International Consultant to conduct a decentralized Project Final Evaluation


Location : Home-based, UKRAINE
Application Deadline :15-Jun-21 (Midnight New York, USA)
Type of Contract :Individual Contract
Post Level :International Consultant
Languages Required :
English   Russian  
Duration of Initial Contract :20 working days within the timeframe June-July (including) 2021

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.


Background

The need for energy efficiency improvements across the Ukrainian economy is significant. Ukraine’s economy is two or three times as energy intensive as many neighboring countries, including Poland, Slovakia, and the Czech Republic. One of the many sectors which need to become more energy efficient is the housing and communal sector,  which directly impacts the quality of the living conditions of millions of Ukrainians, and is completely unsustainable due to the high levels of energy and heat consumption, outdated infrastructure, and heating systems, significant gas wastage and old housing stock. Comparing to the neighbouring EU countries with a similar climate, the housing and communal sector of Ukraine is three to four times less energy efficient and consumes almost 45 percent of the country’s energy. The heating sector of residential buildings has one of the largest potentials for improving energy efficiency in Ukraine.

48% of the Ukrainian population live in around180,456  multi-apartment buildings, 144,000 out of them- which is 80%- require modernization. [1]As an average, the Ukrainian resident of a multi-apartment building consumes  264 kWh energy per sq. meter, while in the European countries the corresponding figure does not exceed 90 kWh / sq. meter as per the official statistics.  An analysis of the heating losses in a multi-apartment building shows that 60-90% of the heat is lost through the building envelope (the walls, top floor ceiling, and cellar) due to their low thermal characteristics, 30-40%  is lost with ventilated air, 20-30% through the walls,  15-25% is lost through the windows, 10-25% through the roof and 3-6%  through the basement, which belong to common parts of the multi-apartment building.

However, although Ukraine’s housing stock is privatized at the level of 98%, the responsibility for the management and maintenance of common parts of the multi-apartment buildings has been shared between the municipal housing services organizations (ZHEK), housing/building cooperatives (HBC), and private home owners. Under this management system, major repairs, including those focused on energy efficiency, are traditionally not foreseen/planned. Moreover, co-owners have generally had limited awareness of their responsibilities, and are often not willing and/or capable to deal with and contribute to the financing of complex technical interventions. Attitudes and expectations often lag behind the legal and policy framework.

One of the important steps to align Ukrainian legislation in the field of responsibility of home owners for the energy efficiency of buildings with European standards was the Law ?417 "On specifics of ownership in apartment buildings" adopted in 2015. This Law determines the relations associated with the implementation of the rights and performance of duties by co-owners of apartment buildings in terms of its maintenance and administration (including energy efficiency issues). This law provides for the possibility of voluntarily creating a Home Owners Association (HOA)  and declared it as a legal entity under the laws of Ukraine.

The proper functioning of HOAs in Ukraine and effective management of common property are prerequisites for the formation and successful implementation of state housing policy and implementation of energy efficiency measures.  HOAs become an effective instrument to manage the common property in the multi-apartment building and achieve the reduction of energy consumption and improve quality of life at large. According to the State Statistics Service on the beginning of 2020 in Ukraine, the Unified State Register of Legal Entities, Individual Entrepreneurs and Public Associations in Ukraine counted over 34,000 Home Owners Associations, almost 33,000 of them active, while the remaining part either haven’t finished their registration or suspended their activity. An analysis held by the Ministry for Communities and Territories Development showed that the most important for HOAs are the first years after the registration; the majority of the HOAs suspended their activities during the first four years[2].  The biggest number of HOAs was established after the adoption of Law#417, currently, approximately 140 HOAs are created per month. If the number of HOAs does not increase, it will take about 87,5 years to establish them in all multi-apartment buildings in Ukraine.

