National Consultant (Mid-term Evaluation)

Consultant

Contract

This is a International Consultant contract. More about International Consultant contracts.

Background

UNDP Global Mission Statement:

The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) is the UN’s global development network, an organization advocating for change and connecting countries to knowledge, experience and resources to help people build a better life. We are on the ground in 166 countries, working with national counterparts on their own solutions to global and national development challenges.

UNDP Afghanistan Mission Statement:

UNDP has been working in Afghanistan since 1966 in close partnership with government, civil society and other national and international partners. UNDP focus is helping Afghanistan build and share solutions to the challenges of Environment, Livelihoods, Gender, Rule of Law, Governance and Health. UNDP advocate for change and connect the Afghan government, NGOs, civil society and other partners to the knowledge and resources they need to help the Afghan people build a better life. UNDP Afghanistan is committed to the highest standards of transparency and accountability and works in close coordination with the United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan and the UN system as a whole to maximize the impact of its development efforts on the ground.

Organizational Context:

The Community Based Agricultural Rural Development (CBARD) projects to support the production of fruit and vegetables as an alternative to poppy cultivation and trade in three high cultivating provinces of Afghanistan. Early results show farmers will commit to substituting other crops for opium if given alternatives that offer better returns. Marketing depends on established traders facilitating a sale in domestic and export markets. Prices in international markets are much higher, but regional and international markets require better quality produce that reaches the markets without major deterioration or loss.

This project supports cold chain facilities to bring to market Afghan fruit and vegetables. This will allow traders to source licit crops such as fresh fruits and vegetables from CBARD provinces while minimizing loss and deterioration. Exporting better-quality products to international markets is expected to lead to higher incomes for CBARD farmers and promote licit trade. The project will also focus on strengthening the human and institutional capacity of the Afghan Ministry of Agriculture, Irrigation & Livestock (MAIL).

Grant funding in the range of $50,000 to $150,000 will support the establishment of cold chain facilities at up to 50% of the total cost. In addition to refrigerated cold storage, pre-chilling equipment, and packhouses, facilities may include reefer containers, reefer centres, and sorting equipment. Any assistance will be underpinned by an analysis of market preferences by crop and destination, with traders invited to apply for funding. Approved traders will also receive training in marketing, specifically in the use of cold chain facilities. Moreover, the CBARD-AIM project will create a partnership between existing CBARD communities to reach three key objectives: reducing opium poppy cultivation, create licit economic development for former poppy farmers and women in the community, and supporting more sustainable peace.

The Mid-term Evaluation of the CBARD-AIM project will assess progress towards the achievement of project objectives and outcomes under the overarching results framework at the higher-level results i.e. CPD outputs/outcomes and as specified in the CBARD-AIM Project Document and assess early signs of project success or failure with the goal of identifying the necessary changes to be made to keep the project on-track to help achieve its intended results. The Mid-term Evaluation will also review the project’s approach and methodology, its risks to results impact and sustainability, and make recommendations on how to improve the project over the remainder of its lifetime.

The questions regarding aspects of relevance, efficiency, effectiveness, impact and sustainability of the project will cover the design, start-up, project management, and project implementation phases from October 2019 till end of July 2021.

The objectives of this Mid-term Evaluation (MTE) are to:

• assist the recipient government, beneficiaries, UNDP and, as appropriate, the concerned partners and stakeholders, to improve the efficiency, effectiveness, relevance, sustainability and impact of the project especially in terms of gender equality and women’s empowerment.
• provide feedback to all parties to improve the policy, planning, appraisal and implementation and monitoring phases; and
• ensure accountability for results to the project’s financial backers, stakeholders and beneficiaries.

Against this background, UNDP is hiring an independent national consultant to carry out the mid-term evaluation of the CBARD-AIM project, which will be conducted through a consultative process with UNDP, MAIL, the project donor, and beneficiaries

Duties and Responsibilities

SCOPE OF WORK

Evaluation Purpose

The objectives of the Mid-term Evaluation (MTE) are to:

1. Assist the recipient Government, beneficiaries, UNDP and, as appropriate, the concerned partners and stakeholders, to improve the efficiency, effectiveness, relevance, sustainability and impact of the project;
2. Provide feedback to all parties to improve the policy, planning, appraisal and implementation phases; and
3. Ensure accountability for results to the project’s financial backers, stakeholders and beneficiaries.

