UNDP Jobs - 63894- National Individual Consultant -UNDAF Mid-Term Rev

National Individual Consultant -UNDAF Mid-Term Review

Location :

Nairobi, Kenya

Type of Contract :

Individual Contract

Starting Date :

07-Mar-2016

Application Deadline :

25-Feb-16 (Midnight New York, USA)

Post Level :

National Consultant

Duration of Initial Contract :

60 working days

Languages Required :

English

Expected Duration of Assignment :

60 working days

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

Introduction:

The United Nations Development Assistance Framework (UNDAF 2014- 2018) is the fourth generation Programme of UN support to Kenya. The UNDAF was developed according to the principles of UN Delivering as One (DaO), aimed at ensuring Government ownership, demonstrated through UNDAF’s full alignment to Government priorities as defined in the Vision 2030 and Medium-Term Plan 2013- 2017 and planning cycles, as well as internal coherence among UN agencies and programmes operating in Kenya. The UNDAF contributes to the overall goal of Kenya’s Vision 2030 of: “Creating a globally competitive and prosperous nation with a high quality of life by 2030, that aims to transform Kenya into a newly industrializing, middle-income country for all citizens in a clean and secure environment”.

The UNDAF reflects the efforts of all UN agencies and key partners working in Kenya. The design of the UNDAF was informed by several strategic discussions both within the UN and with stakeholders, to determine how the UN System is best suited to support the national development goals. Accordingly, the Government of Kenya and the UN System are committed to working together in the spirit of partnership to implement the UNDAF, as a contribution to the achievement of national development goals and aspirations. Shaped by the five UNDG programming principles (a Human Rights-based approach, Gender equality, Environmental sustainability, Results-based management, and Capacity development) the UNDAF has a broad-based Results Framework, developed in collaboration with Government, Civil Society, donors and other partners .The UNDAF has four Strategic Results Areas;

Transformational Governance encompassing Policy and Institutional Frameworks; Democratic Participation and Human Rights; Devolution and Accountability; and Evidence-based Decision-making;
Human Capital Development comprised of Education and Learning; Health, including Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH), Environmental Preservation, Food Availability and Nutrition; Multi-sectoral HIV and AIDS Response; and Social Protection;
Inclusive and Sustainable Economic Growth, with Improving the Business Environment; Strengthening Productive Sectors and Trade; and Promoting Job Creation, Skills Development and Improved Working Conditions;
Environmental Sustainability, Land Management and Human Security including Policy and Legal Framework Development; and Peace, Community Security and Resilience. The UNDAF Results Areas are aligned with the three Pillars (Political, Social and Economic) of the Government’s Vision 2030 transformational agenda.

The UN Country Team (UNCT), under the leadership of the UN Resident Coordinator, is responsible for implementation of the UNDAF 2014-2018. Under the DaO “One Leader” approach the Resident Coordinator and the UNCT are responsible for oversight of the Strategic Results Groups, the Operations Management Team and the Country Communications Group. The National Steering Committee (NSC) oversees the Programme implementation and reporting and the One Budgetary Framework.

Duties and Responsibilities

Purpose of the Mid -Term Review:

The Government of Kenya and the UN Country Team proposes to undertake a mid –term (MTR) of the UNDAF in June 2016. The review will provide an overall assessment of progress and achievements made against planned results as well as assess and document challenges and lessons learnt over the past first two and a half years of the UNDAF cycle. The review will also focus on significant developments that have taken place in the programming environment which include the post 2015 agenda and the sustainable development goals that will impact on implementation of the UNDAF development agenda and realization of programme results. The review will in addition reflect on how the UN agencies and government through the strategic result area groups (SRAs) have supported UNDAF goals and identify areas requiring additional support either in programme management or new implementation strategies.

The expected outcome is consensus on findings of the review and agreement on the options suggested for reinforcing efficiencies and effectiveness of development results including deliberations on new and emerging challenges beyond the current UNDAF.

