Reviewer, CERF Disability Allocation

Result of Service Objectives, Users and Scope The main objective of the review is to generate learning from the disability envelope. Since the allocation was the first of its kind, identifying lessons learned, best practices and potential challenges will help generate learning to inform disability inclusion in humanitarian actions, including as it relates to using funding for advancing inclusion and targeted programming. The intended users of the review are the CERF secretariat, its Advisory Group, and other donors, and OCHA offices, country teams and Resident and Humanitarian Coordinators, as well as implementing agencies and OPDs, especially in the seven selected countries. The CERF secretariat will use the lessons generated by the review to inform the inclusion of disability considerations in its allocation processes. Other stakeholders will benefit from learning related to disability inclusions more generally, including as it relates to financing. The final report will be published on the CERF website. The review will focus on the disability envelope starting with the first conceptualization of the envelope to its implementation. The review may not cover the final stages of implementation or the final reports as implementation is likely to still be ongoing over the course of the review.

Research questions The overarching objective of the review is to assess whether the allocation met its stated objectives while also aiming to establish learning of broader relevance to advancing disability inclusion in humanitarian action. The main overarching research questions related to the allocation are: - What was the added value and/or disadvantages of earmarked disability funding compared to (and combined with) regular unearmarked CERF funding? - Did the dedicated funding envelope help to better address the specific requirements of persons with disabilities in the humanitarian response, compared to regular mainstreaming in CERF allocations? - Did the dedicated disability funding - and focus - catalyze lasting improvements, beyond the allocation, by strengthening collective structures and systems to enhance the ability of humanitarian actors to develop and implement quality programmes that are inclusive of persons with disabilities? - Did the allocation lead to greater accountability in the system, including by increasing and improving the participation of persons with disabilities and organizations of persons with disabilities? In addition, by examining experiences across the seven countries the review is also expected to provide learning of broader relevance to disability inclusion, including (but not limited to): - Examine, to the extent possible, the challenges, opportunities, and best practices for increasing the involvement of OPDs in humanitarian response, including in decision-making and implementation, in particular as it relates to disability inclusion. Specifically, the review will help answer the following detailed questions related to effectiveness and relevance, efficiency, coverage, and impact (the questions may be adjusted and/or prioritised during the inception phase of the review): - Effectiveness and Relevance: o To what extent did the envelope meet its stated objectives? o Did the disability envelope lead to a more effective response? o Did the funding envelope help better address the specific requirements of persons with disabilities by providing specific interventions and did it help remove barriers preventing people with disabilities accessing services? o Did the envelope sustain critical disability programming and address the needs of people with disabilities? o Were the parameters (e.g., in terms of criteria for country selection and prioritization of interventions) used for the allocation the right measures to better meet humanitarian needs? o Has the envelope assisted with strengthening the capacity of OPDs at country level? o Where the types of programme interventions proposed in the guidance note the right ones? o Was the longer implementation time of 18 months for the disability envelope appropriate? o How was the disability envelope integrated into the overall UFE allocation process, and did the earmarked funding envelope help improve disability inclusion for the rest of the UFE funding? o Did the focus on disability inclusion help direct or divert attention to/from other cross-cutting priorities (such as gender equality, GBV, AAP). - Efficiency: o Was the allocation process conducted efficiently? o To what extent, if any, did the prioritization of disability activities differ from the rest of the allocation? Was the linkage between the disability envelope and the overall UFE allocation clear, and was the integration of the two processes efficient? o Was clear guidance provided and were roles and responsibilities clearly assigned? o Was complementarity with CBPF allocations ensured in the relevant countries? o Was the involvement of disability experts in the preparation and implementation of the allocation process beneficial and appropriate? - Coverage: o Did country teams and agencies prioritise the types of activities proposed in the guidance note for the allocation? o Has the provision of the disability envelope directly led to more precise targeting of people with disabilities? If so, to what extent? o Have participating countries used CERF funding to focus on vulnerable groups that would otherwise not have been reached? - Impact: o Has the allocation catalysed lasting improvements by strengthening collective structures and systems to enhance the ability of humanitarian actors to develop and implement quality programmes that are inclusive of persons with disabilities? o Has the allocation led to greater accountability in the system (within and beyond the CERF process), including by increasing and improving the participation of persons with disabilities and organizations of persons with disabilities? o Has a change been registered by the targeted persons with disabilities regarding their inclusion in humanitarian response, including through availability of services, possibilities of access services and assistance, wider prioritization of their needs, etc.? o How has the envelope shaped relationships at country level, including between the UN and OPDs, beyond the allocation process? o Has the allocations resulted in better participation by OPDs in humanitarian decision-making and coordination fora? o Has the envelope led to co-benefits such as improved access (e.g., to services for people with disabilities or to funding for OPDs), better relations with partners or as a catalyst to raise more funding (for the overall response, for disability inclusive programming or for individual OPDs)?

