Background

1. INTRODUCTION

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 “Sustainable Forest Management (PIMS# 4674)” implemented through Ministry of Climate Change. The project started on January 2016 and is in its sixth 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’ (Guidance for Terminal Evaluations of UNDP-supported GEF-financed Projects).

1. PROJECT BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT

Programme Period:               70 months (Inclusive of 10 months extension)           

Total resources required:        USD 8,338,000 

Total allocated resources:      

• GEF                             USD    8,338,000
• Co-financing                  USD               
  • Government         USD   47,770,000
  • UNDP                 USD     1,000,000       
  • CBOs                  USD        650,000      

Sustainable Forests Management is a five years project funded by GEF and supported by UNDP. Ministry of Climate Change (MoCC) is the executing  agency/Implementing Partner for this project. The Project Management Unit (PMU) is established in Islamabad which serves as the  secretariat for IP. Provincial Forest Departments are the co-implementing partners in KPK, Punjab and Sindh. Similarly, Provincial Management Implementation Units (PMIUs) are established for implementing the planned activities in the  respective landscapes.

There are six landscapes selected for executing the project interventions. Project forest landscapes have been selected based on their global and national significance for biodiversity conservation and climate mitigation, operational feasibility, local security, governance, and well-defined land tenure. The target areas include state-owned forests as well as communal and private forests.

Objective of the SFM project is to promote sustainable forest management in Pakistan's Western Himalayan Temperate Coniferous, Sub-tropical broadleaved evergreen thorn (Scrub) and Riverine forests for biodiversity conservation, mitigation of climate change and securing of forest ecosystem services. In particular, it aims at implementation of three inter-related and mutually complementary components that are focused at addressing the barriers of inadequate planning, regulatory and institutional frameworks to integrated forest resource management, and enhancing the limited experience among key government and civil society stakeholders in developing and implementing SFM practices on the ground.

Location of the landscapes in Punjab as per project document were fixed as scrub forest in Chakwal and Riverine forest in South Punjab. When the project started its activities’ implementation on the ground, it was found not feasible due to numerous reasons to pursue implementation of the SFM activities regarding restoration of riverine forest in South Punjab. The issue was discussed in Project Board Meeting and the Boards Members suggested to visit and make a feasibility report for selection of an alternative site. UNDP and SFM management jointly visited the sites and selected pine forest in Rawalpindi North (Kahuta and Kalar Syedan) and an addition of Samarkand in the Scrub landscape at Chakwal.  Deciding restoration and reforestation targets for the sites in Punjab are under consideration and shortly be finalized to be used in evaluation missions of the project to judge the progress made during course of the project.

7,436 hectares will have to be reforested and 13,128 hectares will be used for conservation of biodiversity in Sukkur and Kot Dingano Lakhat riverine forest in Benazir Abad. Interventions in Kaghan and Siren landscapes at KPK for SFM cover approximately 28,005 ha of state and community forests, of which approximately 18,000 ha are of high conservation value, 7,848 ha require forest restoration and 2,157 ha require reforestation. There are three major outcomes the project is pursuing its attainment towards the institutionalization of SFM in the country.

Outcome 1: will support the incorporation of sustainable forest management objectives and safeguards in forest management planning, forestland allocation and compliance of monitoring systems at the local level.

Outcome 2: will identify, demarcate and implement on-the-ground approaches to improving management of high conservation value forests within six landscapes covering an area of 58,545 ha with the aim of meeting life requisites of the target species, and habitats such as breeding areas, feeding areas, water sources, dispersal and connectivity corridors, etc. It will be achieved through the following four objectives:

Outcome 3: will develop practical approaches to enhancing carbon sequestration through restoring degraded and former forested areas (LULUCF activities) by a combination of restoration and reforestation of 10,005 ha of degraded conifer forests; ,400 ha of degraded scrub forests, and reforestation of 7,436 ha of Riverine forests with native species.

Duties and Responsibilities

TE PURPOSE

The TE  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.

TE APPROACH & METHODOLOGY

The TE report 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 GEF focal area Tracking Tools submitted to the GEF at the CEO endorsement and midterm stages and the terminal 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 Advisor, 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 Ministry of Climate Change, Economic Affairs Division (EAD), Pakistan Forest Institute, Planning Commission of Pakistan, Provincial Forest Departments of Punjab, Sindh and KP, Executing Agencies, Senior Officials and task team/ component leaders, key experts and consultants in the subject area, Project Board, project stakeholders, academia, local government and CSOs, etc. Additionally, the TE team is expected to conduct field missions to KPK, Sindh, Punjab and meet with the local communities if permitted by UNDP as per the SOPs under COVID-19 pandemic.

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 final approach and methodology must be documented in the inception report and agreed upon by both the parties. The TE team must 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.

Engagement of stakeholders is vital to a successful Final Evaluation. Stakeholder involvement should include (where possible, given the COVID situation) surveys/questionnaires, focus groups, interviews with stakeholders who have project responsibilities, including but not limited to executing agencies, senior officials and task team/component leaders, key experts and consultants in the subject area, Project Steering Committee, project stakeholders, local government, CSOs, project beneficiaries, etc. If not, all stakeholders are available to engage virtually, this must be documented in the Evaluation report. 

Data collection will be used to validate evidence of results and assessments (including but not limited to assessment of Theory of Change, activities delivered, and results/changes occurred).

The final Evaluation report should describe the full evaluation approach taken and the rationale for the approach making explicit the underlying assumptions, challenges, strengths and weaknesses about the methods and approach of the review.  The final report must also describe any limitations encountered by the Evaluation team during the evaluation process, including limitations of the methodology, data collection methods, and any potential influence of limitation on how findings may be interpreted, and conclusions drawn. Limitations include, among others: language barriers, inaccessible project sites (due to travel restrictions because of COVID), issues with access to data or verification of data sources, issues with availability of interviewees, methodological limitations to collecting more extensive or more representative qualitative or quantitative evaluation data, deviations from planned data collection and analysis set out in the ToR and Inception Report, etc. Efforts made to mitigate the limitations should also be included in the Interim Evaluation report.

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

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 although not restricted and travel in the country is well but to follow UNDSS SOPs for domestic travels which may not permit UNDP contract holder to travel. If it is not possible to travel 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. 

The TE team is expected to start the field mission in Islamabad. In the case that the international consultant cannot travel to Islamabad, he/she will work remotely from his/her home country with supports from National evaluator. However, if the international consultant manages to come to Islamabad, then his/her travel to other cities may or may not be materialized keeping current COVID-19 scenario in mind. The final decision to be taken at an appropriate time; the dates closer to the mission dates.

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.

The final report must 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.

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 (Guidance for Terminal Evaluations 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.

Findings

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

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 (*)
• Implementing Agency (UNDP) (*) and Executing Agency (*), overall project oversight/implementation and execution (*)
• Risk Management, including Social and Environmental Standards

1. 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 below:

ToR Table 2: Evaluation Ratings Table for (project title)

[1] 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)

1. TIMEFRAME/

The total duration of the TE will be approximately (35 working days) over a time period of June – September 2021). The tentative TE timeframe is as follows:

1. TE DELIVERABLES

*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]

Competencies

• Excellent communication skills;
• Demonstrable analytical skills;

Required Skills and Experience

For Detail Term of Reference Please follow below link.

https://procurement-notices.undp.org/view_notice.cfm?notice_id=79323

Please go the following link for the UNDP General Conditions of Contract for Individual Consultants:  http://procurement-notices.undp.org/view_file.cfm?doc_id=7879.