feasible and targeted recommendations directed to the intended users of the evaluation about what actions to take and decisions to make. The recommendations should be specifically supported by the evidence and linked to the findings and conclusions around key questions addressed by the evaluation.
  • The TE report should also include lessons that can be taken from the evaluation, including best and worst practices in addressing issues relating to relevance, performance and success that can provide knowledge gained from the particular circumstance (programmatic and evaluation methods used, partnerships, financial leveraging, etc.) that are applicable to other GEF and UNDP interventions. When possible, the TE team should include examples of good practices in project design and implementation.
  • It is important for the conclusions, recommendations and lessons learned of the TE report to include results related to gender equality and empowerment of women.

The TE report will include an Evaluation Ratings Table, as shown in the ToR Annex.


Expected Outputs and Deliverables

The TE consultant/team shall prepare and submit:

  • TE Inception Report: TE team clarifies objectives and methods of the TE no later than 2 weeks before the TE mission. TE team submits the Inception Report to the Commissioning Unit and project management. Approximate due date: 5 April 2021
  • Presentation: TE team presents initial findings to project management and the Commissioning Unit at the end of the TE mission. Approximate due date: 19 April 2021
  • Draft TE Report: TE team submits full draft report with annexes within 3 weeks of the end of the TE mission. Approximate due date: 14 May 2021
  • Final TE Report* and Audit Trail: TE team submits revised report, with Audit Trail detailing how all received comments have (and have not) been addressed in the final TE report, to the Commissioning Unit within 1 week of receiving UNDP comments on draft. Approximate due date: 28 May 2021

*The final TE report must be in English. If applicable, the Commissioning Unit may choose to arrange for a translation of the report into a language more widely shared by national stakeholders.

All final TE reports will be quality assessed by the UNDP Independent Evaluation Office (IEO).  Details of the IEO’s quality assessment of decentralized evaluations can be found in Section 6 of the UNDP Evaluation Guidelines.[1]

TE Arrangements

The principal responsibility for managing the TE resides with the Commissioning Unit.  The Commissioning Unit for this project’s TE is UNDP Country Office in China.

The Commissioning Unit will contract the consultants and ensure the timely provision of per diems and travel arrangements within the country for the TE team.  The Project Team will be responsible for liaising with the TE team to provide all relevant documents, set up stakeholder interviews, and arrange field visits.

Duration of the Work

The total duration of the TE will be approximately (average 25-35 working days) over a time period of (12 of weeks) starting 19 March 2021 and shall not exceed five months from when the TE team is hired.  The tentative TE timeframe is as follows:

  • 5 March: Application closes
  • 8 March: Selection of TE Team
  • 10 March: Prep the TE team (handover of project documents)
  • 15 March: 5 days: Document review and preparing TE Inception Report
  • 24 March: 3 days: Finalization and Validation of TE Inception Report- latest start of TE mission
  • 16 April: 6 days: TE mission: stakeholder meetings, interviews, field visits
  • 19 April: Mission wrap-up meeting & presentation of initial findings- earliest end of TE mission
  • 14 May: 13 days: Preparation of draft TE report
  • 28 May: Circulation of draft TE report for comments
  • 31 May: 1 day: Incorporation of comments on draft TE report into Audit Trail & finalization of TE report
  • 1 June: Preparation & Issue of Management Response
  • 11 June: Expected date of full TE completion

The expected date start date of contract is 19 March 2021.

[1] Access at:

Required Skills and Experience

A team of two independent evaluators will conduct the TE – one team leader (with experience and exposure to projects and evaluations in other regions) and one team expert, usually from the country of the project.  The team leader will be responsible for the overall design and writing of the TE report, etc.  The team expert will assess emerging trends with respect to regulatory frameworks, budget allocations, capacity building, work with the Project Team in developing the TE itinerary, etc.

The evaluator(s) cannot have participated in the project preparation, formulation and/or implementation (including the writing of the project document), must not have conducted this project’s Mid-Term Review and should not have a conflict of interest with the project’s related activities.