Furthermore, a new law that implements a European Union directive on the efficiency of buildings in July 2017,  and the set-up of a Ukrainian Energy Efficiency Fund (EEF), which was officially registered on 24 July 2018. The objective of the Fund is to improves Ukraine’s energy efficiency by reducing the level of energy consumption and ??2 emissions in the residential sector, thus achieving a decrease in the adverse impact on the environment. The Energy Efficiency Fund provides support to Home Owners Associations for the implementation of the thermo-modernization projects and energy-efficiency renovations in multi-apartment buildings while factoring in the best European thermal modernization practices. Financing of energy efficiency projects is made through partial refunds (grants) to Ukrainian Home Owners’ Associations  for energy efficiency project's costs. Since the launch of its programme for the residential sector “ENERGODIM” in September 2019 the Energy Efficiency Fund received 625 applications for grants from HOAs, with estimated total budget of projects exceeding UAH 4,9  billion and total amount of requested funding from EEF approaching UAH 3,6  billion. More than 321[3] applications are already approved for funding.

In 2017 and 2018, the European Commission adopted its Energy Efficiency Support Programme for Ukraine (EE4U, phases I and II), aimed at contributing to increased energy efficiency in the Ukrainian residential sector and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. In this context, the EU, together with Germany, is supporting the activities of the Ukrainian Energy Efficiency Fund by providing grants to energy efficient renovations of multi-apartment buildings across Ukraine. Through this Programme, the EU contributes 80 million Euros to the Multi-Donor Trust Fund (established and managed by the International Finance Corporation – IFC – in the framework of the EE4U Programme) as well as over 20 million Euros package of technical assistance.

The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) NDP was called upon by the European Union to contribute, through technical assistance, to the improvement of the Ukrainian housing stock energy efficiency. In the context of “Home Owners of Ukraine for Sustainable Energy Solutions  (HOUSES) – an action within the EE4U Programme” (HOUSES) project, UNDP is intervening during a period of 34 months to stimulate and support the creation of Home Owners Associations through a local presence, and to prepare them to seek and obtain financing for their home improvement projects. UNDP is preparing HOAs by building on its country-wide network of partnerships with regional and local governments, and its long-standing experience of bottom-up citizen mobilization for common action, including the creation of home-owners’ associations.

The specific targets to be achieved through the implementation of the project are: throughout the country’s 24 oblasts, with UNDP’s support, at least 2,250 new HOAs to be created and a total of 6,000 HOAs to be trained to manage their associations and develop energy efficiency projects. The project will directly benefit an average of 480,000 people throughout Ukraine and will help raise energy efficiency awareness of no less than 1,000,000 people overall. The large-scale creation of home-owner associations as entities for active bottom-up engagement and civic responsibility also have other benefits on overall housing sector reform.

Overall, since the beginning of the project, some 5,545 HOAs improved their capacities in the management of their home through training provided by the Project; more than 2,118 new HOAs were established, including more than 570 established during the COVID-19 pandemic. In addition, up to the date, 57 newly established and 114 trained HOAs by the project applied for the “ENERGODIM” programme of the EEF, while 45 more HOAs are at the stage of the energy audit and 77 HOAs are considering their participation in “ENERGODIM” programme.

In order to effectively implement the project, the following key partnerships were established. At the national level, the project works with the Ministry for Communities and Territories Development as the main project beneficiary; provides support to the Energy Efficiency Fund in launching its grant programme, closely cooperates with the International Finance Corporation (ICF) as the key institution responsible for the management of the EEF and an international organization of the World Bank Group active in the field of energy efficiency and communal services.  Both IFC and UNDP have been working in close cooperation through the entire project’s implementation period and clearly distributed activities: UNDP covers activities related to the identification of the project’s participants (initiative groups, HOAs),  improvement of their capacity through professional knowledge developed within the project’s training programmes, while the IFC partner covers technical details of the EEF grants. At the sub-national level, the project works closely with municipalities (over 300), local councils, home owners and Associations of Home Owners Associations.

 

[1] Data of the Ministry for Communtities and Territories Development

https://www.minregion.gov.ua/press/news/fond-energoefektivnosti-prezentuvav-programu-modernizatsiyi-zhitlovogo-fondu-ukrayini/

[2] 

https://www.minregion.gov.ua/press/news/v-ukrayini-diye-32-982-osbb-doslidzhennya-minregionu/

[3] https://energodim.org


Duties and Responsibilities

2. PURPORSE, SCOPE AND OBJECTIVE OF THE ASSIGNMENT

UNDP seeks to conduct a decentralized final project evaluation. The nature of the final evaluation is largely a management tool to provide project teams and stakeholders with an account of results received at the time of the reporting, assess project progress against initial plans, project documents, highlight important lessons learnt, demonstrate the sustainability of the results and ownership of the project by the beneficiaries.