Evaluation Scope and Objectives

The MTE of the CBARD-AIM project aims to provide a comprehensive and independent assessment of project performance within the broader organizational framework such CPD and Strategic Plan till end of July 2021, as well as provide substantive recommendations for the remainder of project implementation. The MTE is expected to serve as a means of validating or filling the gaps in the initial assessment of relevance, effectiveness, efficiency and sustainability obtained from monitoring. The MTE provides the opportunity to assess early signs of project success or failure and prompt necessary adjustments. Specifically, the MTE is intended to provide a programme or project manager with a basis for identifying appropriate actions to:

1. address particular issues or problems in project design, identify potential project design issues or problems.
2. address particular issues or problems regarding project implementation.
3. address particular issues or problems regarding the project management.
4. assess progress towards the achievement of objectives and targets.
5. identify and document initial lessons learnt from experience (including lessons that might improve design and implementation of other projects in the Prosperity Unit);
6. identify additional risks (which are not part of the current risk log, if any) and countermeasures; and
7. make recommendations and aid decision-making regarding specific actions that might be taken to improve the project and reinforce initiatives that demonstrate the potential for success.

The project works in collaboration with the Community Based Agriculture and Rural Development (CBARD) West and East projects in the provinces of Badghis, Farah and Nangarhar, all three of which are among top six opium poppy cultivating provinces, which produce 26% of the opium in the country (According to the UNODC’s Afghanistan Opium Survey 2017 Cultivation and Production).

Table 1: CBARD-AIM Geographical Target Areas (Taken from CBARD-E and CBARD-W projects):

Province

District

Badghis

Bala Murghab, Ghormach, Jowand, Qadis (Northern most part of the district only)

Farah

Khaki-Safed, Pusht-e-Rod

Nangarhar

Achin, Chaparhar, Rodat, Sherzad, Kot, and Khugyani

Total

12 Districts

The international consultant is not expected to travel to these districts but he/she will travel to Jalalabad in Nangarhar province under UN security rules and regulations.

1)Evaluation Questions:

1.1.****Relevance:

• Is the project design appropriate to address the substantive problem that the project is intended to address? How useful are the project outputs to the needs of the target beneficiaries?
• What is the value of intervention in relation to the national and international partners’ policies and priorities (including SDG, UNDAF and UNDP Corporate Strategic Plan; ANPDF/NPPs, UNHCR regional strategy, etc.)?
• Are the project objectives consistent with substantive needs and realistic in consideration of technical capacity, resources and time available?

1.2.****Efficiency:

• How well is the project managed, and how could it be managed better?
• What is the project status with respect to target outputs in terms of quality and timeliness?
• What is the potential that the project will successfully achieve the desired outcomes?
• To what extent were project start-up activities completed on schedule?
• If there were delays in project start-up, what were the causes of delay, and what was the effectiveness of corrective measures undertaken? Do start-up problems persist?
• To what extent were adequate resources secured prior to project implementation? Did the project use the resources in the most economical manner to achieve its objectives?
• Is there an appropriate mechanism for monitoring the progress of the project? If yes, is there adequate usage of results/data for programming and decision making?
• What are the potential challenges/risks that may prevent the project from producing the intended results?

1.3.****Effectiveness:

• Are the project’s objectives and outcomes clearly articulated, feasible, realistic?
• To what extent is the project logic, concept and approach appropriate and relevant to achieving the objectives?
• Are the underlying assumptions on which the project intervention has been based valid? Is there a clear and relevant Theory of Change?
• To what extent has the project managed to implement activities across the target project locations?
• To what extent has the project implemented activities as envisaged? To what extent have those activities contributed to achieving the project objectives?
• To what extent did the project start-up activities adhere to the agreed approach and methodology?
• To what extent have the project implementation modalities been appropriate to achieve the overall objectives?
• What factors have contributed to achieving/not achieving the intended results?
• To what extent do external factors, such as logistical or security constraints, have impacts on project implementation?

