National Consultant (Mid-Term Review) Climate-induced Disaster Risk Reduction Project (CDRRP)-UNDP

This opening expired 2 years ago.

UNDP - United Nations Development Programme

Open positions at UNDP
Logo of UNDP

Application deadline 2 years ago: Thursday 27 Aug 2020 at 23:59 UTC

Open application form


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


UNDP Global Mission Statement

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 helps countries to achieve sustainable development by eradicating poverty in all its forms and dimensions, accelerating structural transformations for sustainable development and building resilience to crises and shock. In Afghanistan, a country in conflict, UNDP works for development and recovery choices that reduce vulnerability and contribute a development perspective to strengthen humanitarian and peace-building responses, to strengthen the continuum from relief to rehabilitation and development.

UNDP Livelihoods and Resilience Unit:

The focus of the UNDP Livelihoods and Resilience programme in Afghanistan is on reducing poverty and creating mechanisms that help the country to cope with socioeconomic stresses resulting from limited human development, the humanitarian crisis and climate change. The unit provides quality assurance for the Climate-induced Disaster Risk Reduction Project (CDRRP) implemented by the Ministry of Agriculture, Irrigation and Livestock (MAIL).

Project information:

Adapting Afghan Communities to Climate-Induced Disaster Risks is a five-year project, which commenced on 26 September 2017 and is set to close on 25 September 2022. It is a joint initiative of the Global Environment Facility (GEF), Ministry of Agriculture, Irrigation and Livestock (MAIL) and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). The project is being implemented by the MAIL under National Implementation Modality (NIM) of UNDP. The relevant stakeholders of the project are: Ministry of Rural Rehabilitation and Development (MRRD), Ministry of Energy and Water (MoEW), Ministry of Women Affairs (MoWAs), Afghanistan National Disaster Management Authority (ANDMA) and Afghanistan Metrological Department (AMD)

The objective of the project, which is also known as Climate-Induced Disaster Risk Reduction Project (CDRRP), is to improve preparedness and resilience of target communities to climate-induced disaster risks in two provinces of Afghanistan - Jawzjan and Nangarhar. The total budget of the project is US$ 6.6 million including US$ 1 million co-financing from UNDP

The main co-financing partner for this project has been the Ministry of Agriculture, Irrigation and Livestock (MAIL). The total co-financing from MAIL is US$5,000,000. The World Bank Group is co-financing US$ 2,500,000. Asian Development Bank (ADB) US$57,000,000. In addition, there is a US$ 1,000,000 cash co-finance from UNDP core fund.

To achieve this goal, the project carries out activities under the following four components:

  • Public awareness and hazard mapping
  • Community-based early warning systems (EWS)
  • Climate-resilient livelihoods
  • Institutional capacity development

Afghanistan is especially vulnerable because of its limited health care system and few medical personnel, weak infrastructure, and poor social cohesion after 40 years of war, along with a large influx of refugees returning from Iran and Pakistan. The Ministry of Public Health (MoPH) shows that as of today (July 13, 2020) 34,451 people across all 34 provinces in Afghanistan are now confirmed to have COVID-19. Some 21,216 people have recovered, and 1,010 people have died (56 of whom are healthcare workers). 79,732 people out of a population of 37.6 million have been tested. 10 per cent of the total confirmed COVID-19 cases are among healthcare staff. Due to limited public health resources and testing capacity, as well as the absence of a national death register, confirmed cases of and deaths from COVID-19 are likely to be under reported overall in Afghanistan. Different COVID-19 models show that the peak for the COVID-19 outbreak in Afghanistan is expected between late July and early August, creating grave implications for Afghanistan’s economy and people’s well-being.

The government has adopted strict containment and quarantine measures, including social distance and using mask. Moreover, strict quarantine for those tested positive and closure of public places and public gatherings have been put in place. Schools, universities and all other government organizations were declared to be closed till now. In the meantime, the Ministry of Hajj and Religious affairs had called upon all people to pray at home and do not hold any mourning/ religious ceremonies at mosques.