Objectives and scope of the Mid Term Review:

The UNDAF Mid-Term Review is a joint UN/ Government of Kenya review that will be conducted in close collaboration with UN agencies, national and development partners. The main objective of the UNDAF mid- Term Review is to assess the relevance, effectiveness, efficiency and sustainability of the programme, including the extent to which cross cutting and have been mainstreamed. . In addition, the review will assess the extent to which the programme has been responsive to address emerging issues. The MTR will determine effectiveness of the Delivering as One modality in supporting achievements of the programme in line with the national vision 2013 and medium term goals. The review will also assess the mechanisms put in place to enhance coordination and harmonization among all UN agencies and the government through the strategic result area groups.

The Mid-Term Review will explore extent to which five UNDAF programming principles human rights and HRBA, gender equality, environmental sustainability; capacity development and results-based management have been mainstreamed throughout the UNDAF and recommendations delivered accordingly.

Mid Term Review Criteria and Review Questions:

The Mid Term Review will specifically focus on:

Assessing achievements and progress made against planned results (2 year rolling work-plan), as well as assess challenges and lessons learnt over the past two and a half years of the UNDAF;
Assessing how the emerging issues not reflected in the current UNDAF such as sustainable development goals (SDGs) among others impact on outcomes and make recommendations and suggestions for future programming to realign UN assistance to these new priorities to achieve greater development impact;
Reviewing effectiveness of the UNDAF results framework specifically the indicators, baselines and targets assessing how realistic/relevant and measurable they are and make recommendations for improvement;
Reviewing coherence in delivery of the overall UN programme and recommend ways in which the strategic result area groups and technical groups ( namely M&E technical working group, Operation and management technical (OMT) working group, Program Management Oversight Group PMOG, Resource mobilization group, communications group , the National Steering Committee (NSC) and the UN Country Team (UNCT) among others may increase its effectiveness of programme delivery in the remaining period of the current cycle;
Assess how effectively the current UNDAF is compatible with national development priorities (Vision 2030, Medium term program goals among others);
Assess effectiveness towards attainment of results and reflect on how each agency both UN and GOK has contributed to the UNDAF results through the implementation of programmes and projects;
Assess effectiveness of and advantage of the use of the Joint Programmes modality as a mechanism for fostering UN coherence and delivering as one such as HIV/AIDS Marsabit- Moyale program and the Turkana joint programs;
Document lessons learnt, challenges and future opportunities, and provide recommendations for improvements or adjustments in strategy, design and/or implementation arrangements.

The key criteria and questions for the mid -term review are:

Relevance–responsiveness of implementation mechanisms to the rights and capabilities of the rights-holders and duty-bearers of the programme (including national institutions, communities, and the related policy framework):

Do the set of UNDAF Results address a) the rights of the communities being targeted; b) the relevant sectorial priorities identified at a national level; and therefore, c) the objectives of the MTP11 and Vision 2030?Are the stated UNDAF objectives consistent with the requirements of rights-holders, in particular, the requirements of most vulnerable populations?
To what extent does the UNDAF respond to devolution at national and county relevant, what changes need to be done?
How relevant and appropriate is the UNDAF to the devolved levels of Government;
Are all the target groups appropriately covered by the stated UNDAF Results?
Is there a participatory approach in programming?
To what extent does the UN ensure that gender equality is enjoyed by all especially the most vulnerable women and girls?
Is human rights adequately addressed throughout the UNDAF?
To what extent human rights based approach is applied in programming and planning processes;
To what extent is the UN strengthening rights-holders participation and duty-bearer’s accountability; ensuring that the most vulnerable populations know, demand and enjoy their human rights and reinforcing capacities of duty bearers to respect, protect and guarantee these rights.