The main objective of the evaluations is to assess the efficacy of the project design, relevance of the project outputs, specific contributions and impact, efficiency and effectiveness of the project’s approach, and sustainability of the interventions of the project “Home-Owners of Ukraine for Sustainable Energy Solutions (HOUSES) - an action within the EE4U Programme”.

The purpose of the evaluation is to study mobilization of the Ukrainian population of home-owners to trigger energy efficiency improvements in their housing buildings and the creation and capacity development of Home Owners Associations  at the local level throughout the country and their preparation to apply for financing to the Energy Efficiency Fund. It is expected that the incumbent will analyze the implementation of the project in 2018-2021 against the planned results and draw conclusions and lessons learned as well as recommendations for similar initiatives, carried out by UNDP. The evaluation will highlight strengths, weaknesses/gaps, good practices and provide recommendations for similar initiatives for HOAs in multi-apartment buildings in Ukraine.

This decentralized evaluation will assess project performance against the review criteria, as outlined in the UNDP Evaluation Guidelines, based on OECD-DAC evaluation criteria: relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, sustainability, and impact.

The scope of the final evaluation will cover all activities undertaken in the framework of the HOUSES project. Given the nature of the evaluation, the Evaluator will:

a) compare planned outputs of the project to actual outputs and assess the actual results to determine their contribution to the attainment of the project’s objectives, and

b) draw lessons learnt and provide clear recommendations for similar initiatives in Ukraine.

The evaluation will be carried (home-based) between December 2020 and February 2021 (30 working days in total).

3. EVALUATION QUESTIONS

A. RELEVANCE

  • Country context: how relevant was the project to the interventions target group, including Home Owners Associations’ needs and priorities? To what extent was the project aligned with the policies and strategies of the Government,  the UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development as well as the UNDP Country Programme Document/UN Partnership Framework?
  • Target groups: To what extent was the project relevant to address the needs of community members that live in multi-apartment buildings in the realm of 1) creation of a HOA and management of its property through its statutory body and 2) conducting a meeting of co-owners and select a managing company by a majority of votes, or deciding that they will manage it directly?
  • Does the project remain relevant considering the changing environment in the face of the economic crisis linked to the COVID-19 pandemic, while taking into consideration the risks/challenges mitigation strategy? What can be done additionally to better capture the needs of the target group relevant to the focus of the project?
  • Was there a need to reformulate the project design and the project results framework given changes in the country caused by the presidential and parliamentary elections held in 2019,  the local elections held in 2020 and the COVID-19 pandemic and their effect on the operational context?

B. EFFECTIVENESS 

  • Was the overall project performance carried out with reference to the Energy Efficiency Support Programme for Ukraine (EE4U), the respective project document/cost-sharing agreement, strategy, objectives and indicators?
  • Was the cooperation with key project partners under the EE4U programme, namely IFC, EEF and GIZ successfully achieved and contributed to the achievement of the project’s goals?
  • Was the cooperation and support of the municipalities fully explored? Which options remained unexplored for the successful implementation of the EE4U programme?
  • Was the involvement of the local partnership network (local administration, amalgamated territorial communities, Associations of Home Owners) sufficient to achieve the project’s results?
  • Was the project’s strategy on the mobilization of home owners and Initiative Groups effective to motivate them to establish a Home Owners  Association?
  • Were the needs of the project’s beneficiaries –Initiative Groups and Home Owners Associations – fully covered by the proposed training curriculums? Were the benefits of managing the properly successfully and fully presented to the project’s beneficiaries by the project? Which needs remained uncovered and would affect the decisions of home owners to establish themselves in an HOA?
  • Was the project’s approach to the transformation of the House-Building Cooperatives successful and sufficient to achieve the project’s results? What can be done better?
  • Did the project target the home owners in the new buildings? What are the challenges the home owners of the new buildings are facing on the way to organize themselves in an HOA?
  • What are the results achieved beyond the logical framework? What were the supporting factors at the national or at the sub-national level? What are the main lessons learned from the project’s strategies and what are the possibilities of replication and scaling-up the project?
  • Has the project sufficiently mainstreamed gender and human rights concerns in the activities? What is the anticipated influence of the intervention on human rights and gender equality? What measures can be taken up to improve the involvement of stakeholders, gender equality, social inclusion, human rights and environmental protection in similar initiatives?
  • Has the project addressed the needs of the home owners with low income and explored the support municipalities that can provide to support those?

C. EFFICIENCY

  • Was the project cost-effective? Was the project using the least cost options? Have resources (funds, human resources, time, expertise, etc.) been allocated strategically to achieve the relevant outputs and outcomes?
  • Has the project produced results (outputs and outcomes) within the expected period? Was project implementation delayed, and, if it was, did that affect cost effectiveness or results?
  • Was the project management, coordination and monitoring efficient and appropriate? Did the monitoring consider gender equality and women empowerment issues, as well as social inclusion and human rights, environmental protection and climate change?
  • Are the criteria and governance aspects related to the selection of beneficiaries and partner institutions appropriate?
  • Have there been sufficient cooperation and exchange of information between the partners of the project? How do they correspond to each other and contribute to the achievement of the UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development?
  •  Was the project building upon/seeking synergies with existing programmes and strategies in order to maximize impact, efficiently allocate resources and avoid duplications?

D. SUSTAINABILITY

  • To what extent are project results (impact, if any, and outcomes) likely to continue after the project ends? Define the areas that produced the most sustainable results, and the most promising areas requiring further support and scaling-up in the course of future interventions.
  • Is there sufficient public/stakeholder awareness in support of the project’s long-term objectives?
  • Is the project’s approach likely to continue, be scaled up, replicated and increasingly contribute to the inclusive gender responsive socio-economic development at the local level after the project ends? Define which of the platforms, networks, relationships development in the framework of the project that have the highest potential for further scaling up and/or replication.
  • Was environmental sustainability considered in the project design and measures accordingly implemented / instruments put in place to ensure that no harm is caused to the environment and natural resources are used sustainably?
  • Which social or political risks have challenged the achievements of projects results and its sustainability? Has this appropriately been addressed by the project?
  • To what extent were capacity development initiatives for partner organizations adequate to ensure sustainable improvements for women, men and vulnerable groups? What can additionally be done to improve the sustainability of the project?
  • What are possible priority areas of engagement and recommendations for the possible future projects/initiatives? Findings, conclusions and recommendations should reflect gender equality and women empowerment, social inclusion, and environmental protection.

E. IMPACT

  • Has the project contributed or is likely to contribute to the reform of the energy-efficient sector of Ukraine, specifically to the reforming of its housing and communal sector?
  • Has the project contributed to the establishment of an institute of a responsible home-owner, capable to take the responsibility for the management of their homes and recognizing its importance for the country’s reforms, energy security and independence?
  • What is the impact of the establishment of an institute of a responsible home-owner on the quality of life of Ukrainian?  What sustainable change has the project made in the lives of women and men, vulnerable groups, specifically home owners with low income, and targeted communities of home owners at large? Has there been any ‘spill-over’ effect on other communities or groups in the community?
  • Has the project improved the Ukrainian population’s awareness about energy efficiency issues and specifically the national energy reform agenda?
  • Has the project contributed to gender equality, women’s empowerment and protection of human rights, social inclusion and environmental protection?
  • Has the project contributed to  the larger context?

The final list of evaluation questions and tools to be proposed by the evaluator and agreed with UNDP in an Inception report. All evaluation questions should mainstream gender and will be screened by UNDP’s gender team.

 

4. EVALUATION APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY

4.1. Methodology

The evaluator will be required to use a few different methods to ensure that data collection and analysis deliver evidence-based qualitative and quantitative information, such as: desk studies and literature review, quantitative data, individual interviews, focus group meetings, surveys, most significant change method... This approach will not only enable the final evaluation to assess causality through quantitative means but also to provide reasons for why certain results were achieved or not and to triangulate information for higher reliability of findings. The concrete mixed methodological approach will be detailed in the Inception report and stated in the Final report. All data provided in the report should be disaggregated by gender and types of vulnerabilities. Furthermore, the evaluation methods and sampling frame should address the diversity of stakeholders affected by the project, particularly the most vulnerable ones. Ethical standards are required throughout the evaluation and all stakeholder groups are to be treated with integrity and respect for confidentiality.

The evaluator is expected to follow a participatory and consultative approach ensuring close engagement with UNDP Country Office (CO), project team, government counterparts, the Delegation of the European Union to Ukraine at all stages of the evaluation planning and implementation. The evaluation will assess the extent to which the project was successfully mainstreamed with UNDP strategic priorities, including eradicating poverty, accelerating structural transformations for sustainable development, gender equality and women’s empowerment, and building resilience to crises and shocks.

The evaluation of project performance will be carried out against the 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. All indicators in the Logical Framework need to be assessed individually, with final achievements noted. An assessment of the project Monitoring and Evaluation  (M&E design, implementation and overall quality should be undertaken, with specific emphasis of whether gender equality and women’s empowerment issues have been considered. The evaluation will assess the key financial aspects of the project, including project budget revisions. Project cost and funding data will be required from the project, including annual expenditures. Variances between planned and actual expenditures will need to be assessed and explained. The evaluation also should include the value of money aspect – the minimum purchase price (economy) but also on the maximum efficiency and effectiveness of the purchase.

The evaluator is expected to develop and present a detailed statement of evaluation methods/approaches in the Inception report to show how each objective and evaluation criterion will be assessed.

The methodology will be based on the following:

  1. A desk review of including, but not limited to:
    1. The original project documents, progress reports, action plans, M&E frameworks;
    2. Notes from the meetings involved in the project (donor coordination meetings, Project Board meeting, Local Project Appraisal Committee (LPAC) etc.)
    3. Other project-related material produced by the project (such as datasets, publications, audio-visual materials and consultancies reports).
  2. Interviews with the relevant UNDP Country Office and the project’s management and staff, Delegation of the European Union, project partners such as GIZ,  IFC  and EEF, and the various national sub-regional, and local authorities dealing with project activities as necessary, to provide in-depth briefing on the project, its results, context of partnerships with different stakeholders etc. as well as vision for future.
  3. Interviews and focus groups discussions with project partners, beneficiaries and other social groups affected by the outcomes of the project. Partners and beneficiaries can be divided into two distinct groups:
    1. Members of local communities, specifically Initiative Groups and Home Owners Associations, who directly participated in the implementation of the project and benefitted from the project;
    2. Government institutions (national authorities, regional and local  state administrations, amalgamated territorial communities, other).
  4.      Debriefing session will be arranged for discussing the evaluation findings, results and recommendations.

5. EVALUATION PRODUCTS (key deliverables)

The Consultant should provide the following deliverables:

Deliverable #

Task description

Days and timing

Payment breakdown

Deliverable #1

Conduct desk research of the project’s core documentation (cost-sharing agreements, project documents, annual work plans and progress reports 2018-2021, project implementation plans). The set of documents to be reviewed will be prepared by UNDP.

Develop an evaluation methodology and strategy to collect the required data, plans and forms for the interview with partners and counterparts.

Output: The Inception report (with detailed description of the methodology and evaluation matrix, and a workplan) is produced; an annotated structure of the report is developed; a toolkit for gathering data (questionnaire and interview plans, a questionnaire for a beneficiary satisfaction survey) is designed to address the review criteria and the principles illustrated above in the document. All documents are submitted to UNDP for final approval.

3 days,

By 14 May 2021

20%

Deliverable #2

Conduct necessary consultations and interviews with the project staff and project partners.  Examine how stakeholders assess the project and what their concerns and suggestions are. Clarify issues that emerge from the preliminary analysis of the project and require hard and soft data to substantiate their reasoning. Discuss the existing needs in the field of energy efficiency sector development and how the follow-up phase of the project should address them. Collect and analyse feedback from the partners.

Initial findings discussed in a wrap-up session with Project team and UNDP CO (via video conference).

10 days,

By 11 June 2021

0%

Deliverable #3

Produce a draft report of the evaluation covering all items detailed in  paragraph #2 of the present TOR with a definition of the lessons learned and recommendations for the follow-up phase of the project.

Output: draft of the report produced and submitted for UNDP and Delegation of the European Union (DEU) Results-Assessment Form for Final Project Evaluation (UNDP and DEU review will take up to 10 working days).  

5 days,

By 18 June 2021

40%

Deliverable #4

Collect, review and incorporate comments from UNDP and DEU into the final version of the evaluation report.

Output: Final evaluation report containing all required annexes indicated in  paragraph #3 of the present TOR, submitted to UNDP for final review and approval.

Final finding discussed in the debriefing session with UNDP CO and DEU team

2 days,

By 29 June 2021

40%

The detailed structure of the final report should be agreed with UNDP and reflect all key aspects in focus.

The key product expected is a comprehensive evaluation report (up to 30 pages without annexes, single spacing, Myriad Pro font, size 11), which includes, but is not limited to, the following components:

  • Executive summary (up to 3 pages)
  • Introduction
  • Evaluation of scope and objectives
  • Evaluation approach and methods
  • Development context and project background
  • Data analysis and key findings and conclusions
  • Lessons learned and recommendations for future intervention (including viable ideas on work directions which could be sharpened and further enhanced in the next project phase)
  • Annexes: TOR, list of people interviewed, interview questions, documents reviewed etc.

The conclusions related to the implementation of the project in 2019-2021 should be comprehensive and balanced, and highlight the strengths, weaknesses, challenges and outcomes of the project. They should be well substantiated by the evidence and logically linked to the final evaluation findings. They should 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 DEU.

The recommendations for the project should identify how best practices and achievements of the project can be scaled up or proliferated to increase the positive impact of similar intervention on local communities’ development in Ukraine. Also, how theory of change of the project may be adapted/strengthened to be more relevant in the evolving context, based on interviews with project partners and beneficiaries, and desk analysis. The recommendations (5-7) need to be supported by an evidential basis, be credible, practical, action-oriented, and define who is responsible for the action - to have potential to be used in decision-making.

The evaluator should provide a proposed design, methodology of evaluation (methods, approaches to be used, evaluation criterion for assessment of each component to be proposed), detailed work plan and report structure to UNDP prior to the start of fieldwork; these documents and the list of businesses and other stakeholders to visit should be agreed with UNDP. While proposing the methodology, the Consultant should be guided by UNDP approach to project evaluations[1]. Payment will be based upon satisfactory completion of deliverables. 100% of the total amount shall be paid upon completion of the Deliverables 1-4.

 

6. MONITORING/REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

The consultant will interact with UNDP project and CO staff to receive any clarifications and guidance that may be needed. He/she will also receive all necessary informational and logistical support from UNDP CO and the project. On a day-to-day basis, the consultant’s work will be coordinated with UNDP Programme Analyst. The satisfactory completion of each of the deliverables shall be subject to the endorsement of the UNDP CO Partnership and Coordination Officer.

The consultant will inform UNDP of any problems, issues or delays arising during the implementation of the assignment and take necessary steps to address them.

The key product expected is two comprehensive evaluation reports (with parameters indicated above in section 2)

The report must be as free as possible of technical jargon in order to ensure accessibility to its wide and diverse audience. The Report should be prepared in English.

All reports and results are to be submitted to the UNDP in electronic form (*.docx, *.xlsx, *.pptx, and *.pdf or other formats accepted by UNDP).

 

[1] http://web.undp.org/evaluation/handbook/documents/english/pme-handbook.pdf


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 favoritism;
  • Fulfils all obligations to gender sensitivity and zero tolerance for sexual harassment.


Required Skills and Experience

7. EXPERIENCE AND QUALIFICATIONS REQUIREMENTS

Education: Master’s/Specialist’s degree or equivalent in Economics, Management, Mathematics, Social Sciences, Public Administration, Business Administration or other relevant area.

Relevant professional experience: At least 5 years of work experience in the area of socio-economic development, energy efficiency, community mobilization, civil society and community development, monitoring and evaluation. Working experience in Eastern Europe region and CIS will be an asset.

Experience in evaluation and research: Not less than 5 years of proven experience in designing, conducting and leading development evaluations, providing consultancies and/or monitoring, based on qualitative and quantitative methods.

At least, 3 completed evaluations and/or research reports, where the candidate was the author or co-author especially in of socio-economic development, energy efficiency, community mobilization, civil society and community development, understanding of gender aspects (a reference to or copies of previously developed knowledge materials including analytical reports, research papers, case studies materials, etc. to be provided).

Excellent written and oral communication skills with demonstrable experience of analytical reports writing (at least 3 program/project evaluation documents prepared).

Fluency in English. Ukrainian would be an asset.

The evaluator must be independent from any organizations that have been involved in designing, executing or advising any aspect of the intervention that is the subject of the evaluation.

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.

 

8. DOCUMENTS TO BE INCLUDED WHEN SUBMITTING THE PROPOSALS

 

Required

 

 

Letter of interest/proposal, providing brief methodology on how the work will be conducted and/or approached (up to 2 pages);

 

P11 form, including information about past experience in similar projects / assignments and contact details for referees.

 

Financial proposal

 

Duly accomplished Letter of Confirmation of Interest and Availability using the template provided by UNDP

 

Examples of evaluations conducted (minimum 3 evaluations of development projects)

 

9. FINANCIAL PROPOSAL

 Lump-Sum based on Delivery of Outputs

The financial proposal shall specify a lump sum amount. In order to assist the requesting unit in the comparison of financial proposals, the financial proposal will include a breakdown of this daily fee-based amount and number of anticipated working days.

 

10. EVALUATION CRITERIA

The following criteria will be rated as indicated below:

  • University degree (10 points max): PhD – 10 points, Masters/Specialist – 8 points;
  • At least 5 years’ working experience in the area of socio-economic development, energy efficiency, community mobilization, civil society and community development, monitoring and evaluation (20 points max): more than 10 years – 20 points, 6-9 years – 18 points, 5-7 years – 16 points;
  • At least 5 years’ working experience in in designing, conducting and leading development evaluations, providing consultancies and/or monitoring, based on qualitative and quantitative methods (20 points max): more than 10 years – 20 points, 6-9 years – 18 points, 5 years – 16 points;
  • Excellent written and oral communication skills with demonstrable experience of analytical reports writing (at least 3 program/project evaluation documents prepared, 10 points max): 3 publications – 5 points, more than 3 publications – 10 points;
  • Proven prior working experience with similar assignment within reputable international organization or governmental body will be an advantage (8 points max) (yes 8 - points; no – 0 points);
  • Excellent written and spoken English – pass/fail; Working knowledge of Ukrainian would be an asset (2 points max): Working knowledge of Ukrainian/Russian – 2 points, no knowledge of Ukrainian/Russian – 0 points.
  • Maximum available technical score - 70 points.

 

Evaluation method

Cumulative analysis

Contract award shall be made to the incumbent whose offer has been evaluated and determined as:
A) responsive/compliant/acceptable, and
B) having received the cumulative highest score out of a pre-determined set of weighted technical and financial criteria specific to the solicitation.
* Technical Criteria weight: 70%
* Financial Criteria weight: 30%
Only candidates obtaining a minimum 70% from the maximum available technical score would be considered for the Financial Evaluation.
The maximum number of points assigned to the financial proposal is allocated to the lowest price proposal and will equal to 30. All other price proposals will be evaluated and assigned points, as per below formula:
30 points [max points available for financial part] x [lowest of all evaluated offered prices among responsive offers] / [evaluated price].
The proposal obtaining the overall cumulatively highest score after adding the score of the technical proposal and the financial proposal will be considered as the most compliant offer and will be awarded a contract.



If you are experiencing difficulties with online job applications, please contact erecruit.helpdesk@undp.org.

© 2016 United Nations Development Programme