  1. Overall objective of the consultancy:

This is the Terms of Reference (ToR) for -the Midterm Review (MTR) of the full-sized UNDP-supported GEF-financed project titled Adapting Afghan Communities to Climate-Induced Disaster Risks (PIMS#5398) implemented through the Ministry of Agriculture, Irrigation and Livestock (MAIL), which is to be undertaken in 2020. The project started on September 26, 2017 and is in its 3rd year of implementation. This ToR sets out the expectations for this MTR. The MTR process must follow the guidance outlined in the document Guidance For Conducting Midterm Reviews of UNDP-Supported, GEF-Financed Projects


The MTR will assess progress towards the achievement of the project objectives and outcomes as specified in the Project Document, and assess early signs of project success or failure with the goal of identifying the necessary changes to be made in order to set the project on-track to achieve its intended results. The MTR will also review the project’s strategy and its risks to sustainability.

The MTR will also review the project’s strategy, its risks to sustainability and make recommendations on how to improve the project over the remainder of its lifetime.

The mid-term evaluation 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 mid-term evaluation provides the opportunity to assess early signs of project success or failure and prompt necessary adjustments. Specifically, the mid-term evaluation is intended to provide the project team with a basis for identifying appropriate actions to:

  • Address particular issues or problems in project design, identify potential project design issues or problems;
  • Address particular issues or problems regarding project implementation;
  • Address particular issues or problems regarding the project management;
  • Assess progress towards the achievement of objectives and targets;
  • Identify and document initial lessons learnt from experience (including lessons that might improve design and implementation of other Livelihoods and Resilience (L&R) Unit projects);
  • Identify additional risks (which are not part of the current risk log, if any) and countermeasures;
  • 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;
  • Find out the impact of the COVID-19 on the project and propose necessary changes in the project document because of COVID-19.

    MTR Approach & Methodology:

The MTR report must provide evidence-based information that is credible, reliable and useful. The MTR team will review all relevant sources of information including documents prepared during the preparation phase (i.e. PIF, UNDP Initiation Plan, UNDP Social and Environmental Screening Procedure/SESP), the Project Document, project reports including annual PIRs, project budget revisions, national strategic and legal documents, and any other materials that the team considers useful for this evidence-based review. The MTR team will review the baseline GEF focal area Core Indicators/Tracking Tools submitted to the GEF at CEO endorsement, and the midterm GEF focal area Core Indicators/Tracking Tools that must be completed before the MTR field mission begins.

The MTR team is expected to follow a collaborative and participatory approach[1] ensuring close engagement with the Project Team, government counterparts (the GEF Operational Focal Point), the UNDP Country Office(s), the Nature, Climate and Energy (NCE) Regional Technical Advisor, direct beneficiaries, and other key stakeholders.

Engagement of stakeholders is vital to a successful MTR.[2] Stakeholder involvement should include interviews with stakeholders who have project responsibilities, including but not limited to: UNDP Afghanistan, UNDP Bangkok Regional Hub, Ministry of Agriculture, Irrigation and Livestock (MAIL), National Environmental Protection Agency (NEPA), Ministry to Rural Rehabilitation and Development (MRRD), Ministry of Energy and Water (MoEW) ); executing agencies, senior officials and task team/ component leaders, key experts and all consultants in the subject area who have been hired by the project, Project Board, project stakeholders, academia, local government and CSOs including project beneficiaries (CDCs), etc. Additionally, the MTR team is expected to conduct field missions to Nangarhar and Jowzjan provinces, including the following project sites (Karma, Kuz Kunar and Bihsud in Nangarhar and Khwaja Duk Koh, Khanaqa and Fazabad in Jowjzan. The project sites are located in East (Nangarhar) and North (Jowzjan).