The selection of evaluators will be aimed at maximizing the overall “team” qualities in the following areas:


  • Master’s degree in chemical science, chemical engineering, natural science, environment science, environmental engineering, or other closely related field;


  • Relevant experience with results-based management evaluation methodologies;
  • Experience applying SMART indicators and reconstructing or validating baseline scenarios;
  • Competence in adaptive management, especially on hazardous chemicals or Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs);
  • Experience in evaluating projects;
  • Experience working in China;
  • Experience in relevant technical areas for at least 10 years;
  • Demonstrated understanding of issues related to gender and Hazardous chemicals; experience in gender responsive evaluation and analysis;
  • Excellent communication skills;
  • Demonstrable analytical skills;
  • Project evaluation/review experience within United Nations system will be considered an asset;
  • Experience with implementing evaluations remotely will be considered an asset.


  • Fluency in written and spoken English.

Evaluator Ethics

The TE team will be held to the highest ethical standards and is required to sign a code of conduct upon acceptance of the assignment. This evaluation will be conducted in accordance with the principles outlined in the UNEG ‘Ethical Guidelines for Evaluation’. The evaluator 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 evaluator 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 without the express authorization of UNDP and partners.

Payment Schedule

  • 20% payment upon satisfactory delivery of the final TE Inception Report and approval by the Commissioning Unit
  • 40% payment upon satisfactory delivery of the draft TE report to the Commissioning Unit
  • 40% payment upon satisfactory delivery of the final TE report and approval by the Commissioning Unit and RTA (via signatures on the TE Report Clearance Form) and delivery of completed TE Audit Trail

Criteria for issuing the final payment of 40%

  • The final TE report includes all requirements outlined in the TE TOR and is in accordance with the TE guidance.
  • The final TE report is clearly written, logically organized, and is specific for this project (i.e. text has not been cut & pasted from other MTR reports).
  • The Audit Trail includes responses to and justification for each comment listed.

In line with the UNDP’s financial regulations, when determined by the Commissioning Unit and/or the consultant that a deliverable or service cannot be satisfactorily completed due to the impact of COVID-19 and limitations to the TE, that deliverable or service will not be paid.

Due to the current COVID-19 situation and its implications, a partial payment may be considered if the consultant invested time towards the deliverable but was unable to complete to circumstances beyond his/her control.


Scope of Price Proposal and Schedule of Payments

Financial Proposal:

  • Financial proposals must be expressed in a lump-sum for the total duration of the contract including the professional fees, living allowances etc.; travel expenses will be reimbursed based on actual cost.
  • The lump sum is fixed regardless of changes in the cost components.
  1.   Recommended Presentation of Proposal
  2. Letter of Confirmation of Interest and Availability using the template provided by UNDP;
  3. CV and a Personal History Form (P11 form);
  4. Brief description of approach to work/technical proposal of why the individual considers him/herself as the most suitable for the assignment, and a proposed methodology on how they will approach and complete the assignment; (max 1 page)
  5. Financial Proposal that indicates the 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.

All application materials should be submitted online through the link attached in the advertisement by 5 March 2021 Incomplete applications will be excluded from further consideration.

  Criteria for Selection of the Best Offer

Only those applications which are responsive and compliant will be evaluated. Offers will be evaluated according to the Combined Scoring method – where the educational background and experience on similar assignments will be weighted at 70% and the price proposal will weigh as 30% of the total scoring. The applicant receiving the Highest Combined Score that has also accepted UNDP’s General Terms and Conditions will be awarded the contract.

 Annexes to the TE ToR

  • ToR Annex A: Project Logical/Results Framework
  • ToR Annex B: Project Information Package to be reviewed by TE team
  • ToR Annex C: Content of the TE report
  • ToR Annex D: Evaluation Criteria Matrix template
  • ToR Annex E: UNEG Code of Conduct for Evaluators
  • ToR Annex F: TE Rating Scales and TE Ratings Table
  • ToR Annex G: TE Report Clearance Form
  • ToR Annex H: TE Audit Trail template

ToR Annex A: Project Logical/Results Framework

ToR Annex B: Project Information Package to be reviewed by TE team


Item (electronic versions preferred if available)


Project Identification Form (PIF)


UNDP Initiation Plan


Final UNDP-GEF Project Document with all annexes


CEO Endorsement Request


UNDP Social and Environmental Screening Procedure (SESP) and associated management plans (if any)


Inception Workshop Report


Mid-Term Review report and management response to MTR recommendations


All Project Implementation Reports (PIRs)


Progress reports (quarterly, semi-annual or annual, with associated workplans and financial reports)


