National Consultant - Mid-term review of the Human Security project in Soa, chiefdom, Gbense & Kamara chiefdoms in Sierra Leone

Consultant Elections & Governance

Contract

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

Background

The Human Security joint programme (JP) uses the Human Security Approach to address development challenges and vulnerabilities in three chiefdom areas of Kono District of Sierra Leone. It aims accelerate Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) implementation, while increasing ownership in the local community. Through a people-centred, context-specific framework, this programme advances the livelihood and dignity of people in the community, particularly those who are most vulnerable.

The target area is three chiefdoms in the Kono District of Sierra Leone, (Kamara, Gbense, and Soa) that face multiple interconnected development challenges, in the context of a country setting with high rates of poverty and food insecurity. Over the years, these chiefdoms experienced civil conflict, unsustainable mining practices, and destructive forestry activities that have negatively impacted the survival, livelihood and dignity of the residents. Although Kono district has a productive mineral sector and has attracted many people from other parts of the country, it is one of the poorest districts in the country.

Intersecting challenges include a non-diversified economy and inadequate governance systems for community decision making. Kono District is considered a conflict hot spot due to the regionalized party politics, especially during periods surrounding elections. This political struggle has resulted in frequent clashes between youth, security personnel and traditional leaders, often fuelled by the lack of productive livelihood opportunities for youth and a strong belief among young people that their needs are not met by the national and local leadership structures. The enabling environment is not present for them to participate actively in national or local decision-making processes. This is especially true for vulnerable groups, such as women and girls and persons with disabilities.

Low agricultural productivity stems partly from the high demand placed on land for mining rather than farming, but also from lack of productive inputs to the sector. A high proportion of farming households are engaged in sustenance farming, rather than cash crop farming, and a poor road network presents challenges for access to markets. Plus, there is a lack of knowledge on climate-smart growing techniques and value-added processes.

The multifaceted nature of the programmes is in keeping with the human security people-centred approach and fosters a community that is more resilience to internal and external shocks, whether political, economic, or natural. The programme is designed in a way that one arm ensures transformational community governance through empowerment, knowledge, capacity and diverse input to decision making, whilst the other enables sustainable agriculture, food security, livelihood and economic diversity and resilience. Together, these initiatives support the community’s cohesiveness, livelihood, and dignity.

Through support for registration and the provision of seed funds, microcredit, and loan schemes to youth-led cooperatives, the programme will enhance bottom-up community empowerment and bring concrete, sustainable benefits. Enhancing the economic role of youth considering mutually supportive of the other initiatives designed to increase the role of youth in community decision making.

The climate-smart agriculture approach not only focuses to protect the environment, but also reclaim land considered unusable for agriculture due to previous mining activities. It aims at promoting responsible management of land, crops, livestock, aquaculture and ‘capture fisheries’ to balance near-term food security and livelihoods needs with long-term priorities for climate change adaptation and mitigation.

The project seeks to achieve –

1. Outcome 1: The community enjoys economic, political and community security, with expanded social cohesion, all of which promote and sustain peace.
   1. Output 1.1: The foundation for a diversified economy that provides sustainable economic benefits for all
   2. Output 1.2: Programs to reduce political tensions, improve social cohesion, and foster a non-violence culture among youth.
   3. Output 1.3: Locally led mechanisms for addressing grievances and platforms for inclusive decision-making, along with enhanced community capacities and skills to address insecurities.
   4. Output 1.4: The community has sustainable WASH service delivery
2. Outcome 2: Community farmers realize improved livelihoods, higher incomes, and reduced vulnerability to climate, economic, and other shocks through sustainable farming that also improves the nutrition status of all community residents
   1. Outputs 2.1: Inputs and structures needed for sustainable, integrated community farming activities (production, processing, and marketing) to include year-round vegetables, rice, bananas and cassava, as well as honeybees, fish, poultry and livestock.
   2. Output 2.2: Training for farmers on agribusiness, land reclamation, Climate smart resilience farming and enterprise development for recovery, development and sustainability.
   3. Output 2.3: Market linkages established between the community and private/public partners for the sale of farm produce and other agricultural products

The project covered the Soa, Kamara & Gbense Chiefdoms of Kono District.