The final MTR report should describe the full MTR approach taken and the rationale for the approach making explicit the underlying assumptions, challenges, strengths and weaknesses about the methods and approach of the review. The specific design and methodology for the MTR should emerge from consultations between the MTR team and the above-mentioned parties regarding what is appropriate and feasible for meeting the MTR purpose and objectives and answering the evaluation questions, given limitations of budget, time and data. The MTR team must, however, use gender-responsive methodologies and tools and ensure that gender equality and women’s empowerment, as well as other cross-cutting issues and SDGs are incorporated into the MTR report.

The final methodological approach including interview schedule, field visits and data to be used in the MTR must be clearly outlined in the Inception Report and be fully discussed and agreed between UNDP, stakeholders and the MTR team. The final MTR report must describe the full MTR approach taken and the rationale for the approach making explicit the underlying assumptions, challenges, strengths and weaknesses about the methods and approach of the review.

As of 11 March 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared COVID-19 a global pandemic as the new coronavirus rapidly spread to all regions of the world. Travel to the country has been restricted since 21 March 2020 and travel in the country is also restricted. If it is not possible for the national consultant to travel then the MTR team should develop a methodology that takes this into account the conduct of the MTR virtually and remotely, including the use of remote interview methods and extended desk reviews, data analysis, surveys and evaluation questionnaires. This should be detailed in the MTR Inception Report and agreed with the Commissioning Unit.

If all or part of the MTR is to be carried out virtually then consideration should be taken for stakeholder availability, ability or willingness to be interviewed remotely. In addition, their accessibility to the internet/computer may be an issue as many government and national counterparts may be working from home. These limitations must be reflected in the final MTR report.

If a data collection/field mission is not possible then remote interviews may be undertaken through telephone or online (skype, zoom etc.). International consultants can work remotely with national evaluator support in the field if it is safe for them to operate and travel. No stakeholders, consultants or UNDP staff should be put in harm’s way and safety is the key priority.

A short validation mission may be considered if it is confirmed to be safe for staff, consultants, stakeholders and if such a mission is possible within the MTR schedule. Equally, qualified and independent national consultants will be hired to undertake the MTR and interviews in country as long as it is safe to do so.

  1. Detailed Scope of the MTR:

The MTR team will assess the following four categories of project progress. See the Guidance For Conducting Midterm Reviews of UNDP-Supported, GEF-Financed Projects for extended descriptions.

  1. Project Strategy:

    Project design:

  2. Support international consultant to review the problem addressed by the project and the underlying assumptions. Review the effect of any incorrect assumptions or changes to the context to achieving the project results as outlined in the Project Document;
  3. Review the relevance of the project strategy and assess whether it provides the most effective route towards expected/intended results.Were lessons from other relevant projects properly incorporated into the project design;
  4. In collaboration with the international consultant, review how the project addresses country priorities. Review country ownership. Was the project concept in line with the national sector development priorities and plans of the country (or of participating countries in the case of multi-country projects);
  5. Review decision-making processes: were perspectives of those who would be affected by project decisions, those who could affect the outcomes, and those who could contribute information or other resources to the process, taken into account during project design processes;
  6. Support/assist the international consultant to review the extent to which relevant gender issues were raised in the project design. See Annex 9 of Guidance For Conducting Midterm Reviews of UNDP-Supported, GEF-Financed Projects for further guidelines;
  7. Were relevant gender issues (e.g. the impact of the project on gender equality in the programme country, involvement of women’s groups, engaging women in project activities) raised in the Project Document;
  8. If there are major areas of concern, recommend areas for improvement.