Effectiveness – the extent to which programme results are being achieved:

To what extent has the UNDAF contributed to achieving better synergies among the programmes and UN agencies?
To what extent has the costed 2 year rolling work-plan contributed to effective implementation of the UNDAF?
To what extent are the UNDAF Outcomes being achieved to date? What is the likelihood of their being achieved by 2018?
To what extent have effective partnerships and strategic alliances (e.g. national partners, development partners and other external support agencies) been promoted around the UNDAF Outcomes?

Efficiency–Is the implementation mechanism the most cost effective way of delivering this programme?

Have adequate financial resources been mobilised for the Programme?
Is there a discernible common or collaborative funds mobilisation strategy?
To what extent have administrative procedures been harmonised?
Are there any apparent cost-minimising strategies that should be encouraged?
Are the implementation mechanisms – Strategic Result Area (SRAs), technical working groups –M&E, PMOG, UNCT, Resource mobilisation and communications effective in managing the Programme?
Progress in establishing the NSC secretariat and its functionality;
How are joint programmes being designed and implemented?
How efficiently resources/inputs (funds, expertise, time, etc.) have been converted to UNDAF results at output level?
To what extent and in what ways have the comparative advantages of the UN organizations been utilized in the national context (including universality, neutrality, voluntary and grant-nature of contributions, multilateralism, and the special mandates of UN agencies)?
Are there any indications of leakages and how effective is use of domestic resources?
Are there challenges in effective use of resources, given by development partners (DPs) restrictions on funding for example some donors not willing to support through government (GoK)?

Sustainability – the extent to which these implementation mechanisms can be sustained over time:

Assess design and focus of the UNDAF, the quality of the formulation of results at different levels, i.e. the results chain

To what extent is the current UNDAF designed as a results-oriented, coherent and focused framework?
To what extent are the indicators and targets relevant, realistic and measurable? Are the indicators in line with the sustainable development goals (SDGs) and what changes need to be done? Are the baselines up to date -do they need adjusting?
Is it likely that the planned Country Programmes and projects and programme strategies will lead to the expected UNDAF results?
Are expected outcomes realistic given the UNDAF timeframe and resources?
To what extent and in what ways have risks and assumptions been addressed in UNDAF design?
Is the distribution of roles and responsibilities among the different UNDAF partners well defined, facilitated in the achievement of results and have the arrangements been respected in the course of implementation?
Do the Country Programmes and the UNDAF respond to the challenges of national capacity development and do they promote ownership of programmes by the national partners?
To what extent have human rights principles and standards been reflected or promoted in the UNDAF and, as relevant, in the Country Programmes? To what extent and in what ways has a human rights approach been reflected as one possible method for integrating human rights concerns into the UNDAF?
To what extent and in what ways are the concepts of gender equity and equality and other cross-cutting issues reflected in programming? Were specific goals and targets set? Was there effort to produce sex disaggregated data and indicators to assess progress in gender equity and equality? To what extent and how is special attention given to girls’ and women’s rights and empowerment? What needs to be done to further integrate these dimensions?
Bridging humanitarian responses and long term development/resilience; what are our lessons learnt, change of business?

Assess the effectiveness of the UNDAF as a coordination and partnership framework:

To what extent and in what ways has UNDAF contributed to achieving better synergies among the programmes of UN agencies?
Has the UNDAF enhanced joint programming by agencies and /or resulted in specific joint programmes? Were the strategies employed by agencies complementary and synergistic?
Have agency supported programmes been mutually reinforcing in helping to achieve UNDAF outcomes?
Has the effectiveness or programme support by individual agencies been enhanced as a result of joint programming?
Did UNDAF promote effective partnerships and strategic alliances around the main UNDAF outcome areas (e.g. national partners, International Financial Institutions and other external support agencies)?

Assess Impact: To the extent possible, assess the impact of UNDAF on the lives of the poor, i.e. determine whether there is any major change in UNDAF indicators that can reasonably be attributed to or be associated with UNDAF, notably in the realization of MDGs, National Development Goals and the national implementation of internationally agreed commitments and UN Conventions and Treaties.