Methodology The review will be conducted remotely and will include a desk review, interviews at headquarters and field level along with field visits to up to three case study countries. At the end of each country visit, the reviewer should offer the country team a debrief meeting to present, discuss and validate the main findings, conclusions, and recommendations from each case study country.

Stakeholders to be interviewed include: OCHA (including CERF), UN and NGO staff involved in the allocation in country offices; RC/HCs; Cluster Coordinators, protection and gender advisors, organizations of persons with disabilities, persons with disabilities and others involved in the allocation process. The reviewer will have access to all documents related to the UFE allocation.

Governance The review is commissioned by the Guidance, Learning and Reporting Section within OCHA’s Pooled Fund Management Branch who will manage the assignment in close cooperation with the CERF secretariat.

Work Location home-based

Expected duration Five months with the possibility of extension.

Duties and Responsibilities OCHA seeks to hire a consultant to conduct a review of the Central Emergency Response Fund’s (CERF) allocation to benefit disability programming. Every year, the Emergency Relief Coordinator (ERC) allocates funding from CERF’s Underfunded Emergencies (UFE) Window to address core emergency humanitarian needs in chronically underfunded emergencies. In 2021, the ERC allocated US$125 million to 12 countries. To better address the needs of persons with disabilities, the ERC allocated a further $10 million to seven of these 12 countries. This CERF disability envelope sought to promote the must-do actions identified in the IASC’s guidelines on the Inclusion of persons with disabilities in humanitarian action (2019), including: - The promotion of meaningful participation of persons with disabilities in all processes regarding humanitarian programmes. - The removal of barriers to ensure persons with disabilities aren’t prevented from accessing services. - The disaggregation of data to help monitor inclusion of persons with disabilities, and - The empowerment of persons with disabilities, equipping them with the knowledge and skills needed to contribute to and benefit from humanitarian assistance and protection. The funding was made available to address foundational issues and advance programming for persons with disabilities. As explained in the guidance note prepared for the allocation, the objectives of the additional CERF funding for persons with disabilities were to: - Address the specific requirements of persons with disabilities by providing specific interventions. - Catalyze lasting improvements by strengthening collective structures and systems to enhance the ability of humanitarian actors to develop and implement quality programmes that are inclusive of persons with disabilities. - Promote greater accountability in the system, including by increasing and improving the participation of persons with disabilities and organizations of persons with disabilities. UN recipients of CERF funding were encouraged to form partnerships with Organizations for Persons with Disabilities (OPDs) or seek to create committees that engage persons with disabilities or disability experts in governance mechanisms where OPDs do not exist.

CERF selected seven countries based on consultations with disability experts about the existing capacities to deliver support and expand partnerships with OPDs, and opportunities to strengthen the overall approach to inclusion. Afghanistan, Syria, South Sudan, and Venezuela were all chosen primarily based on significant needs present on the ground, as well as the possibility to expand operational partnerships that support disability inclusion. Mozambique, Nigeria, and DRC were selected principally based on significant operational activities on the ground to support inclusion, as well as existing partnerships on disability programming.

Qualifications/special skills Skills: Proven ability to conduct in-depth research on humanitarian action; Ability to formulate advice and guidance on humanitarian programming; Strong writing skills, including ability to communicate technical information to non-expert audience; Knowledge of disability programming and of legal and other frameworks relating disability inclusion in humanitarian action, such as the IASC Guidelines on inclusion of persons with disabilities. Academic Qualifications: Advanced university degree (Master’s degree or equivalent) in international affairs, international development, development economic, public policy, or related field. A first-level university degree in combination with qualifying experience may be accepted in lieu of the advanced university degree. Experience: A minimum of seven years of progressively responsible experience in humanitarian action and/or international development is required. Experience drafting evaluation reports and/or guidance is required. Knowledge of disability programming and humanitarian pooled funds is desirable. Language: Fluency in English is a requirement. Knowledge of other languages, such as French, Arabic, Spanish or Portuguese, is considered a significant advantage.

No Fee THE UNITED NATIONS DOES NOT CHARGE A FEE AT ANY STAGE OF THE RECRUITMENT PROCESS (APPLICATION, INTERVIEW MEETING, PROCESSING, OR TRAINING). THE UNITED NATIONS DOES NOT CONCERN ITSELF WITH INFORMATION ON APPLICANTS’ BANK ACCOUNTS.