Consultant for the Interim Review Green Climate Fund Project FP049

Programme & Policy

Overview

Conduct interim review of Green Climate Fund project for smallholder farmers.

You have:

• University degree in international development, political or social sciences, planning, or project cycle monitoring (PhD, Master’s Degree)
• Proven experience of over 7 years in conducting program monitoring and evaluation (including in evaluation of large-scale regional or global programs using a theory of change approach)
• Experience with WFP, and in evaluating projects funded by donors such as GCF in West Africa region and/or in Senegal
• A good understanding of climate adaptation programming
• Experience on the design of qualitative and quantitative data collection tools
• Good knowledge of assessment methodologies, including sampling, data collection, analysis techniques, and report writing
• Strong interpersonal and communication skills
• Good knowledge and experience in financial analysis of programs and projects
• Good working knowledge of French and English

Terms of Reference

INTERIM REVIEW Green climate fund PROJECT FP049 (Consultant)

1. PROJECT TITLE

Building the climate resilience of food insecure smallholder farmers through integrated management of climate risks (the R4 Rural Resilience Initiative)"

2. CONTRACT DURATION

Number of working days: 45 working days in 2 months

Contract start date: 15/02/2022

Contract end date: 30/04/2022

3. PROJECT DESCRIPTION

As part of the scaling-up first phase of the Rural Resilience Initiative in Senegal, funds from the Green Climate Fund (GCF) were mobilized by the World Food Program (WFP) and Senegal’s Government to strengthen the resilience of small agricultural producers affected by climate change effects.

The project targets small and vulnerable agricultural producers in 5 regions in Senegal: Kaolack, Fatick, Kaffrine, Tambacounda and Kolda for 4 years, from 2020 to 2023 and is executed by WFP in coordination with the Government of Senegal and cooperating partners. The project proposes an integrated risk management approach that includes Risk Reduction (creation of sustainable community assets); Risk Transfer (which includes drought insurance); Reserve against risks and prudent risk taking (savings and access to loans).

The Project objective will be achieved through the implementation of 4 components. Each component and their expected outputs are listed below.

Component 1: Risk reduction

Output 1.1: Training of farmers on innovative, climate-smart agricultural practices and support of community-based disaster risk reduction assets creation, such as water and soil conservation

Activity 1.1.1: Seasonal Livelihood and Community-based participatory Planning.

Activity 1.1.2: Training on assets creation and Climate Smart Agriculture (“CSA”) and dissemination of Climate Change Adaptation (“CCA”) good practices.

Activity 1.1.3: Asset creation that reduce the impacts of climate change and help households to adapt to the effects of CC built or rehabilitated.

Output 1.2: Provision of climate services, enabling farmers to access reliable climate information via their mobile phones and radio programs, as well as advisory services

Activity 1.2.1: Training on climate services.

Activity 1.2.2: Delivery of climate information.

Component 2: Risk transfer

Output 2.1: WFP, in partnership with the local agricultural insurance company, Compagnie Nationale d’Assurance Agricole (“CNAAS”), provides smallholders with weather index insurance (“WII”)

Activity 2.1.1: Index design.

Activity 2.1.2: Insurance policies delivery and enrollment.

Activity 2.1.3: End of the season assessment and payouts.

Component 3: Risk reserves and prudent risk taking

Output 3.1: WFP, in partnership with Oxfam America (“OA”), supports vulnerable rural populations in building up savings and accessing small loans through the Savings for Change (“SfC”) program

Activity 3.1.1: Recruitment and training of field teams for savings groups.

Activity 3.1.2: Formation and training of savings groups.

Output 3.2: During good years, farmers have the opportunity to store their surplus production in WFP Village Cereal Banks (“VCBs”) and use their stocks as collateral to receive credit from local Micro Finance Institutions (“MFIs”)

Activity 3.2.1: Set up and roll out of warrantage systems.

Component 4: Enabling the Government of Senegal to mainstream climate change adaptation and climate risk management into its safety net and protection programmes

Output 4.1: Build national capacity to scale up rural resilience and adaptation measures linked to national social protection programs, supporting the government to implement its adaptation actions and reinforce national capacities

Activity 4.1.1: Capacity building of national and local government.

Activity 4.1.2: Integration of climate risk management tools in government safety net.