    Results Framework/Logframe:

  9. Assist the international consultant to undertake a critical analysis of the project’s log-frame indicators and targets, assess how “SMART” the midterm and end-of-project targets are (Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Relevant, Time-bound), and suggest specific amendments/revisions to the targets and indicators as necessary;
  10. Are the project’s objectives and outcomes or components clear, practical, and feasible within its time frame;
  11. Examine if progress so far has led to, or could in the future catalyse beneficial development effects (i.e. income generation, gender equality and women’s empowerment, improved governance etc...) that should be included in the project results framework and monitored on an annual basis;
  12. Ensure broader development and gender aspects of the project are being monitored effectively.Develop and recommend SMART ‘development’ indicators, including sex-disaggregated indicators and indicators that capture development benefits;
  13. Undertake critical analyses how the project has been delayed because of the COVID-19 and what are the mitigation measurements that the project should take to finish the project on-time with delivering all targets of the project as per agreed Results Framework/Log-frame.
  14. Progress Towards Results:

    Progress Towards Outcomes Analysis:

  15. Assist the international consultant to review the log-frame indicators against progress made towards the end-of-project targets using the Progress Towards Results Matrix and following the Guidance For Conducting Midterm Reviews of UNDP-Supported, GEF-Financed Projects; colour code progress in a “traffic light system” based on the level of progress achieved; assign a rating on progress for each outcome; make recommendations from the areas marked as “Not on target to be achieved” (red). The Logframe of the project will be shared with the successful candidate after the signature of the contractor.

    In addition to the progress towards outcomes analysis:

  16. Assist the international consultant to compare and analyse the GEF Tracking Tool/Core Indicators at the Baseline with the one completed right before the Midterm Review;
  17. Assist the international consultant to identify remaining barriers to achieving the project objective in the remainder of the project;
  18. By reviewing the aspects of the project that have already been successful, identify ways in which the project can further expand these benefits.
  19. Project Implementation and Adaptive Management

    Management Arrangements:

  20. Review overall effectiveness of project management as outlined in the Project Document.Have changes been made and are they effective?Are responsibilities and reporting lines clear?Is decision-making transparent and undertaken in a timely manner?Recommend areas for improvement;
  21. Review the quality of execution of the Executing Agency/Implementing Partner(s) and recommend areas for improvement;
  22. Review the quality of support provided by the GEF Partner Agency (UNDP) and recommend areas for improvement;
  23. Do the Executing Agency/Implementing Partner and/or UNDP and other partners have the capacity to deliver benefits to or involve women? If yes, how;
  24. “What is the gender balance of project staff? What steps have been taken to ensure gender balance in project staff”;
  25. What is the gender balance of the Project Board? What steps have been taken to ensure gender balance in the Project Board”.

    Work Planning:

  26. Review any delays in project start-up and implementation, identify the causes and examine if they have been resolved;
  27. Are work-planning processes results-based?If not, suggest ways to re-orientate work planning to focus on results;
  28. Together with international consultant examine the use of the project’s results framework/ logframe as a management tool and review any changes made to it since project start

    Finance and co-finance:

  29. Together with international consultant consider the financial management of the project, with specific reference to the cost-effectiveness of interventions;
  30. Together with international consultant review the changes to fund allocations as a result of budget revisions and assess the appropriateness and relevance of such revisions;
  31. Together with international consultant find out if the project has the appropriate financial controls, including reporting and planning, that allow management to make informed decisions regarding the budget and allow for timely flow of funds;
  32. Informed by the co-financing monitoring table to be filled out by the Commissioning Unit and project team, provide commentary on co-financing: is co-financing being used strategically to help the objectives of the project? Is the Project Team meeting with all co-financing partners regularly in order to align financing priorities and annual work plans;
  33. Include the separate GEF Co-Financing template (filled out by the Commissioning Unit and project team) which categorizes each co-financing amount as ‘investment mobilized’ or ‘recurrent expenditures’;
  34. The table of co-finance will be shared with the successful candidate after the signature of the contractor.