Methods and process

The UNDAF MTR will be an external, participatory, and iterative learning exercise, which should be completed within a timeframe of two months. It will take place from March –May of 2016 and will build on the previous UNDAF Annual Reviews as well as the quarterly reviews. The MTR will be jointly commissioned and managed by the UNCT (heads of agencies) and national government. The evaluation will also involve stakeholders such as UN staff, their counterparts in the government as well as NGOs and other international actors. Stakeholder participation is essential and will be sought from the beginning of the process through a series of meetings and possibly through the organisation of an UNDAF Evaluation Workshop that will take place towards the end of the MTR process. The purpose of the workshop will be to validate and refine findings, conclusions and recommendations of the evaluation.

In order to determine the scope of the MTR the government and the UNCT will initiate the evaluation process by assessing how the UNDAF can be evaluated in a reliable and credible manner given the data and resources. This assessment will include a review of the documentation available on the UNDAF design and implementation process.

Methods to assess UNDAF outcomes and impact will include open and semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders, a comprehensive review of documents (both from the government on national policies and strategies as well as from the UN agencies), a synthesis and analysis of data from regular programme monitoring as well as field visits. Interviews with beneficiaries and local partners using participatory review and evaluation methodologies will be strongly encouraged, Reviews or evaluations of agency supported programmes will feed into the MTR.

Management and organisation

The UNDAF Evaluation will be commissioned and overseen by the UNCT and the Government. The responsibility to provide oversight and direction to the UNDAF MTR process will rest with the National Steering Committee. The Steering Committee is co-chaired by the National treasury, Ministry of Devolution and planning and the UN Resident Coordinator, with additional members being drawn from other Government Ministries, UN agencies and the UNCT.

A reference group which will serve as the MTR Technical Committee comprised of about 12 members from various national and international stakeholders (including the UNCT and GOK) will be established. The main task of the reference group will be to guide the evaluation process at the design, implementation and report stages. The reference group will also participate in the UNDAF Evaluation workshop. Appointed by the Government and the UNCT/RC will be established to backstop the work of the MTR consultancy team. The reference group will be chaired by a senior UN staff identified by the RC. It will facilitate the preparation of a substantive programme of consultations, discussions and interviews and it ensures quality control of the process.

The Resident Coordinator’s Office will be responsible for the day-to-day support of the MTR consultancy team, maintaining a close liaison with the Technical Committee and coordination among participating agencies throughout the duration of the UNDAF MTR process.

The team will work closely with and report to the RCO Monitoring and Evaluation Specialist. Availability of background documents will be ensured by the RCO. Likewise, facilitation for meetings setting and scheduling is to be provided by the RCO. Necessary technical expertise from UN agencies will be availed as appropriate. On the Government side, The National Treasury and ministry of devolution and planning will coordinate the participation of key ministries and other institutions in the Technical Committee. The One UN M&E Technical Working Group will provide technical guidance to the UNDAF MTR process.

An external Consultancy Team composed of one Senior International Consultant and one National Consultant selected by mutual agreement between the UNCT and the government through a transparent thorough selection process will conduct the MTR while facilitating the self-evaluation process within the UN (UN Country Team) and the government.

The Team will analyse the information gathered, interview key partners, working with thematic groups, the RC Office and other stakeholders to ensure the impartiality, consistency and coherence of the evaluation and provide recommendations on any necessary actions to adjust the current UNDAF.

The Resident coordinator’s office will manage and provide all the logistical and administration support required during the evaluation. These includes making appointments and schedules for interviews, workshops and meetings and providing transport to the he field. All costs related to travel, workshops and transport to the field and attending meetings will be taken care of by RCO.

Proposed Time Frame is as follows:

March 2016.

Activity; Desk Review (Home based) and development of inception report (which included the detail evaluation design (Week 1-2) -2 weeks

Responsibility; MTR /Reference Committee/and RCO to brief the evaluation team and provide initial guidance to the process. RCO to make all relevant documents available for home based desk review at commencement of consultancy.