1.4.****Perception and Impact:

• What is the wider perception of the project, its image, applicability and performance? Are project communications effective in positively promoting the project to a wider audience?
• What are the results (or preliminary results) of the intervention in terms of changes in the lives of beneficiaries against set indicators?

1.5.****Sustainability:

• What are the Implementing Partner’s resources, motivation and ability to continue implementing activities until the end of the project?
• Is there adequate all-party commitment to the project objectives and chosen approach?
• To what extent is there constructive cooperation among the project partners? What are the levels of satisfaction of government counterparts, donors and beneficiaries?
• What has been the quality of implementation of the implementing partner, and if applicable where are there specific areas for improvement?
• What is the likelihood that the project results will be sustainable in terms of systems, institutions, financing and anticipated impact?
• What is needed for the project intervention to be adapted/replicated further?

1.6.Coverage:

• Which groups have been reached and what is the different impact on those groups?
• Have vulnerable families been reached, including those with girls, children with disabilities, and low-income families?

1.7.****Coordination:

• What are the effects of coordination or lack thereof at district/province/ national level?

1.8.****Coherence:

• What are areas and ways of cooperation with other UN and donor agencies’ in regard to set goals and objectives?
• What is the existing national policy on agriculture and rural development?
• Is there coherence across policies of different donor agencies and national stakeholders? (this criteria should be assessed to the extent possible)

1.9.****Protection:

• Is the response adequate in terms of protection of children of different groups? (this criterion should be assessed in regard to what measures/actions need to be taken to provide, for example, support systems for children with disabilities, as/where applicable.)

2)Conclusions and Recommendations:

• The MTE will include a section of the report setting out the evaluation’s evidence-based conclusions.
• What corrective actions are recommended for the design, start-up phase, managerial arrangements and project implementation, including sustainability of the project? An actionable recommendation table should be included in the report, and succinctly summarized executive summary.
• What actions are recommended to follow up or reinforce initial benefits from the project?
• Identification of major challenges and risks to project implementation, as well as any opportunities for maximizing benefits and achievements.
• What are the main lessons that can be drawn from the project experience that may have generic application?

Evaluation Approach and Methodology

The MTE will provide evidence-based information that is credible, reliable and useful to project implementation. The International Consultant will lead an evaluation team (formed of national consultants) will review all relevant sources of information including documents (see the 'Documents to be consulted' section below). The evaluation team will also interview all relevant stakeholders, including all parties who have been contracted by the project or participate in meetings and discussions with the project. The evaluation team is expected to follow a collaborative and participatory approach ensuring close engagement of all stakeholders (See section below: “Evaluation Target Groups and Sources of Information”).

At the outset, evaluation team will produce an Evaluation Inception Report based on a review of all relevant documents and initial consultations and present it to the UNDP’s Prosperity Unit, the Programme Strategy and Results Team (PSRT), UNDP Senior Management and other stakeholders to explain the objectives and methods adopted for the MTE.

In addition to the Evaluation Inception Report, the consultant will produce: a) an initial findings presentation on the final day of the in-country mission to Afghanistan, b) a draft evaluation report, and c) a final evaluation report based on below evaluation criteria and feedback received, including all tools and questionnaires that were used.

·Stakeholder participation:

The MTE should strive to consult with as many people as possible, ensuring diversity of various stakeholder groups, as well as to review existing reports and data for an enriched evaluation.

A provisional list of stakeholder groups that should be consulted during the evaluation is given below and will be updated once the consultant is on board:

• Government of Afghanistan: MAIL, and its various departments including relevant Directorates in both Kabul and field province of Nangarhar
• Beneficiaries: MAIL, Community Development Councils (CDCs), and recipients of project inputs
• International Organizations: UNODC
• Donor: Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs (INL)
• UNDP Country Office
• CBARD-E project staff in Kabul and Nangarhar

·Accountabilities:

The CBARD-AIM project staff will be accountable for coordination of stakeholders involved, organizing field-visits, focus groups, and other logistical issues. UNDP CO/programme staff will be accountable for reviewing/approving of intermediate and final evaluation results. The evaluator shall be independent in evaluation exercise, however taking into account sensitive issues which may arise during the course of assessment. There are no specific concerns related to conflict of interest.