    Project-level Monitoring and Evaluation Systems:

  • Together with international consultant, review the monitoring tools currently being used:Do they provide the necessary information? Do they involve key partners? Are they aligned or mainstreamed with national systems?Do they use existing information? Are they efficient? Are they cost-effective? Are additional tools required? How could they be made more participatory and inclusive;
  • Together with international consultant examine the financial management of the project monitoring and evaluation budget.Are sufficient resources being allocated to monitoring and evaluation? Are these resources being allocated effectively;
  • Together with international consultant, review the extent to which relevant gender issues were incorporated in monitoring systems. See Annex 9 of Guidance For Conducting Midterm Reviews of UNDP-Supported, GEF-Financed Projects for further guidelines.

    Stakeholder Engagement:

  • Project management: Has the project developed and leveraged the necessary and appropriate partnerships with direct and tangential stakeholders;
  • Participation and country-driven processes: Do local and national government stakeholders support the objectives of the project?Do they continue to have an active role in project decision-making that supports efficient and effective project implementation;
  • Participation and public awareness: To what extent has stakeholder involvement and public awareness contributed to the progress towards achievement of project objectives;
  • How does the project engage women and girls?Is the project likely to have the same positive and/or negative effects on women and men, girls and boys?Identify, if possible, legal, cultural, or religious constraints on women’s participation in the project.What can the project do to enhance its gender benefits.

    Social and Environmental Standards (Safeguards)

  • Validate the risks identified in the project’s most current SESP, and those risks’ ratings; are any revisions needed;
  • Summarize and assess the revisions made since CEO Endorsement/Approval (if any) to:
  • The project’s overall safeguards risk categorization;
  • The identified types of risks[3] (in the SESP);
  • The individual risk ratings (in the SESP).
  • Describe and assess progress made in the implementation of the project’s social and environmental management measures as outlined in the SESP submitted at CEO Endorsement/Approval (and prepared during implementation, if any), including any revisions to those measures. Such management measures might include Environmental and Social Management Plans (ESMPs) or other management plans, though can also include aspects of a project’s design; refer to Question 6 in the SESP template for a summary of the identified management measures.

    A given project should be assessed against the version of UNDP’s safeguards policy that was in effect at the time of the project’s approval.


  • Together with international consultant, assess how adaptive management changes have been reported by the project management and shared with the Project Board;
  • Together with international consultant, assess how well the Project Team and partners undertake and fulfil GEF reporting requirements (i.e. how have they addressed poorly-rated PIRs, if applicable?);
  • Together with international consultant, assess how lessons derived from the adaptive management process have been documented, shared with key partners and internalized by partners.

    Communications & Knowledge Management:

  • Review internal project communication with stakeholders: Is communication regular and effective? Are there key stakeholders left out of communication? Are there feedback mechanisms when communication is received? Does this communication with stakeholders contribute to their awareness of project outcomes and activities and investment in the sustainability of project results;
  • Review external project communication: Are proper means of communication established or being established to express the project progress and intended impact to the public (is there a web presence, for example? Or did the project implement appropriate outreach and public awareness campaigns);
  • For reporting purposes, write one half-page paragraph that summarizes the project’s progress towards results in terms of contribution to sustainable development benefits, as well as global environmental benefits;
  • List knowledge activities/products developed (based on knowledge management approach approved at CEO Endorsement/Approval).


  • Validate whether the risks identified in the Project Document, Annual Project Review/PIRs and the ATLAS Risk Register are the most important and whether the risk ratings applied are appropriate and up to date. If not, explain why;
  • In addition, assess the following risks to sustainability.

    Financial risks to sustainability:

  • What is the likelihood of financial and economic resources not being available once the GEF assistance ends (consider potential resources can be from multiple sources, such as the public and private sectors, income generating activities, and other funding that will be adequate financial resources for sustaining project’s outcomes)

    Socio-economic risks to sustainability:

  • Are there any social or political risks that may jeopardize sustainability of project outcomes? What is the risk that the level of stakeholder ownership (including ownership by governments and other key stakeholders) will be insufficient to allow for the project outcomes/benefits to be sustained? Do the various key stakeholders see that it is in their interest that the project benefits continue to flow? Is there sufficient public / stakeholder awareness in support of the long-term objectives of the project? Are lessons learned being documented by the Project Team on a continual basis and shared/ transferred to appropriate parties who could learn from the project and potentially replicate and/or scale it in the future.