April 2016.

Activity; Week 3 to WEEK 6: - 4 weeks in country – presentation of the evaluation design to the reference group, consultations, interviews and first draft report writing.

Responsibility; Consultancy Team supported by the RCO. Schedule of meetings and logistics arranged by the RCO. At the request of the Team Leader. Reference group to approve the evaluation design.

May 2016.

Activity; Week 7-9: - 2 weeks in country – Analysis of data, report writing – draft report presented to the Technical Committee and Outcome Working Groups/UNCT/RC/SRAs for comments incorporation of comments.

Responsibility; Consultancy team.

Week 10: in country - presentation of the second draft report to the Steering Committee via validation workshop.

Responsibility; Stakeholders/ NSC/GOK/s RCO, Consultancy Team/, M&E Working Group/SRAs.

Week 11: UNCT/ DaO /NSC Steering Committee - home based : Incorporation of comments and submission of final report to the RC.

Responsibility; UNCT/ NSC Steering Committee.

Composition and qualifications of the consultancy team

The Consultancy Team will be composed of one Senior International Consultant, who will be assigned the responsibility of Team Leader, and one National Consultant. The duration of the consultancy is 60 consecutive working days (11 weeks of 5 working days and 5 days for travel- in country) for each consultant as outlined in the time frame above. The International Consultant is expected to spend seven consecutive weeks in Kenya and the other three weeks will be home based. The Team should have proven record of experience in conducting complex evaluations.

Roles and responsibilities of the Consultancy Team:

The team will undertake the following roles and responsibilities

Organizing the work and preparing an evaluation plan for the team;
conducting briefing and debriefing; and facilitating productive working relationships among the team members;
Consulting with MTR Technical Committee and related partners to ensure the progress and the key evaluation questions are covered;
Assuring the draft and final reports are prepared in accordance with the Terms of Reference, Facilitating the meeting to present the main findings and recommendations of MTR, and discussing the proposed action plan to implement recommendations including changes in contents and direction of the programme.

The team leader will undertake the following tasks:

Taking the lead in contacting MTR Technical Committee regarding MTR-related issues and ensure that the process is as participatory as possible;
Organising the team meetings, assigning specific roles and tasks of the team members and closely monitor their work;
Supervising data collection and analysis;
Consolidating draft and final MTR reports, and a proposed action plan with the support provided by team members;
Completing the final MTR report, which incorporated comments of the Technical Committee and key stakeholders;
Submitting the draft and final MTR report and a proposed action plan to MTR Technical Committee and the RCO, on schedule;
Presenting MTR results and facilitating the meeting Specific tasks of the team Member.

Specific tasks of the National consultant:

Follow the tasks assigned by the team leader meeting the MTR working timetable

Data collection and analysis;
Providing written and verbal inputs to the Team Leader for the development of the MTR reports – drafts and final;
Participating in all meetings as per guidance provided by the Team Leader Collecting all comments on the MTR report and participating in the report revision process.

Competencies

Demonstrate knowledge of and ability to apply theoretical knowledge in the design, management and evaluation of complex multidisciplinary programmes involving the national government, county governments civil society and international organizations;
Have strong analytical and communication skills;
Have a strong understanding of the development context in Kenya and national development vision and strategies.

Required Skills and Experience

Education:

Master’s degree in relevant fields- social sciences, development stidies , international development among others;

Experience:

At least 10 years of relevant experience – specifically in evaluating similar programmes;
Demonstrate experience of having worked or evaluated UN programmes.

Language:

Fluency in English is required.

Submission of applications:

Interested and qualified individual consultants should submit their applications which should include the following;

UNDP Personal History Form (P11) – Template provided;
Detailed Curriculum Vitae;
IC proposal - Template provided.

The above forms can be accessed on the following link;http://procurement-notices.undp.org/view_notice.cfm?notice_id=28085