The programme is being implemented through the following partner institutions –

• SEND Sierra Leone
• Fambul Tok International
• Network Movement for Justice & Development
• Political Party Registration Commission
• FAO is implementing directly in collaboration with the Ministry of Agriculture.

Overall, it is assumed that the review process will be an excellent project instrument which helps for a compressive and systematic reflection of the project. The process is instrumental since it highlights the achievements and it forwards recommendations from everyone involved towards an enhanced future of the project. UNDP therefore seeks the services of an international consultant to conduct the mid-term review with the following objectives -

Objectives

The review will assess the performance of first half of the Project in achieving its intended results.

• Evaluate the Project vis-à-vis it’s intended objective of strengthening Human Security in the 3 chiefdoms through the human security approach;
• To identify specific outcomes and assess the effectiveness of the project over the first phase of implementation;
• To advise how different aspects of the project can be enhanced in the final stage – with a specific focus on how local results can feed into replicable models in other communities or at national level;
• Draw up recommendations based on the review of achievements, successes, challenges, lessons of the project interventions;

Key Focus Areas

Relevance

• Has the project targeted the most appropriate beneficiaries? Who are the beneficiaries? Was the selection all inclusive? Did it engage beneficiaries in identifying their needs and/or modes or participation?
• To what extent is the project relevant under the existing socio-economic and political context? How does the project align with SDGs?
• Is the project located in the most suitable and appropriate counterparts?
• To what extent does the overall and specific outcomes contribute towards the attainment of human security in Soa, Gbense & Kamara Chiefdoms?
• What types of interconnected challenges are addressed by the project? Is the response strategy by the project relevant?

Design

• Does the project design (i.e. priorities, outcomes, outputs and activities) address the stakeholder needs that were identified? Specifically, does the project design addresses the human security issues in their communities?
• Does the project include appropriate activities towards specified outcomes? How appropriate and useful are the indicators described in the project workplan in assessing the project’s achievements? Are the targeted indicators realistic and can they be tracked?
• Does the project promote integration across partners? In what ways in this integration manifested in the programme design?
• How fair or feasible are the project assumptions and sound analysis of the context?
• Have risks been properly identified and addressed in project design and implementation?
• Are instruments and tools essential for the project identified from the very outset of the project?
• How were project sites selected?

Efficiency

• How efficient is the project in terms of proper resource utilization, delivery, timeliness and expertise?
• Is the project participatory in all its aspects?
• What strategies are UNDP & FAO employing to ensure strong partnership? How are each of these strategies contributing to an integrated approach, efficiency, better engagement with local communities, and new ways of approaching local challenges, among others?
• How is the overall partnership between UNDP/FAO and the implementing partners? And how has this impacted on efficiency? (Positive or negative)
• How is the project managed to achieve agreed results?
• Does the project management arrangement include various stakeholders? If so, how did this facilitate efficiency and result orientation of the project?
• How have stakeholders been involved in project implementation?
• How effective has the project been in establishing national ownership?
• Does the project receive adequate technical and administrative support from UNDP, FAO and its national implementing partners?

Coherence

• How integrated are the project interventions?
• To what extent are the interventions coherent with other interventions which have similar objectives?
• To what extent is the intervention coherent internally?
• To what extent is the intervention coherent with wider UN policy?

Result

• What are the core results attained by the project? Had the project contributed to the overall improvement of conflict management and resolving capacity of the community?
• What has changed as a result of the introduction and implementation of this project at community/district level?
• Have situations improved in the project areas?
• What local mechanisms and systems have been put in place as a result of the project? What are their eventual contributions to human security and peace?
• To what extent the locally led mechanisms are applying the human security approach?
• How/where human security brings values in the establishment of the locally led mechanisms?
• Stakeholders understand human security and do they use the terminology when discussing the project
• How can local authorities and communities sustain the outcomes of the project?