    Institutional Framework and Governance risks to sustainability:

  • Do the legal frameworks, policies, governance structures and processes pose risks that may jeopardize sustenance of project benefits? While assessing this parameter, also consider if the required systems/ mechanisms for accountability, transparency, and technical knowledge transfer are in place.

    Environmental risks to sustainability:

  • Are there any environmental risks that may jeopardize sustenance of project outcomes?.

    Conclusions & Recommendations:

    The MTR team will include a section in the MTR report for evidence-based conclusions, in light of the findings.

Additionally, the MTR consultant/team is expected to make recommendations to the Project Team. Recommendations should be succinct suggestions for critical intervention that are specific, measurable, achievable, and relevant. A recommendation table should be put in the report’s executive summary. See the Guidance For Conducting Midterm Reviews of UNDP-Supported, GEF-Financed Projects for guidance on a recommendation table. The MTR team should make no more than 15 recommendations in total.


The MTR team will include its ratings of the project’s results and brief descriptions of the associated achievements in a MTR Ratings & Achievement Summary Table in the Executive Summary of the MTR report. See Annex E for ratings scales. No rating on Project Strategy and no overall project rating is required. The annex will be shared with the successful candidate after the signature of the contract.

  1. Team Compositions:

A team of two independent consultants will conduct the MTR - one team leader (with experience and exposure to projects and evaluations in other regions globally) and one team expert (National Consultant), from the country of the project. The team leader (International Consultant) will be responsible for the overall design and writing of the Mid-term Evaluation Report and may work from home considering the COVID-19 mitigation measurements. The team expert (National Consultant) will assess emerging trends with respect to regulatory frameworks, budget allocations, capacity building, work with the Project Team in developing the MTR itinerary and will go to the relevant provinces to collect the required data and will have regular communication with the international consultant and make sure the data collected is correct and align with the GEF requirements. The consultants cannot have participated in the project preparation, formulation, and/or implementation (including the writing of the Project Document) and should not have a conflict of interest with project’s related activities.

[1] For ideas on innovative and participatory Monitoring and Evaluation strategies and techniques, see UNDP Discussion Paper: Innovations in Monitoring & Evaluating Results, 05 Nov 2013.

[2] For more stakeholder engagement in the M&E process, see the UNDP Handbook on Planning, Monitoring and Evaluating for Development Results, Chapter 3, pg. 93.

[3] Risks are to be labeled with both the UNDP SES Principles and Standards, and the GEF’s “types of risks and potential impacts”: Climate Change and Disaster; Disadvantaged or Vulnerable Individuals or Groups; Disability Inclusion; Adverse Gender-Related impact, including Gender-based Violence and Sexual Exploitation; Biodiversity Conservation and the Sustainable Management of Living Natural Resourc

Duties and Responsibilities

  1. Scope of Work and Deliverables with required working days and payment percentages:

Deliverable 1: MTR Inception Report: Document review and preparing MTR Inception Report (MTR Inception Report due no later than 2 weeks before the MTR mission), 5 working days to be completed on October 15, 2020;

Deliverable 2: Presentation of initial findings- last day of the MTR mission, one working day, to be completed on November 10, 2020;

Deliverable 3: Preparing draft report (due within 3 weeks of the MTR mission), 24 Working days, to be completed on December 10 2020;

Deliverable 4: Finalization of MTR report/ Incorporating audit trail from feedback on draft report (due within 1 week of receiving UNDP comments on the draft), 5 working days to be completed on December 31, 2020.

