Evaluability Assessment Consultant
Evaluability Assessment Consultant - Independent Evaluation Unit (IEU) Remote
The Green Climate Fund (GCF) is a multilateral fund created to make significant and ambitious contributions to the global efforts to combat climate change. The GCF contributes to achieving the objectives of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the Paris Agreement. In the context of sustainable development, the GCF aims to promote a paradigm shift towards low-emission and climate-resilient development pathways by providing support to developing countries to limit or reduce their greenhouse gas emissions and to adapt to climate change, while accounting for their needs and supporting particularly those that are vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate change. The GCF is governed by a Board, composed of an equal number of members from developed and developing countries. It is operated by an independent Secretariat headed by an Executive Director.
The Independent Evaluation Office (IEU) of the GCF, is mandated by the GCF Board under paragraph 60 of its governing instrument inform its decision making. Specifically, the governing instrument states “… the Board will establish an operationally independent evaluation unit as part of the core structure of the Fund. The head of the unit will be selected by, and will report to, the Board. The frequency and types of evaluation to be conducted will be specified by the unit in agreement with the Board.”
The IEU has several objectives:
(a) Informing decision-making by the Board and identifying and disseminating lessons learned, contributing to guiding the GCF and stakeholders as a learning institution, providing strategic guidance;
(b) Conducting periodic independent evaluations of GCF performance to objectively assess the results of the GCF and the effectiveness and efficiency of its activities; and (c) Providing evaluation reports to the Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the Paris Agreement for purposes of periodic reviews of the Financial Mechanism. 1
The IEU has a mandate for both discharging an accountability function and supporting a learning function. These are central to the GCF being a learning organization as laid out in its Governing 3
Instrument and its initial strategic plan. The responsibilities of the IEU are as follows:
(d) Evaluation: The IEU will undertake independent overall, portfolio, country, thematic, programme evaluations that inform GCF strategic result areas. In key cases, it will also support and undertake project evaluations. The IEU will use relevant and innovative methods and an independent peer-review mechanism that will provide guidance on independent
1 The Conference of Parties to the UNFCCC provides the following guidance on the function of the IEU: “The reports of the GCF should include any reports of the independent evaluation unit, including for the purposes of the periodic reviews of the financial mechanism of the Convention” (UNFCCC decision 5/CP19, annex, paragraph 20).
2 Board document B.16/18
3 Annex I to decision B.12/20.
4 Annex I to decision GCF/B.05/03. evaluations. The vision, criteria and guidelines for these will be laid out in the Independent evaluation policy. The IEU is also mandated to independently peer review and attest the
quality of GCF self-evaluation; 5
(e) Advisory and capacity support: The IEU is required to advise the Board by synthesizing
findings and lessons learned from its evaluations. These findings and lessons learned are
expected to also inform the Executive Director of the Secretariat and other GCF
stakeholders. The IEU will engage closely with the independent evaluation units of
intermediaries and implementing entities of the GCF, including national designated
authorities (NDAs) and accredited entities (AEs). It will provide support to catalyse learning
and build and strengthen NDA and AE evaluation capacity. It will also provide guidelines and
support evaluation-related research that helps produce rigorous evidence in GCF result areas;
(f) Learning: The IEU will support the GCF in its learning function by ensuring that
recommendations from independent evaluations are incorporated into the Secretariat’s
functioning and processes. This includes recommending possible improvements to the GCF
performance indicators and its initial results8framework, after accounting for international
experience and the results of evaluation;
(i) Engagement: The IEU will actively participate in relevant evaluation networks to ensure that it
is at the frontier of evaluation practice. The IEU will involve its own staff and staff from NDAs
and AEs in evaluations wherever feasible and appropriate. In addition, the IEU will support
knowledge hubs of low-emission and climate-resilient pathways.
The short-term consultant will be responsible for helping the Head of the IEU assess the evaluability of
the Fund approved proposals and more precisely their impact evaluability using different criteria and
best practices in the field.
The short-term consultant will be remotely based and will work up to 60 days. The consultancy may
also include a week’s visit to the Fund’s headquarters in Songdo, Incheon City, Republic of Korea so the
consultant may engage with key secretariat staff and with the IEU. This is a unique opportunity to help
inform the evaluability and quality of GCF programmes and projects at start-up as well as inform key
conditions for agreements with potential accredited entities and nationally designated authorities. It
also offers the opportunity to think out-of-the-box in innovative ways to ensure that quality at entry is
strong to inform high quality, credible evaluations of programmes, policies and activities in GCF result
III. Duties and responsibilities
Under the overall guidance of the Head of the IEU, s/he will be responsible for analysing the GCF’s
portfolio of approved programmes and programmes in the pipeline, as well as agreements with
5 Decisions B.12/12 and 20.
6 Annex III to decision B.06/09
7 Syntheses will include not just evidence from GCF funded programmes and policies but also from other agencies that are relevant to the GCF’s result areas.