Oversight mission reports


Minutes of Project Board Meetings and of other meetings (i.e. Project Appraisal Committee meetings)


GEF Tracking Tools (from CEO Endorsement, midterm and terminal stages)


GEF/LDCF/SCCF Core Indicators (from PIF, CEO Endorsement, midterm and terminal stages); for GEF-6 and GEF-7 projects only


Financial data, including actual expenditures by project outcome, including management costs, and including documentation of any significant budget revisions


Co-financing data with expected and actual contributions broken down by type of co-financing, source, and whether the contribution is considered as investment mobilized or recurring expenditures


Audit reports


Electronic copies of project outputs (booklets, manuals, technical reports, articles, etc.)


Sample of project communications materials


Summary list of formal meetings, workshops, etc. held, with date, location, topic, and number of participants


Any relevant socio-economic monitoring data, such as average incomes / employment levels of stakeholders in the target area, change in revenue related to project activities


List of contracts and procurement items over ~US$5,000 (i.e. organizations or companies contracted for project outputs, etc., except in cases of confidential information)


List of related projects/initiatives contributing to project objectives approved/started after GEF project approval (i.e. any leveraged or “catalytic” results)


Data on relevant project website activity – e.g. number of unique visitors per month, number of page views, etc. over relevant time period, if available


UNDP Country Programme Document (CPD)


List/map of project sites, highlighting suggested visits


List and contact details for project staff, key project stakeholders, including Project Board members, RTA, Project Team members, and other partners to be consulted


Project deliverables that provide documentary evidence of achievement towards project outcomes


Add documents, as required

ToR Annex C: Content of the TE report

  1. Title page
  • Tile of UNDP-supported GEF-financed project
  • TE timeframe and date of final TE report
  • Region and countries included in the project
  • GEF Focal Area/Strategic Program
  • Executing Agency, Implementing partner and other project partners
  • TE Team members
  1. Acknowledgements
  2. Table of Contents
  3. Acronyms and Abbreviations
  1. Executive Summary (3-4 pages)
  • Project Information Table
  • Project Description (brief)
  • Evaluation Ratings Table
  • Concise summary of findings, conclusions and lessons learned
  • Recommendations summary table
  1. Introduction (2-3 pages)
  • Purpose and objective of the TE
  • Scope
  • Methodology
  • Data Collection & Analysis
  • Ethics
  • Limitations to the evaluation
  • Structure of the TE report
  1. Project Description (3-5 pages)
  • Project start and duration, including milestones
  • Development context: environmental, socio-economic, institutional, and policy factors relevant to the project objective and scope
  • Problems that the project sought to address: threats and barriers targeted
  • Immediate and development objectives of the project
  • Expected results
  • Main stakeholders: summary list
  • Theory of Change
  1. Findings

(in addition to a descriptive assessment, all criteria marked with (*) must be given a rating[1])

4.1 Project Design/Formulation

  • Analysis of Results Framework: project logic and strategy, indicators
  • Assumptions and Risks
  • Lessons from other relevant projects (e.g. same focal area) incorporated into project design
  • Planned stakeholder participation
  • Linkages between project and other interventions within the sector
    1. Project Implementation
  • Adaptive management (changes to the project design and project outputs during implementation)
  • Actual stakeholder participation and partnership arrangements
  • Project Finance and Co-finance
  • Monitoring & Evaluation: design at entry (*), implementation (*), and overall assessment of M&E (*)
  • UNDP implementation/oversight (*) and Implementing Partner execution (*), overall project implementation/execution (*), coordination, and operational issues
    1. Project Results
  • Progress towards objective and expected outcomes (*)
  • Relevance (*)
  • Effectiveness (*)
  • Efficiency (*)
  • Overall Outcome (*)
  • Country ownership
  • Gender
  • Other Cross-cutting Issues
  • Social and Environmental Standards
  • Sustainability: financial (*), socio-economic (*), institutional framework and governance (*), environmental (*), and overall likelihood (*)
  • Country Ownership
  • Gender equality and women’s empowerment
  • Cross-cutting Issues
  • GEF Additionality
  • Catalytic Role / Replication Effect
  • Progress to Impact
  1. Main Findings, Conclusions, Recommendations & Lessons
  • Main Findings
  • Conclusions
  • Recommendations
  • Lessons Learned
  1. Annexes
  • TE ToR (excluding ToR annexes)
  • TE Mission itinerary
  • List of persons interviewed
  • List of documents reviewed
  • Summary of field visits
  • Evaluation Question Matrix (evaluation criteria with key questions, indicators, sources of data, and methodology)
  • Questionnaire used and summary of results
  • Co-financing tables (if not include in body of report)
  • TE Rating scales
  • Signed Evaluation Consultant Agreement form
  • Signed UNEG Code of Conduct form
  • Signed TE Report Clearance form
  • Annexed in a separate file: TE Audit Trail
  • Annexed in a separate file: relevant terminal GEF/LDCF/SCCF Core Indicators or Tracking Tools, as applicable