  1. Payment Schedule:
  • 20% payment upon satisfactory delivery of the final MTR Inception Report and approval by the Commissioning Unit;
  • 40% payment upon satisfactory delivery of the draft MTR report to the Commissioning Unit;
  • 40% payment upon satisfactory delivery of the final MTR report and approval by the Commissioning Unit and RTA (via signatures on the TE Report Clearance Form) and delivery of completed TE Audit Trail.

Criteria for issuing the final payment of 40%[1]:

  • The final MTR report includes all requirements outlined in the MTR TOR and is in accordance with the MTR guidance;
  • The final MTR report is clearly written, logically organized, and is specific for this project (i.e. text has not been cut & pasted from other MTR reports);
  • The Audit Trail includes responses to and justification for each comment listed.


  • The deliverables maybe delayed because of the COVID-19. The evaluation team has to inform the evaluation commission unit (UNDP Country Office) for any delay and mitigation measurement that explains the justification for no-cost extension;
  • In line with the UNDP’s financial regulations, when determined by the Commissioning Unit and/or the consultant that a deliverable or service cannot be satisfactorily completed due to the impact of COVID-19 and limitations to the MTR, that deliverable or service will not be paid;
  • Due to the current COVID-19 situation and its implications, a partial payment may be considered if the consultant invested time towards the deliverable but was unable to complete to circumstances beyond his/her control.
  1. MTR Arrangements:

The principal responsibility for managing this MTR resides with the Commissioning Unit. The Commissioning Unit for this project’s MTR is the UNDP Afghanistan Country Office;

The Commissioning Unit will contract the consultants and ensure the timely provision of per diems and travel arrangements within the country for the MTR team and will provide an updated stakeholder list with contact details (phone and email). The Project Team will be responsible for liaising with the MTR team to provide all relevant documents, set up stakeholder interviews, and arrange field visits.

[1] The Commissioning Unit is obligated to issue payments to the MTR team as soon as the terms under the ToR are fulfilled. If there is an ongoing discussion regarding the quality and completeness of the final deliverables that cannot be resolved between the Commissioning Unit and the MTR team, the Regional M&E Advisor and Vertical Fund Directorate will be consulted. If needed, the Commissioning Unit’s senior management, Procurement Services Unit and Legal Support Office will be notified as well so that a decision can be made about whether or not to withhold payment of any amounts that may be due to the evaluator(s), suspend or terminate the contract and/or remove the individual contractor from any applicable rosters.


Corporate Competencies:

  • Demonstrates integrity by modeling the UN’s values and ethical standards;
  • Displays cultural, gender, religion, race, nationality and age sensitivity and adaptability;
  • Treats all people fairly without favoritism.

Functional Competencies:

Knowledge Management and Learning:

  • In-depth practical knowledge of inter-disciplinary development issues;
  • Seeks and applies knowledge, information, and best practices from within and outside of UNDP.

Development and Operational Effectiveness:

  • Ability to lead strategic planning, change processes, results-based management and reporting;
  • Ability to lead formulation, oversight of implementation, monitoring and evaluation of development projects;
  • Ability to apply development theory to the specific country context to identify creative, practical approaches to overcome challenging situations.

Management and Leadership:

  • Builds strong relationships with clients, focuses on impact and result for the client and responds positively to feedback;
  • Consistently approaches work with energy and a positive, constructive attitude;
  • Demonstrates openness to change and ability to manage complexities;
  • Ability to lead effectively, mentoring as well as conflict resolution skills;
  • Demonstrates strong oral and written communication skills;
  • Remains calm, in control and good humored even under pressure;
  • Proven networking, team-building, organizational and communication skills

Required Skills and Experience


  • A Bachelor’s degree in Environment, Climate Change, Natural resources, or other closely related field


  • Relevant experience with result-based management evaluation methodologies;
  • Experience applying SMART indicators and reconstructing or validating baseline scenarios;
  • Experience in evaluating projects;
  • Experience in relevant technical areas for at least 2 years;
  • Demonstrated understanding of issues related to gender and Climate Change Adaptation;
  • Basic experience in gender sensitive evaluation and analysis;
  • Excellent communication skills;
  • Demonstrable analytical skills;
  • Project evaluation/review experiences within United Nations system will be considered an asset;
  • Experience with implementing evaluations remotely will be considered an asset.