8 Annex III to decision B.06/09
9 See note 7 above.
10 Annex I to decision GCF/B.05/03.independent entities and implementing entities to produce a study that is an analysis of the following topics:
A. Overall evaluability and impact evaluability analyses
- Assess the evaluability of the Fund’s approved proposals/Funded Activity Agreements as well other accreditation agreements to outline key areas that may be improved in pre-qualification requirements, reporting and in design that will increase their evaluability;
- Examinetheproject approval process and assess thebest timeand opportunity forevaluability criteria to be incorporated. Evaluability assessment will use the best practices in the field;
- Examine the GCF’s results framework and performance framework and assess reporting requirements and reports on indicators and measurements as included in submitted documentsaswellastheirtiming,methods,relevance,measurability,timeliness,feasibilityand sufficiency. In the context of the GCF’s results and performance framework, examine what would make programmes/projects impact evaluable in GCF’s result areas and make recommendations;
- Assess GCF documents through a desk study to examine the follow topics: o Theory of change: What is the quality of the (implicit or explicit) theories of change and program logic? Are causal pathways clearly identified and discussed? Are unintended consequences referred to and identified robustly in the programme theory of change and/or in the surrounding literature reviews? Is good quality evidence cited to discuss the efficacy of causal linkages? How robust are the causal linkages (implicit or explicit) and are they well informed by high quality evidence? Are methods for measuring attributable causal changes (outcomes or impact or other) discussed? o Targeting and eligibility: Are eligibility and targeting criteria well-articulated in submitted documents? What else is required? o Impactevaluation: Towhatextentiscausalchangeidentifiableandmeasurable(i.e.impact evaluability) in the proposal, implicitly or explicitly; What are possible impact evaluation methods including experimental and quasi- experimental methodsbut alsoothermethods such as process tracing, social network analyses etc. that may be used to undertake possible impact evaluations of approved programs? Has baseline data been collected and/or is there a requirement for this? What is its (potential) quality of data? Are these suitable for impact evaluations? Are there potential areas of bias that are likely to creep in unless controlled for in any evaluation that is carried out? How can these be mitigated? o Implementation fidelity: Is there adequate and reliable information included in the proposalregardingimplementationfidelitytoensureprogrammewillbewellimplemented in terms of monitoring method and its frequency? What else can be included judiciously (while considering burdens of time and money) that may increase the evaluability of programmes? Are current reporting requirements o Costs: To what extent are included requirements for monitoring and evaluation adequate and able to cover costs of undertaking high quality evaluations and impact evaluations? What activities as included in the proposals that focus on ‘economic analyses’ and ‘overall monitoring and evaluation incorporated’ and are these sufficient for high quality credible evaluations? o Paradigm shift, impact and scalability: The extent to which paradigm shift and impact potential are identifiable and measurable in the proposal? How well are other GCF investment criteria informed and are these measurable and verifiable with high credibility and quality? B. Incremental cost calculations and additionality
- To what extent to project documents include incremental cost analyses. For approved projects and programmes, this will include a tabulation of incremental costs comparisons; It will also include a tabulation of cost of carbon dioxide mitigated by country; tabulation of cost of adaptation by country – costs per person. C. Otherconditions as discussed and mutually agreed upon.
IV. Minimum required experience and qualifications
- Advanced university degree in economics, law, applied social sciences; preferably good understanding of quantitative analyses;
- At least 10 years’ of relevant experience in evaluation and evaluation related research;
- Deep knowledge of theory of change, impact evaluation methodology including measurement of causal change, evaluation design;
- Exposure to climate change topics including mitigation and adaptation is an advantage;
- Initiative, independent thinker and self-starter with enough skills to liaise with HQ staffs to understand some of details;
- Excellent communication and engagement skills (including written and oral);
- Analytical and organizational skills, sound judgement, decision making abilities, tactful and diplomatic demeanour and capable of working under strict timelines;
- Ability to read and communicate fluently in English; the ability to read and communicate in one or more other major languages (French, Spanish, Russian, Chinese, Arabic) is desirable but not required;
- Experience of establishing strong working relationships with colleagues from different functions and cultures.
V. Outputs and timeline
There are two main outputs. The first is an evaluability checklist. The second is a final paper.
- Checklist:Thisisanevaluabilityandanimpactevaluabilitychecklistforaprogramme/project/policy funded by the GCF that will first be piloted with a few entities and then be finalized.
- A final paper that will present an analysis of the portfolio which will likely consist of approximately 50 full proposals and other documents including the GCF results frameworks, performance frameworks as well as requirements in the funding proposal templates, the reporting templates and agreement templates.
The consultant will be expected to start as soon as possible. A brief scope and approach paper will be
required by July 2017. A final paper will be required by September 2017.
VI. Application process and requirements
Interestedcandidates are required tosend an email attaching their CVanda letterof interest.
In the letter of interest kindly include specifically
1) your experience in working with new offices and particularly an example of where you have
displayed out of the box thinking in a professional set up;
2) experience and exposure to the evaluation methodologies and particularly experience with
impact evaluation methods that help to identify and measure causal change;
3) Your experience with building and assessing theories of change;
4) Experience in the field of climate change;
5) An overall budget for this task.Please send this ina singlefile to: firstname.lastname@example.org and email@example.com
File name: “[last name], [first name]” (e.g. Peterson, Anna)
Subject line: “Evaluability Assessment Consultant - IEU”
Please indicate yourearliest availability to take up assignment.
Applications should be submitted by 7 May 2017, andshortlisting will take place on a rolling basis till a
suitable candidate is identified.
Applications fromwomen and nationals from developing countries are strongly encouraged.
Upon submission of your application, you will receive an automatic e-mail acknowledging receipt of your
application. Should you not receive a response, however, please check your spam/clutter mail before
resubmitting your application. Please also ensure to use the correct spelling for the subject line of your e- mail. Thank you.
- Organization: GCF - Green Climate Fund
- Grade: International Consultant
- Closing Date: 2017-05-07