General Inquiry

• To what extent are existing local solutions incorporated into and/or providing the foundation for the programme? Has this helped scale local initiatives?
• To what extent has there been co-creation with local communities/actors?
• What strengths, assets and capacities at the local level are being leveraged in the programme? What are the outcomes of this?
• To what extent has the programme strengthened the link between national and local actors on development issues? How has this been achieved? What are the implications?
• Have there been mechanisms or processes that enable regular interaction between diverse actors (national and municipal officials, community leaders, grassroots organizations, and the private sector, etc.)? What have been the outcomes of these mechanisms or processes?
• To what extent has the programme strengthened the link across sectors in advancing development initiatives? How has this been achieved? What are the implications?
• What is the role of municipal leaders in the programme?
• To what extent has local ownership of the development progress increased? What are the indications of this?
• To what extent has the programme introduced or enhanced participatory governance? What are the indications of this?

Redesign and reconsideration

• Best practices for future considerations by the project?
• Aspects of the project that need redesigning and reshaping?
• New result areas to be considered?
• Project instruments and tools for consideration?

Adjustments to strengthen the application of human security?

Application Process

Applicants are requested to apply online at http://jobs.undp.org by 11th August 2022. The application document can be accessed on https://procurement-notices.undp.org. Candidates are invited to submit applications together with their CV for these positions. UNDP applies a fair and transparent selection process that will consider the competencies/skills of the applicants as well as their financial proposals. Qualified women and members of social minorities are encouraged to apply. Interested applicants should send an email to: [email protected] for any inquiries

Duties and Responsibilities

Scope of work:

The evaluator will undertake the following tasks:

• Conduct a desk review and analysis of reports related to the project
• Consult with the Project management team on the scope of work, methodology and possible case studies to be selected;
• Draft the inception report outlining the evaluation methodology as well as interview and work plan and schedule;
• Develop the research questions and interview questionnaires based on the agreed evaluation plan and other creative methodologies to collect data from the various stakeholders as and project beneficiaries in line with the project objectives
• Conduct interviews with the relevant Project staff, donors, implementing partners, and other selected stakeholders;
• Undertake field visits to selected communities to evaluate the effectiveness of the project at the community level;
• Identify key learnings from our strategy and propose some recommendations to inform and improve future programs/projects.
• Draft the evaluation report based on the findings for the review of the programme team;
• Conduct a presentation on the draft report to the Project team and incorporate feedback from the Joint Programme management;

Submit final evaluation report to the Programme Management team.

Expected Output

Duration

Target Dates

Responsible for review

1. Inception report outlining the evaluation methodology and suggested report outline

7 days

TBD

UNDP

1. Submission of interview reports

14 days

TBD

UNDP

1. Presentation of the initial findings of the mid-term review to the Project Team

14 days

TBD

UNDP

1. Draft evaluation report and PowerPoint presentation on findings on the draft report to the Project Team

7 days

TBD

UNDP

1. Final report, based on feedback received from the programme team

7 days

MoPED

MoPED / UNDP

Competencies

Substantive and technical expertise in one or more of the following issues:

• Design of Integrated and comprehensive development approaches to addressing vulnerability including the Human Security Approach
• Good understanding of programming modalities, particularly in post-conflict settings is an asset.
• Strong Proactive in problem-solving and recommendation for conflict prevention and resolution.
• Ability in managing confidential and politically sensitive issues, in a responsible way, and in accordance with protocols.

Interpersonal and communication skills:

• Strong communication skills and proven ability to collaborate between different actors and high level of internal and external relationship management;
• Uses tact and sensitivity when delivering sensitive information or resolving delicate issues;
• Demonstrates openness to change and ability to manage complexities.
• Remains calm, in control even under pressure.
• Demonstrates strong ability to manage, facilitate, and engage in discussions with multiple stakeholders in a formal setting, seeking to encourage participation in an open and collegial environment.
• Proactive in problem-solving and recommendation for conflict prevention and resolution;
• Strong communication skills and proven ability to collaborate between different actors and high level of internal and external relationship management;
• Uses tact and sensitivity when delivering sensitive information or resolving delicate
• Demonstrates openness to change and ability to manage complexities;

Remains calm, in control and good humoured even under pressure.

Required Skills and Experience

Master’s degree in social science, Peace & Development, Political Science or related field

Apply now

Added 1 year ago - Updated 1 year ago - Source: jobs.undp.org