ToR Annex D: Evaluation Criteria Matrix template

NOTE: Include COVID-19 specific questions, as needed.

Evaluative Criteria Questions




Relevance: How does the project relate to the main objectives of the GEF Focal area, and to the environment and development priorities a the local, regional and national level?

(include evaluative questions)

(i.e. relationships established, level of coherence between project design and implementation approach, specific activities conducted, quality of risk mitigation strategies, etc.)

(i.e. project documentation, national policies or strategies, websites, project staff, project partners, data collected throughout the TE mission, etc.)

(i.e. document analysis, data analysis, interviews with project staff, interviews with stakeholders, etc.)









Effectiveness: To what extent have the expected outcomes and objectives of the project been achieved?









Efficiency: Was the project implemented efficiently, in line with international and national norms and standards?









Sustainability: To what extent are there financial, institutional, socio-political, and/or environmental risks to sustaining long-term project results?









Gender equality and women’s empowerment: How did the project contribute to gender equality and women’s empowerment? 









Impact: Are there indications that the project has contributed to, or enabled progress toward reduced environmental stress and/or improved ecological status?





(Expand the table to include questions for all criteria being assessed: Monitoring & Evaluation, UNDP oversight/implementation, Implementing Partner Execution, cross-cutting issues, etc.)

ToR Annex E: UNEG Code of Conduct for Evaluators

Independence entails the ability to evaluate without undue influence or pressure by any party (including the hiring unit) and providing evaluators with free access to information on the evaluation subject.  Independence provides legitimacy to and ensures an objective perspective on evaluations. An independent evaluation reduces the potential for conflicts of interest which might arise with self-reported ratings by those involved in the management of the project being evaluated.  Independence is one of ten general principles for evaluations (together with internationally agreed principles, goals and targets: utility, credibility, impartiality, ethics, transparency, human rights and gender equality, national evaluation capacities, and professionalism).

ToR Annex F: TE Rating Scales & Evaluation Ratings Table

TE Rating Scales

Ratings for Outcomes, Effectiveness, Efficiency, M&E, Implementation/Oversight, Execution, Relevance

Sustainability ratings:


6 = Highly Satisfactory (HS): exceeds expectations and/or no shortcomings

5 = Satisfactory (S): meets expectations and/or no or minor shortcomings

4 = Moderately Satisfactory (MS): more or less meets expectations and/or some shortcomings

3 = Moderately Unsatisfactory (MU): somewhat below expectations and/or significant shortcomings

2 = Unsatisfactory (U): substantially below expectations and/or major shortcomings

1 = Highly Unsatisfactory (HU): severe shortcomings

Unable to Assess (U/A): available information does not allow an assessment

4 = Likely (L): negligible risks to sustainability

3 = Moderately Likely (ML): moderate risks to sustainability

2 = Moderately Unlikely (MU): significant risks to sustainability

1 = Unlikely (U): severe risks to sustainability

Unable to Assess (U/A): Unable to assess the expected incidence and magnitude of risks to sustainability


Evaluation Ratings Table

Monitoring & Evaluation (M&E)


M&E design at entry


M&E Plan Implementation


Overall Quality of M&E


Implementation & Execution


Quality of UNDP Implementation/Oversight


Quality of Implementing Partner Execution


Overall quality of Implementation/Execution


Assessment of Outcomes








Overall Project Outcome Rating




Financial resources




Institutional framework and governance




Overall Likelihood of Sustainability


ToR Annex G: TE Report Clearance Form

Terminal Evaluation Report for (Project Title & UNDP PIMS ID) Reviewed and Cleared By:


Commissioning Unit (M&E Focal Point)


Name: _____________________________________________


Signature: __________________________________________     Date: _______________________________


Regional Technical Advisor (Nature, Climate and Energy)


Name: _____________________________________________


Signature: __________________________________________     Date: _______________________________


ToR Annex H: TE Audit Trail

The following is a template for the TE Team to show how the received comments on the draft TE report have (or have not) been incorporated into the final TE report. This Audit Trail should be listed as an annex in the final TE report but not attached to the report file. 

To the comments received on (date) from the Terminal Evaluation of (project name) (UNDP Project PIMS #)

The following comments were provided to the draft TE report; they are referenced by institution/organization (do not include the commentator’s name) and track change comment number (“#” column):




Para No./ comment location

Comment/Feedback on the draft TE report

TE team

response and actions taken














































[1] See ToR Annex F for rating scales.

[2] Outcomes, Effectiveness, Efficiency, M&E, I&E Execution, Relevance are rated on a 6-point rating scale: 6 = Highly Satisfactory (HS), 5 = Satisfactory (S), 4 = Moderately Satisfactory (MS), 3 = Moderately Unsatisfactory (MU), 2 = Unsatisfactory (U), 1 = Highly Unsatisfactory (HU). Sustainability is rated on a 4-point scale: 4 = Likely (L), 3 = Moderately Likely (ML), 2 = Moderately Unlikely (MU), 1 = Unlikely (U)


Inception report content

  1. Background and context illustrating the understanding of the project/outcome to be evaluated.
  2. Evaluation objective, purpose and scope. A clear statement of the objectives of the evaluation and the main aspects or elements of the initiative to be examined.
  3. Evaluation criteria and questions. The criteria the evaluation will use to assess performance and rationale. The stakeholders to be met and interview questions should be included and agreed as well as a proposed schedule for field site visits.
  4. Evaluability analysis. Illustrate the evaluability analysis based on formal (clear outputs, indicators, baselines, data) and substantive (identification of problem addressed, theory of change, results framework) and the implication on the proposed methodology.
  5. Cross-cutting issues. Provide details of how cross-cutting issues will be evaluated, considered and analysed throughout the evaluation. The description should specify how methods for data collection and analysis will integrate gender considerations, ensure that data collected is disaggregated by sex and other relevant categories, and employ a diverse range of data sources and processes to ensure inclusion of diverse stakeholders, including the most vulnerable where appropriate.
  6. Evaluation approach and methodology, highlighting the conceptual models adopted with a description of data-collection methods,[1] sources and analytical approaches to be employed, including the rationale for their selection (how they will inform the evaluation) and their limitations; data-collection tools, instruments and protocols; and discussion of reliability and validity for the evaluation and the sampling plan, including the rationale and limitations.
  7. Evaluation matrix. This identifies the key evaluation questions and how they will be answered via the methods selected.
  8. A revised schedule of key milestones, deliverables and responsibilities including the evaluation phases (data collection, data analysis and reporting).
  9. Detailed resource requirements tied to evaluation activities and deliverables detailed in the workplan. Include specific assistance required from UNDP such as providing arrangements for visiting particular field offices or sites
  10. Outline of the draft/final report as detailed in the guidelines and ensuring quality and usability (outlined below). The agreed report outline should meet the quality goals outlined in these guidelines and also meet the quality assessment requirements outlined in section 6.

[1] Annex 2 outlines different data collection methods.

Management response template


UNDP management response template

[Name of the Evaluation] Date:


Prepared by:                                                                  Position:                                                                                                                                      Unit/Bureau:

Cleared by:                                                                     Position:                                                                                                                                      Unit/Bureau:

Input into and update in ERC:                                   Position:                                                                                                                                      Unit/Bureau:


Evaluation recommendation 1.

Management response:

Key action(s)

Completion date

Responsible unit(s)




(initiated, completed or no due date)

















Evaluation recommendation 2.

Management response:

Key action(s)

Completion date

Responsible unit(s)



Status (initiated, completed or no due date)


















Evaluation recommendation 3.

Management response:

Key action(s)

Completion date

Responsible unit(s)



Status (initiated, completed or no due date)


















* Status of implementation is tracked electronically in the ERC database.


If you are experiencing difficulties with online job applications, please contact

© 2016 United Nations Development Programme