  • Fluency in written and spoken English, Pashto and Dari.


The MTR team will be held to the highest ethical standards and is required to sign a code of conduct upon acceptance of the assignment. This MTR will be conducted in accordance with the principles outlined in the UNEG ‘Ethical Guidelines for Evaluation’. The MTR team must safeguard the rights and confidentiality of information providers, interviewees and stakeholders through measures to ensure compliance with legal and other relevant codes governing collection of data and reporting on data. The MTR team must also ensure security of collected information before and after the MTR and protocols to ensure anonymity and confidentiality of sources of information where that is expected. The information, knowledge and data gathered in the MTR process must also be solely used for the MTR and not for other uses without the express authorization of UNDP and partners

  1. Evaluation Method and Criteria:

Individual consultants will be evaluated based on the following methodology:

Cumulative analysis

  • The award of the contract shall be made to the individual consultant whose offer has been evaluated and determined as:
  • Responsive/compliant/acceptable, and;
  • 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%

Technical Criteria for Evaluation (70 points)

  • Criteria 1: Technical Approach and Methodology (Max 20 points). This 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;
  • Criteria 2: Work plan (Max 10 Points). The incumbent 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;
  • Criteria 3: Relevant experiences in area of specialization (climate change and project monitoring) (Max 10 points);
  • Criteria 4: Relevant experiences with GEF projects (Max 20 points);
  • Criteria 5: Interview (Max 10 Points).

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

Financial Evaluation (30%):

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

Working Arrangements

Institutional Arrangements:

  • The consultant will work under the direct supervision of the Livelihoods and Resilience Unit head in close coordination with programme analyst and provide update to the Project Manager of the of CDRRP project;

UNDP will provide office space and internet access, logistical support, transport and security, applicable to UNDP national personnel. The consultant however is expected to bring his/her own laptop and mobile phone and meet local communication costs (UNDP will provide a local pre-paid SIM card). Costs to arrange meetings, workshops, travel costs to and DSA during field visits (if any) shall be covered by UNDP.

Duration of the Work:

The total duration of the consultancy will be a maximum of 3 months (with maximum 35 working days),

Duty Station:

The consultant will work from Kabul in the UNDP Office, with missions to other locations in Afghanistan (Nangarhar, Jawzjan) required . The consultant will follow the working hours and weekends as applicable to UNDP staff. Consultant’s movement for meetings and consultations shall be coordinated by the UNDP office. The consultant is at all times required to observe UNDP security rules and regulations.


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 contractor shall propose a daily fee, which should be inclusive of her/his professional fee, local communication cost and insurance (inclusive of medical health insurance and evacuation). The number of working days for which the daily fee shall be payable under the contract is 35 working days.
  • 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 schedule of payment linked with deliverables and at the end of assignment. Payments will be made at the end of the assignment.

UNDP reserves the right to withhold all or a portion of payment if performance is unsatisfactory, if work/outputs are incomplete, not delivered or there is a failure to meet agreed-to deadlines

Documents to be included when submitting the proposals:

Interested national Consultant must submit the following documents/information to demonstrate their qualifications in one single PDF document.

Personal CV or P11, indicating all past experience from similar projects,

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

    • Brief description of why the individual considers him/herself as the most suitable for the assignment;
    • A methodology, on how they will approach and complete the assignment and work plan as indicated above.

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

Annex 1 - IC Contract Template (for information);

Added 2 years ago - Updated 2 years ago - Source: