Antecedentes

IMPORTANT: Applicants are requested to apply online http://jobs.undp.org by 02nd June 2019. Full ToR with Annexe's and Offeror's Letter can be seen and downloaded at http://procurement-notices.undp.org/view_notice.cfm?notice_id=56020 .

INTRODUCTION

In accordance with UNDP and GEF M&E policies and procedures, all full and medium-sized UNDP support GEF financed projects are required to undergo a terminal evaluation upon completion of implementation. These terms of reference (TOR) sets out the expectations for a Terminal Evaluation (TE) of the project Technology transfer for climate resilient flood management in Vrbas River Basin (PIMS 5241), implemented by the UNDP Country Office in Bosnia and Herzegovina.  

The essentials of the project to be evaluated are as follows:

Project Summary Table

Project background

Country context

Bosnia and Herzegovina is a middle income country which is still recovering from the 1992-1995 war which had a devastating impact on its human, social and economic resources, leading to enormous challenges of the post-war reconstruction and economic and social recovery. This challenge has been further compounded by the transition towards market economy requiring structural reforms and improved governance. The slow rate of the post-war economic recovery of Bosnia and Herzegovina has been compounded by the negative impacts of climate change on key sectors such as agriculture, energy (hydropower), the environment and, in particular, the frequency and magnitude of flood disasters, which have tripled in frequency in the last decade.

In May 2014, Bosnia and Herzegovina experienced its worst flooding in 150 years which resulted in 23 deaths, $2.7 Billion USD worth damages and approximately one million people affected. Bosnia and Herzegovina that still has not fully recovered from the 2014 disaster is significantly exposed to the threats of climate change but has very limited capacity to address and adapt to its negative impacts, in particular the frequency and magnitude of floods from its major rivers. The Vrbas River Basin in is characterized by a large rural population comprised of the poorest and most vulnerable communities in the country, including war returnees and displaced people, with high exposure to flooding and its devastating impacts. 

Project summary:

The "Technology transfer of climate resilient flood management in Vrbas River Basin" project is a 5-year, 5 mill USD SCCF funded project with the overall objective to transfer technologies for climate resilient flood management in order to increase resilience of highly exposed rural poor, returnee and displaced persons communities in Vrbas River Basin. Adaptation technologies for climate resilient Flood Risk Management (FRM) include the development of state-of-the-art hydrological and hydrodynamic models and GIS tools for the Vrbas River Basin incorporating climate change predictions and producing flood hazard maps as the basis for spatial planning and long-term strategic FRM. The Project includes the upgrade and rehabilitation of the hydrometric network, and the harmonization and centralization of the hydrometric database. It develops the flood forecasting system and enhance the existing early warning system within the VRB. Emergency response is being enhanced through the development of emergency response plans, and provision of training in flood-specific civil protection are provided. Further, an institutional capacity development plan for the long-term development of capability and capacity in FRM is developed. The project works closely with affected communities to introduce climate resilient community-based non-structural measures and provides training to local communities in climate resilient FRM.

The Project has three outcomes, along with their associated outputs and activities, which contribute to the achievement of the Project objective:

• Outcome 1: Key relevant development strategies/policies/legislation integrate climate change-resilient flood management approaches;
• Outcome 2: Climate resilient flood risk management is enabled by transferring modern technologies and strengthening institutional capacities;
• Outcome 3: New technologies and approaches for enhanced flood risk management applied to increase resilience of vulnerable communities in Vrbas River Basin.

Detailed outline of the Project results, baselines and targets is available in the Projects Results and Resources Framework ( Annex A)

Target groups and beneficiaries

By transferring best available technologies for climate resilient flood risk management, the Project directly benefits 250,000 poor, returnee and displaced people exposed to floods in 14 municipalities and cities of Vrbas River Basin: Srbac, Laktaši, Banja Luka, Celinac, Kotor Varos, Kneževo, Mrkonjic Grad, Jajce, Šipovo, Jezero, Bugojno, Gornji Vakuf-Uskoplje, Donji Vakuf and Gradiška.

Project progress summary

The Project has made significant progress and is on track with regard to most of its objectives to transfer technologies for climate resilient flood management in Vrbas River Basin. Some of the main Project’s achievements include setup and operationalization of a hydro-meteorological network consisting of 7 hydrological, 2 meteorological and 20 rain gauges; the development of a climate change model for Vrbas River Basin; development of hydrological and hydrodynamics models (including 2D model for the whole basin); completion of vulnerability assessment, including gender segregated data and development of flood depth-damages curve; The project finalized flood hazard and risk maps for 20-, 100- and 500-year return periods for Vrbas River Basin. For the first time in the country, the Project developed torrential flood sensitivity models for the whole basin, which also included erosion maps. Significant progress has been made in data management with a) the establishment of a geoportal that links spatial data infrastructure and hydro-meteorological data and b) the upgrade and population of an existing obsolete water information system, that now for the first time in Bosnia and Herzegovina enables automatic exchange of information among all three water agencies in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Through implementation of non-structural floods protection measures, in two years, the Project protected from floods 1,129 houses, 226 enterprise facilities, 2,631 ha of agricultural land and nearly 70,000 people. 59,000 people, representing ordinary citizens, farmers, civil protection practitioners, relevant government institutions, local communities and local governments were trained on the specific aspects of climate change adaptation and risk mitigation, readiness and reaction on flood event at local level, hydro-meteorological network operations and maintenance, civil protection coordination, spatial planning and zoning for flood areas; protection and rescue during the flood, flood risk management, agriculture and soil in floods risk management.

The Project directly contributes to the Outcome 5 of the UNDP Country Programme Document 2015-2019 and UNDAF 2015-2019 for Bosnia and Herzegovina: By 2019 legal and strategic frameworks are enhanced and operationalized to ensure sustainable management of natural, cultural and energy resources.

Deberes y responsabilidades

Eevaluation Objective and Scope

The purpose of the TE is to provide an impartial review of the Project Technology transfer for climate resilient flood management in Vrbas River Basin (PIMS 5241) in terms of its relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, impact, sustainability, overall performance, management and achievements. The information, findings, lessons learned, and recommendations generated by the evaluation at this particular time will be used by the UNDP and the implementing partners to strengthen the remaining Project implementation and inform prospects for eventual replication and sustainability of the intervention.

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 the overall enhancement of UNDP programming.

The evaluation will assess the extent to which planned project results have been achieved since the beginning of the Project in March 2015 and likelihood for their full achievement by the end of the Project in March 2020 (based on the Programme Document and its results framework). Specifically, it will consider the relevance and influence of the Project on the individuals and groups living within the 14 municipalities and cities where the project activities are implemented.

The scope of the evaluation covers the following specific aspects, integrating the GEF’s Operational Principles[1] as appropriate:

• Project design, risk assessment/management;
• Progress toward results, outputs, outcomes and impacts;
• Implementation and execution arrangements, including GEF Agency oversight;
• Partnership approach and stakeholder participation;
• Communications and public awareness;
• Work planning, financial management/planning, co-financing;
• Flexibility, innovation and adaptive management;
• Gender and human rights integration and mainstreaming in implementation;
• Catalytic role: Replication and up-scaling.

Finally, the evaluation will assess the monitoring and evaluation aspect of the project and its compliance with UNDP and GEF minimum standards, including SMART criteria for indicators.

Evaluation approach and method

An overall approach and method[2] for conducting project terminal evaluations of UNDP supported GEF financed projects has developed over time. The evaluator is expected to frame the evaluation effort using the criteria of relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, sustainability, and impact, as defined in the UNDP Guidance for Conducting Terminal Evaluations of UNDP-supported, GEF-financed Projects. A set of questions covering each of these criteria have been drafted and are included within this TOR (Annex C). The evaluator is expected to amend, complete and submit this matrix as a part of an evaluation inception report, and shall include it as an annex to the final report.   

As a part of the evaluation inception report, the evaluator will propose a detailed evaluation methodology and agree on a plan for the assignment. The proposed methodology may employ any relevant and appropriate quantitative, qualitative or combined methods to conduct the TE, exploring specific, gender sensitive data collecting and analytical methods and tools applicable in the concrete case.

The evaluation must provide evidence-based information that is credible, reliable, analytical and going beyond known facts within project reports. The evaluator is expected to follow a participatory and consultative approach ensuring close engagement with government counterparts.

The evaluator is expected to conduct one field mission to Bosnia and Herzegovina and will cover several project implementation sites and localities, including: Banja Luka, Bijeljina, Sarajevo and 3 partner municipalities in Vrbas River Basin.

Interviews will be held with the following institutions and individuals at a minimum:

• The GEF operational focal point for Bosnia and Herzegovina;
• The Ministry for Spatial Planning, Construction, and Ecology of Republika Srpska;
• The Ministry of Foreign Trade and Economic Relations of Bosnia and Herzegovina;
• Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Water Managements of Republika Srpska and the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina;
• Sava River Basin Water Agency;
• Public institution Vode Srpske,
• Hydro-meteo Institute of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina;
• Hydro-meteo Institute of Republika Srpska;
• Civil protection of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina;
• Civil Protection of Republika Srpska;
• Representatives of Local Governments in Vrbas River Basin;
• Project final beneficiaries at community level
• UNDP Country Office and UNDP projects with whom Project was partnering and achieving synergies in the course of the project implementation;
• UNDP-GEF Regional Technical Advisor based in UNDP Istanbul Regional Hub, Turkey.

As a part of desk review, the evaluator will review all relevant sources of information, such as the project document, project reports – including Annual APR/PIR, project budget revisions, midterm review, progress reports- and GEF focal area tracking tools, project files, national strategic and legal documents, and any other materials that the evaluator considers useful for this evidence-based assessment. A list of documents that the project team will provide to the evaluator for review is included in Annex B of this Terms of Reference.

The evaluation methodology may also include focus group discussions and other data collecting methods, as appropriate, such as surveys, statistical analysis, social network analysis, etc.

Data analysis should be conducted in a systematic manner to ensure that all the findings, conclusions and recommendations are substantiated by evidence. Appropriate tools should be used to ensure proper analysis (e.g. data analysis matrix). As a part of the fact-finding effort, the evaluator should in particular seek evidence of impact during the field visits, i.e. progress towards the articulated global environmental benefits of the project.

Specifically, the triangulation method is suggested for data analysis, implying the use of three or more theories, sources or types of information and analysis to verify and substantiate the provided assessments. By combining multiple data sources, methods, analyses or theories, evaluators can overcome the bias that comes from single informants, single methods, single observer or single theory studies.

Finally, the evaluation approach and method need to allow the assessment of degree to which the programme initiatives have supported or promoted gender equality, a rights-based approach, and human development. In this regard, United Nations Evaluation Group’s guidance on Integrating Human Rights and Gender Equality in Evaluation should be consulted.

Evaluation Criteria & Ratings

An assessment of project performance will be carried out against the expectations set out in the Project Logical Framework/Results Framework (  Annex A), which provides performance and impact indicators for project implementation along with their corresponding means of verification. The evaluation will at a minimum cover the criteria of: relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, sustainability and impact. Ratings must be provided on the performance criteria outlines in the table below. The completed table must be included in the evaluation executive summary.  The obligatory rating scales are included in  Annex D.

Project finance / cofinance

The Evaluation will assess the key financial aspects of the project, including the extent of co-financing planned and realized. Project cost and funding data will be required, including annual expenditures.  Variances between planned and actual expenditures will need to be assessed and explained.  Results from recent financial audits, as available, should be taken into consideration. The evaluator(s) will receive assistance from the Country Office (CO) and Project Team to obtain financial data in order to complete the co-financing table below, which will be included in the terminal evaluation report. 

[1]https://www.thegef.org/sites/default/files/council-meeting documents/C.31.12_Operational_Guidelines_for_Incremental_Costs_4.pdf

[2] UNDP Evaluation Guidelines, Annex 2. Summary of common data-collection methods/sources used in UNDP evaluations

Mainstreaming

UNDP supported GEF financed projects are key components in UNDP country programming, as well as regional and global programmes. The evaluation will assess the extent to which the project was successfully mainstreamed with other UNDP priorities, including poverty alleviation, improved governance, the prevention and recovery from natural disasters, and gender.

Impact

The evaluation will assess the extent to which the project achieved impacts. Key findings that should be brought out in the evaluation include whether the project has demonstrated: a) verifiable improvements in ecological status, b) verifiable reductions in stress on ecological systems, and/or c) demonstrated progress towards these impact achievements.

In assessing project results, the TE will:

a) seek to determine the extent of achievement and shortcomings in reaching project objectives as stated in the project appraisal document and indicate if there were any changes and whether those changes were approved. If the project did not establish a baseline (initial conditions), the evaluators should seek to estimate the baseline condition so that achievements and results can be properly established;

b) focus on achievements in terms of outputs, outcomes, or impacts. Output achievement is easy to access but not sufficient to show whether the interventions were effective in delivering global environmental benefits. Impacts may take a long time to manifest thus difficult to be assessed at this stage. Instead, assessment of outcomes captures project efficacy in terms of delivering medium-term expected results. The outcomes will be rated based on the following scale:

• Highly satisfactory (HS). The project had no shortcomings in the achievement of its objectives in terms of relevance, effectiveness, or efficiency.
• Satisfactory (S). The project had minor shortcomings in the achievement of its objectives in terms of relevance, effectiveness, or efficiency.
• Moderately satisfactory (MS). The project had moderate shortcomings in the achievement of its objectives in terms of relevance, effectiveness, or efficiency.
• Moderately unsatisfactory (MU). The project had significant shortcomings in the achievement of its objectives in terms of relevance, effectiveness, or efficiency.
• Unsatisfactory (U). The project had major shortcomings in the achievement of its objectives in terms of relevance, effectiveness, or efficiency.
• Highly unsatisfactory (HU). The project had severe shortcomings in the achievement of its objectives in terms of relevance, effectiveness, or efficiency.

Conclusions, recommendations & lessons

The evaluation report must include a chapter providing a set of conclusions, recommendations and lessons.  Conclusions should build on findings and be based in evidence.  Recommendations should be prioritized, specific, relevant, and targeted, with suggested implementers of the recommendations.  Lessons should have wider applicability to other initiatives across the region, the area of intervention, and for the future. 

Implementation arrangements

The principal responsibility for managing this evaluation resides with the UNDP Country Office in Bosnia and Herzegovina. The UNDP Country Office will contract the evaluator and ensure the timely provision of per diems and travel arrangements within the country for the evaluation team. The Project Team will be responsible for liaising with the evaluator to set up stakeholder interviews, arrange field visits, coordinate with the Government etc. 

A UNDP Evaluation Manager will be assigned by the Country Office, to oversee and support the overall evaluation process. In addition, an evaluation reference group will be formed to provide critical and objective inputs throughout the evaluation process to strengthen the quality of the evaluation. The Country Office Senior Management and the GEF Regional Technical Advisor will take responsibility for the approval of the final evaluation report.

Evaluation timeframe

The total duration of the evaluation consultancy will be 25 working days according to the following plan:

Evaluation deliverables

The evaluation team is expected to deliver the following:

*When submitting the final evaluation report, the evaluator is required also to provide an 'audit trail', detailing how all received comments have (and have not) been addressed in the final evaluation report.[1]

Evaluator

The evaluation will be conducted by 1 international consultant (evaluator). The evaluator will take the overall responsibility for the quality and due submission of the final evaluation report. S/he will have prior experience in evaluating similar projects. Experience with GEF financed projects is an advantage Specifically, the international consultant will perform the following tasks:

• • Design detailed evaluation scope and methodology (including the methods for data collection and analysis);
• • Implement the evaluation mission;
• • Conduct an analysis of the results, outcomes and outputs;
• • Present preliminary TE findings to stakeholders;
• • Draft the evaluation report;
• • Finalize the evaluation report in English and submit it to UNDP Bosnia and Herzegovina.

The evaluator selected should not have participated in the project preparation and/or implementation and should not have conflict of interest with project related activities.

[1] [1] Audit trial template is available at http://web.undp.org/evaluation/guideline/documents/PDF/UNDP_Evaluation_Guidelines.pdf, p. 25

Competencias

Corporate Responsibility and Teamwork:

• Demonstrates commitment to UNDP’s mission, vision and values;
• Displays cultural, gender, religion, race, nationality and age sensitivity and adaptability;
• Plans, prioritizes and delivers tasks on time;
• Strives for and promotes excellence in performance continually;
• Participates effectively in a team-based, information-sharing environment, collaborating and cooperating with others;
• Generates ideas and seizes opportunities to support corporate strategic objectives

People Skills:

• Demonstrated ability to work harmoniously with persons of different national and cultural backgrounds;
• Recognizes and responds appropriately to the ideas, interests, and concerns of others;
• Builds trust and engenders morale by displaying open, transparent and credible behavior;
• Respects individual/cultural /gender differences; utilizes diversity to foster teamwork;
• Ensures others’ understanding of, involvement in, and adaptation to a change process.

Partnering and Networking:

• Communicates sensitively and effectively across different constituencies;
• Ability to work as a member of a team as well as work autonomously.

 Results-Orientation:

• Plans and procedures quality results to meet established goals.

Communication:

• Technical writing skills, formulates written information clearly and persuasively;
• Strong communication skills;
• Shares information openly with co-workers and partners while using discretion to protect confidences;
• Presents information in a clear and articulate manner.

Job Knowledge and Expertise:

• Demonstrates substantive and technical knowledge to meet responsibilities and post requirements;
• Advanced knowledge in gender equality;
• Strong analytical skills;
• Executes day-to-day tasks systematically and efficiently;
• Initiative and sound judgment.

Habilidades y experiencia requeridas

Academic Qualifications/Education:

• Advanced university degree in Environmental Sciences, Natural Resources Management, Development Studies, or other closely related field or other sciences in sustainable development;

Experience:

• Minimum 10 years of relevant professional experience in evaluations, preferably in GEF supported projects;
• Technical knowledge in the targeted focal area(s) of climate change adaptation, climate resilient management or related disciplines;
• Competence in adaptive management, as applied to climate change adaptation;
• Sound knowledge of results-based management systems, and gender-sensitive monitoring and evaluation methodologies;
• General understanding and knowledge of the political/administrative and development context in the country.

Languages Requirements:

• Fluency in English language.

Other:

• Excellent communication and computer skills (MS Office applications) and ability to use information technologies as a tool and resource;

Evaluator Ethics

Evaluation consultants will be held to the highest ethical standards and are required to sign a Code of Conduct (Annex E) upon acceptance of the assignment. UNDP evaluations are conducted in accordance with the principles outlined in the UNEG 'Ethical Guidelines for Evaluations'

Duty Station

The consultant’ duty station is home-based with one mission to Bosnia and Herzegovina and will be expected to undertake field visits to Vrbas river basin municipalities and respective agencies and institutes (Banja Luka, Sarajevo, Bijeljina).

Travel:

• International travel will be required to Bosnia and Herzegovina during the TE mission;
• The Basic Security in the Field II and Advanced Security in the Field courses must be successfully completed prior to commencement of travel;
• Individual Consultants are responsible for ensuring they have vaccinations/inoculations when travelling to certain countries, as designated by the UN Medical Director.
• Consultants are required to comply with the UN security directives set forth under https://dss.un.org/dssweb/
• All related travel expenses will be covered and will be reimbursed as per UNDP rules and regulations upon submission of an F-10 claim form and supporting documents.

Evaluator Ethics

Evaluation consultants will be held to the highest ethical standards and are required to sign a Code of Conduct (Annex E) upon acceptance of the assignment. UNDP evaluations are conducted in accordance with the principles outlined in the UNEG 'Ethical Guidelines for Evaluations'

Duty Station

The consultant’ duty station is home-based with one mission to Bosnia and Herzegovina and will be expected to undertake field visits to Vrbas river basin municipalities and respective agencies and institutes (Banja Luka, Sarajevo, Bijeljina).

Travel:

• International travel will be required to Bosnia and Herzegovina during the TE mission;
• The Basic Security in the Field II and Advanced Security in the Field courses must be successfully completed prior to commencement of travel;
• Individual Consultants are responsible for ensuring they have vaccinations/inoculations when travelling to certain countries, as designated by the UN Medical Director.
• Consultants are required to comply with the UN security directives set forth under https://dss.un.org/dssweb/
• All related travel expenses will be covered and will be reimbursed as per UNDP rules and regulations upon submission of an F-10 claim form and supporting documents.

Indicative Payment modalities and specifications

Technical criteria

Only candidates obtaining a minimum of 49 points would be considered for the Financial Evaluation

Long/Shortlisting Criteria

Only candidates obtaining a minimum of 60 points would be considered for the Technical Evaluation

EVALUATION

Individual consultants will be evaluated based on the following methodology:

Cumulative analysis

When using this weighted scoring method, the award of the contract should be made to the individual consultant whose offer has been evaluated and determined as:
a) responsive/compliant/acceptable, and
b) Having received the 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%

Applicants are required to submit an application including:

• Proposal (outlining the specific design and methods for the evaluation):

  • Explaining why they are the most suitable for the work;

  • Provide a brief methodology on how they will approach and conduct the work:

    • the methodology should present the Consultants approach, proposed detailed methods,

    • scope and evaluation criteria and questions;

    • the methodology should apply a mixed-method approach collecting both quantitative and

    • qualitative data to validate and triangulate data;

• Completed and signed the Offeror’s template Confirming Interest and Availability (please follow the link: https://popp.undp.org/_layouts/15/WopiFrame.aspx?sourcedoc=/UNDP_POPP_DOCUMENT_LIBRARY/Public/PSU_%20Individual%20Contract_Offerors%20Letter%20to%20UNDP%20Confirming%20Interest%20and%20Availability.docx&action=default);
• Latest personal CV, including past experience from similar projects, and email, telephone and any other contact details for references;
• Financial proposal (in USD) - which will separately specify professional fee, indicating number of anticipated working days, travel costs (air-ticket or use of private vehicle), living allowance, and all other applicable costs.

Please scan all above mentioned documents and upload as one attachment only online through this website.

Note:

• For an assignment requiring travel, consultants of 65 years or more require full medical examination and statement of fitness to work to engage in the consultancy.
• Due to large number of potential applicants, only competitively selected candidates will be contacted for remaining steps of the service procurement process.