Expected Outputs, Deliverables and Timelines:

The following three key deliverables are expected from this assignment:

• Submission and Approval of the Inception Report: The international consultant will provide inception reports detailing the methodology and timelines; (20%)
• Submission and Approval of the Final Draft Report: The international consultant will provide draft final report soon after the mission takes place; (40%);
• Submission and Approval of the final report: The international consultant will provide two separate final reports after finalization of feedback from stakeholders (40%).

DELIVERABLES/OUTPUTS

INPUTS

PAYMENT

Deliverable 1: Submission and Acceptance of Mid-term Evaluation Inception Report: Mid-term Evaluation team clarifies objectives and methods of Mid-term Evaluation. The inception report should also include questionnaire for national consultants to complete.

Inception Report due 4 week after signature of contract (5 home-based working days and before the mission to Afghanistan. The mission to Afghanistan is expected to happen within 4 weeks after signature of contracts)

20%

Deliverable 2: Submission and Acceptance of Draft Final Report: Full report with annexes.

Due 8 weeks after contract signature (15 working days in Kabul) after submission of Initial findings presentation at the end of the mission and report

40%

Deliverable 3: Submission and Acceptance of Final Report: Revised report with audit trail detailing how all received comments have (or have not) been addressed in the final Mid-term Evaluation report; Expected to be completed within 1 week of receiving UNDP comments on draft.

Due 12 weeks after contract signature (15 home-based days) after the submission of the draft final Mid-term Evaluation report.

40%

TOTAL

100%

Working Arrangements:

The national consultants will work under the international consultant for the mid-term evaluation but under overall substantive guidance of the Head of the Prosperity Unit, with the Programme Strategy and Results (PSRT) Unit (for evaluation process and methodology), and overall logistical coordination with CBARD-E Project Manager and/or designated UNDP Prosperity Programme Analyst.

Duration of the Work:

The Mid-term Evaluation is expected to last a period of two months in its entirety, with a maximum of 35 working days. The indicative timeframe for the Mid-term Evaluation is as follows:

INDICATIVE TIMEFRAME

ACTIVITY

Within 4 weeks after contract signature (5 days) after signing the contract

• Document review and initial planning for travel and research.
• Telephone and in person interviews with key project stakeholders, Project Manager, and UNDP Country Office.
• Submit the MTE inception report with initial findings (as per desk review) and questionnaire for the national consultants to get data.

Within 8 weeks after contract signature (15 consultant working days on mission to Afghanistan)

• Mission to Afghanistan to conduct meetings and interviews with project stakeholders including government and project personnel, and UNDP Country Office.
• Initial Findings Presentation presented to stakeholders on final day of mission to Afghanistan.

Duty Station:

The CBARD-E project works in Nangarhar province with main office being in Kabul. The consultant will be guided by the reporting requirements of this assignment. Options for site visits to Nangarhar should be provided in the Inception Report, following discussions with UNDP Afghanistan and the Project Manager.

Evaluation Competencies and Ethics:

The Mid-term Evaluation will follow UNDP and UN Evaluation Group (UNEG) guidelines on the ethical participation of beneficiaries and children. In addition, all participants in the study will be fully informed about the nature and purpose of the evaluation and their requested involvement. Only participants who have given their written or verbal consent (documented) will be included in the evaluation. Specific mechanisms for feeding back results of the evaluation to stakeholders will be included in the elaborated methodology. All the documents, including data collection, entry and analysis tools, and all the data developed or collected for this consultancy are the intellectual property of UNDP Afghanistan, MAIL and the CBARD-E project. The consultant may not publish or disseminate the Mid-term Evaluation report, data collection tools, collected data or any other documents produced from this consultancy without the express permission of and acknowledgement of UNDP and MAIL.

Documents to be Consulted:

• CBARD-E Project Document, including annexes and Annual Workplans and project budget revisions, project reports including Annual Project Reports (APR), Quarterly Project Report (QPR), Back to Office reports, and ad-hoc project activity progress reports.
• Meeting minutes, including Project Board and Technical Working Group meeting minutes, Terms of Reference for project management.
• CBARD-W Midterm Report
• Annual audit reports and spot-check reports.
• TORs for project staff, including UNDP staff and NTA modality
• Correspondence with the donor
• Any other materials that the consultant considers useful for this evidence-based review.

Sample Evaluation Matrix:

The evaluation matrix is a tool that the consultant will create as a map and reference in planning and conducting an evaluation. It also serves as a useful tool for summarizing and visually presenting the evaluation design and methodology for discussions with stakeholders. This will complement the Project’s M&E plan for each indicator. A sample Evaluation Matrix is provided below:

Relevant

evaluation

criteria

Key

Questions

Specific

Sub-

Questions

Data

Sources

Data collection

Methods/Tools

Indicators/

Success

Standard

Methods

for Data

Analysis

Management of the Evaluation:

The consultant is responsible for ensuring that the evaluation function is fully operational and that evaluation work is conducted according to the highest professional standards.

Suggested Template for the Mid-Term Evaluation Report:

1. Executive summary
   1. Including an overview of project progress, research methods, and summary of key recommendations
2. Purpose of the evaluation

• Restate the purpose of the Mid-term Evaluation
• Explain how this evaluation fits into project cycle and project planning/review activities

1. Evaluation methodology

• Overview of methodology and approach
• Research methods employed
• Workplan and research process

1. Background

• Country context (policy, institutional environment with relevance to the CBARD-W project)
• Project rationale
• Project status (implementation, financial)

1. Evaluation:

• Evaluation Questions should be answered under the headings as outlined in the TOR

• Relevance

• Efficiency
• Effectiveness
• Impact

• Sustainability

• Any other pertinent issues that need addressing or which may influence future project direction and UNDP engagement in the country.

1. Conclusions and Recommendations:

• The MTE will include a section of the report setting out the MTE’s evidence-based conclusions, in light of the findings.
• What corrective actions are recommended for the design, start-up phase, managerial arrangements and project implementation, including sustainability, of the project? A recommendation table should be put in the report’s executive summary.
• What actions are recommended to follow up or reinforce initial benefits from the project?
• What are the main lessons that can be drawn from the project experience that may have generic application?

1. Annexes

• To include, at minimum:

• TOR for Mid-term Evaluation

• Evaluation Follow-up Matrix (sample template provided)
• Detailed table of recommendations for improving project implementation
• List of people interviewed, focus group discussions held, etc.
• Templates of tools and questionnaires employed
• References

Competencies

Competencies:

• Demonstrates integrity by modeling the UN’s values and ethical standards.
• Promotes the vision, mission, and strategic goals of UNDP.
• Maturity combined with tact and diplomacy.
• Displays cultural, gender, religion, race, nationality and age sensitivity and adaptability.
• Treats all people fairly without favoritism.

Special Skills Requirements

• Shows ability to communicate and to exercise advocacy skills in front of a diverse set of audience.
• Focuses on impact and result for the client and responds positively to feedback.
• Demonstrates openness to change and ability to manage complexities.
• Consistently approaches work with energy and a positive, constructive attitude.
• Ability to work collaboratively with colleagues in a multi-cultural and multiethnic environment.
• Builds strong relationships with clients and external actors.

Ability to work independently with strong sense of initiative, discipline and self-motivation.

Required Skills and Experience

Academic Qualifications:

• Bachelor’s Degree in agriculture and engineering, social science, evaluation, or other closely related field from an accredited university.

Experience:

• At least 5 years of working experience in evaluation and social research.
• Proven experience in evaluating projects/programmes of UN or development agencies (preferably UNDP).
• Strong analytical and research skills with sufficient understanding of quantitative and qualitative methods and data analysis.
• Familiarity with UNEG evaluation norms and guidelines and processes required.
• Work experience related to rural livelihoods and agriculture economics is an advantage.

Language:

• Fluency in written and spoken English is a requirement.
• Knowledge of Dari or Pashto is an advantage.

Proposal Evaluation Method and Criteria:

The award of the contract shall be made to the individual consultant whose offer has been evaluated and determined as:

1. Responsive/compliant/acceptable; and
2. 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%.

Only candidates obtaining a minimum of 49 points (70% of the total technical points) would be considered for the Financial Evaluation.

Technical Criteria 70 points

Technical Proposal (30 marks) - (can be attached with CV or response can be provided to mandatory question on jobs site):

1. Technical Approach & Methodology (20 marks) – Explain the understanding of the objectives of the assignment, approach to the services, methodology for carrying out the activities and obtaining the expected output, and the degree of detail of such output. The Applicant should also explain the methodologies proposed to adopt and highlight the compatibility of those methodologies with the proposed approach.
2. Work Plan (10 marks) – The Applicant should propose the main activities of the assignment, their content and duration, phasing and interrelations, milestones (including interim approvals by the Client), and delivery dates. The proposed work plan should be consistent with the technical approach and methodology, showing understanding of the TOR and ability to translate them into a feasible working plan.
3. Interview (10 marks)

Qualification and Experience (40 marks) [evaluation of CV]:

• General Qualification (15 marks);
• Experience relevant to the assignment (15 marks);

PRICE PROPOSAL AND SCHEDULE OF PAYMENTS

• The consultant shall submit a price proposal as below: **Shortlisted candidates (ONLY) will be requested to submit a Financial Proposal. **The consultant shall then submit a price proposal when requested by UNDP, in accordance with the below:****
• ******Daily Fee** – The Consultant shall propose a daily fee which should be inclusive of his/her professional fee, local communication cost, insurance (inclusive of medical health and medical evacuation etc.), equipment, and other costs required for performance of the contract but excluding travels and DSA. The number of working days for which the daily fee shall be payable under the contract is 35 working days over a contract duration of 3 months.****
• ******DSA** **– The Consultant shall be separately paid the DSA as per applicable UNDP rate for official missions outside of Kabul- Afghanistan******

The total professional fee shall be converted into a lump sum contract and payments under the contract shall be made on submission and acceptance of deliverables under the contract in accordance with the abovementioned schedule of payment. The total professional fee shall be converted into a lump sum contract and payments under the contract shall be made on submission and acceptance of deliverables under the contract in accordance with the abovementioned schedule of payment.

Financial Evaluation – 30 points

The following formula will be used to evaluate financial proposal:

p = y (µ/z), where

p = points for the financial proposal being evaluated

y = maximum number of points for the financial proposal

µ = price of the lowest priced proposal

z = price of the proposal being evaluated

Documents to be included when submitting the proposals:

Interested individual consultants must submit the following documents/information to demonstrate their qualifications in one single PDF document:

• Personal CV or P11, indicating all experience from similar projects, as well as the contact details (email and telephone number) of the Candidate and at least three (3) professional references.

All materials developed will remain the copyright of UNDP Afghanistan. UNDP Afghanistan will be free to adapt and modify them in the future.

Annexes (click on the hyperlink to access the documents):

• Annex 1 - IC Contract Template (for information);

• Annex 2 - Financial Proposal Template using the template provided by UNDP (to be completed at later stage upon request by UNDP);

• Annex 3 – IC General Terms and Conditions (for information);
• Annex 4 – RLA Template (if consultant wishes to be recruited through an employer) - (for information).

Note: Incomplete application will result in automatic disqualification of candidate.

Technical Proposal (Mandatory Questions on Jobs site):

• Brief description of why the individual considers him/herself as the most suitable for the assignment;
• Technical Approach & Methodology (20 marks) – Please explain the understanding of the objectives of the assignment, approach to the services, methodology for carrying out the activities and obtaining the expected output, and the degree of detail of such output. The Applicant should also explain the methodologies proposed to adopt and highlight the compatibility of those methodologies with the proposed approach. (Maximum 1000 words)
• Work Plan (10 marks) – Please propose the main activities of the assignment, their content and duration, phasing and interrelations, milestones (including interim approvals by the Client), and delivery dates. The proposed work plan should be consistent with the technical approach and methodology, showing understanding of the TOR and ability to translate them into a feasible working plan.

Apply now

Added 2 years ago - Updated 2 years ago - Source: jobs.undp.org