4. OBJECTIVES AND PURPOSE OF THE INTERIM REVIEW

In assessing the implementation of the GCF Project and its alignment with FAA obligations, the interim review will assess the project against the following evaluation criteria from the GCF IEU TOR (GCF/B.06/06) and draft GCF Evaluation Policy along with guidance provided by the OECD DAC (document in Annexes):

1. Program relevance for beneficiary communities;
2. Effectiveness ofn program implementation;
3. Coherence of the project’s intervention strategy with that of other public or multilateral structures also implementing programs financed by GCF;
4. Efficiency: financial management, efficient use of funds, disbursements, etc.
5. Gender equity and equality, and women's empowerment;
6. Ownership of program from National public and governmental entities
7. Innovation in results areas (extent to which interventions may lead to paradigm shift towards low-emission and climate resilient development pathways);
8. Sustainability, replication and scalability – the extent to which the activities can be scaled up in other locations within the country or replicated in other countries
9. Unexpected results, both positive and negative;
10. Monitoring and evaluation system.
11. SCOPE AND FOCUS OF THE INTERIM REVIEW

Scope of Work

This GCF interim evaluation will be conducted through WFPs mid-term review approach covering the period from January 2020 to December 2021. The review will assess the overall performance of project by analyzing the status and quality of implementation done by the partners, measure the current effects of the intervention and define the prospects for sustainability. The interim review will also consider the institutional partnership (functioning of the technical steering committee), analyze the financial situation (budget execution, disbursement of funds, compliance with GCF procedures). Finally, the review will provide recommendations for strategic, technical, institutional, and procedural orientations where needed, to achieve expected results.

The interim review, based on GCF Evaluation criteria will focus on the following elements:

Program relevance for beneficiary communities

• Was the context, problem, needs and priorities well analyzed and reviewed during project initiation?
• Are the planned project objectives and outcomes relevant and realistic to the situation on the ground?
• Is the project Theory of Change (ToC) and intervention logic coherent and realistic?

Does the ToC and intervention logic hold, or does it need to be adjusted?

Effectiveness of program implementation:

• Are the implementation modalities effective?
• Do the assets built thus far help reduce the risk to climate shocks for vulnerable households?
• What other types of initiatives can the project focus on to further help reduce the risk of climate shock of people’s livelihoods?
• Is program coordination, synergy with other activities in the intervention areas, communication with stakeholders effective?

Are the planned activities carried out on time in accordance with the timetable?

Efficiency

• Is the project on track in achieving the desired outcomes under each component and supportive of the TOC? :

• Have project resources been utilized in the most economical, effective and equitable ways possible (considering value for money; absorption rate; commitments versus disbursements and projected commitments; etc.)?

• Is the project’s intervention strategy coherent with that of other public or multilateral structures also implementing programs financed by GCF?

• To what extent has the project complemented other on-going local level initiatives (by stakeholders, donors, governments) on climate change adaptation or mitigation efforts?
• How has the project contributed to achieving stronger and more coherent integration of shift to increased climate resilient sustainable development (GCF RMF/PMF Paradigm Shift objectives)? Please provide concrete examples and make specific suggestions on how to enhance these roles going forward.

Gender Equity, equality and women empowerment

• Does the project rely on sex-disaggregated data for the different processes: targeting, monitoring, implementing training activities…?
• Are financial resources/project activities explicitly allocated to enable women to benefit from project interventions?
• Does the project account in activities and planning for local gender dynamics and how project interventions affect women as beneficiaries?
• Did the project sufficiently address cross cutting issues including gender: gender mainstreaming plan, desegrated data collection, resources for gender activities, appropriation of gender issues by cooperating partners, steering committee and beneficiaries?

National public and governmental entities ownership of program

• To what extent is the project aligned with national development plans, national plans of action on climate change, or sub-national policy as well as projects and priorities of the national partners?
• How well is country ownership reflected in the project governance, coordination and consultation mechanisms or other consultations?
• What strategic orientation to better align the project strategy with national policies on climate change (Component 4)

Sustainability, replication and Scalability

• How effective are the exit strategies and approaches to phase out assistance provided by the project including contributing factors and constraints?
• What factors of the project achievements are contingent on specific local context or enabling environment factors?
• Are the actions and results from project interventions likely to be sustained, ideally through ownership by the local partners and stakeholders?
• What are the key factors that will require attention in order to improve prospects of sustainability, scalability or replication of project outcomes/outputs/results?

Unexpected Results

• What has been the project’s ability to adapt and evolve based on continuous lessons learned and the changing development landscape?
• Can any unintended or unexpected positive or negative effects be observed as a consequence of the project's interventions?
• What factors have contributed to the unintended outcomes, outputs, activities, results?

Innovation in Results areas

• What role has the project played in the provision of "thought leadership,” “innovation,” or “unlocked additional climate finance” for climate change adaptation/mitigation in the project and country context? Please provide concrete examples and make specific suggestions on how to enhance these roles going forward.

Monitoring and evaluation system

• Are the milestones and targets still relevant, and are the assumptions made at the beginning of the project still valid?
• Are the means of verification and data collection adequate? What and how can it be improved?
• Are the planned inputs and strategies identified realistic, appropriate and adequate to achieve the results? Were they sequenced sufficiently to efficiently deliver the expected results?
• Is the M&E system in place adequate to inform the achievement of programme outputs and outcomes in line with FAA commitments?

6. METHODOLOGY

The interim review should be aligned with the principles established in GCF’s (draft) Evaluation Policy and pending GCF guidance on conflicts of interest in evaluation, UNEG Code of Conduct for Evaluations, that include but are not limited to: impartiality, objectivity, unbiased, independent; relevance, utility; credibility; measurability; transparency, ethics, and partnerships.

The interim review should seek to the extent possible to be inclusive and participatory, involving principal stakeholders and beneficiaries in the analysis. During the interim review, the consultant is expected to apply the following approaches for data collection, analysis and triangulation of evidence for validation. Qualitative and quantitative collection techniques will be used to carry out cross-sectional and intelligible analyses for a better understanding of the results.

• Document review of relevant documents including baseline studies, progress reports and any records of surveys conducted during the Project, stakeholder maps, etc.;
• Survey/Questionnaires, Focus Groups or Key informative interviews with relevant stakeholders, beneficiaries, possibly national and or local decentralized authorities (Prefect, sub-Prefect, Mayors, etc.) , and where relevant cooperating partners;
• Data collection as needed (government data/records, field observation visits; CDM verifications, public expenditure reporting, workshop report, official correspondence letter, trips order etc.) to validate evidence of results and assessments (including but not limited to assessment of TOC, activities delivery, and results/changes occurred).

During the implementation of the contract, the Evaluator will report to the Technical team (lead by GCF Coordinator), who will provide guidance and ensure satisfactory completion of the interim review deliverables. There will be coordination with the project team who will assist in connecting the Consultant with senior management, government and development partners, beneficiaries and other relevant key stakeholders. In addition, the technical team will provide key project documentation prior to fieldwork, and will assist in developing a detailed programme to facilitate consultations as necessary.

7. EXPECTED OUTPUTS AND DELIVERABLES

The consultant is expected to deliver the following outputs:

• Inception note on overall understanding of the mission, ToRs, and proposed methodological approach and tools for discussion and approval by the AE.
• Prepare data collection tools for interviews with the various actors (beneficiaries, cooperating partners, government, other relevant stakeholders).
• Establish a work plan with each stakeholder.
• A draft preliminary evaluation report and presentation, to be presented at a debriefing meeting with the AE project team.
• Final report in French, including a 2-3 pages executive summary, results analysis, a set of limited and strategic recommendations (not to exceed 10 recommendations total), and responses addressing the issues raised during presentation of the draft. WFP will procure professional translation services to translate the document in English prior to submission to the GCF.
• Lead a validation meeting for the interim review where the Final Report will be shared.

The Project Interim Review Report should follow the following structure:

• Executive Summary;
• Introduction (including context, scope, methodology and evaluation objectives);
• Key Strategic Findings and Conclusions: Where relevant and possible, specifically outline role, impact and issues in project assistance/implementation;
• Recommendations (corrective actions for on-going or future work and where relevant if major changes are considered necessary;
• Summary review matrix/project RMF and achievement by objectives and outputs (triangulated with evidence and data);
• Annexes (mission reports, list of interviewees and structures, list of visited localities, list of documents reviewed, data sources used, etc.)

8. REQUIREMENTS AND QUALIFICATIONS OF CONSULTANT

• University degree in international development, political or social sciences, planification, or project cycle monitoring (PhD, Master’s Degree)
• Proven experience of over 7 years in conducting program monitoring and evaluation (including in evaluation of large-scale regional or global programs using a theory of change approach)
• Experience with WFP, and in evaluating projects funded by donors such as GCF in West Africa region and/or in Senegal
• A good understanding of climate adaptation programming
• Experience on the design of qualitative and quantitative data collection tools
• Good knowledge of assessment methodologies, including sampling, data collection, analysis techniques, and report writing
• Be proactive and rigorous in respecting the established timeline
• Strong interpersonal and communication skills
• Good knowledge of Gender thematic
• Good knowledge and experience in financial analysis of programs and projects
• Good working knowledge of French and English.

Apply now

Potential interview questions

Added 4 years ago - Updated 1 year ago - Source: wfp.org