National Consultancy for Final Evaluation of the Low Emission Climate Resilient Development (LECReD) Programme (Only for Maldivian Nationals)

Background

The Republic of Maldives is highly vulnerable to climate change due to its low-lying geography that makes it susceptible to flooding and inundation, and its dependence on economic activities that are sensitive to climate change, such as fishing and tourism. It is also highly dependent on imported fossil fuels for its energy supply and this represents a major source of greenhouse gas emissions for the country. Consequently, the Maldives has made significant commitments to the pursuit of a low emission climate resilient development agenda. However, ongoing decentralization reforms, fiscal crisis and low capacity at the sub-national level, mean that local planning is not reflective of national level commitments.

The 3-year United Nations (UN) Joint Programme, "Low Emission and Climate Resilient Development" (LECReD) funded by the Government of Denmark, responds to the United Nations Development Assistance Framework (UNDAF) Outcome 9: “Enhanced capacities at national and local levels to support low carbon life-styles, climate change adaptation, and disaster risk reduction” and builds on the comparative strengths of United Nations Organizations including UNDP, UNICEF, UNOPS, UNFPA, UN WOMEN, WHO and FAO. The programme is innovative and represents a pioneering initiative of bringing together the wealth of diverse development-oriented expertise from these United Nations Organizations (UNOs) with equally diverse national and local partners to address this multi-faceted development challenge.

The programme is assisting Laamu Atoll and its islands to realize low emission and climate resilient development (LECReD). The programme seeks to mainstream LECReD issues into local level development planning and service delivery for greater community-level ownership and sustainability of programme benefits. Towards this objective, the programme is assisting local councils, civil society, private sector and other local stakeholders to establish platforms for stronger partnerships, improved coordination, and enhanced participation in local planning for LECReD; it is strengthening data and knowledge systems for LECReD; it will improve local level LECReD development planning and management of service delivery; and through a learning-by-doing approach will establish early lessons and build demand for LECReD planning and management for replication and scaling-up.

The aim is that the local development plans (at atoll and individual island levels) will evolve from stand-alone action plans into more strategic and evidence-based instruments, which are climate smart and able to mobilize public and private investment. This programme will be closely linked to the existing national development planning cycle and will build capacity of local and national partners engaged in these local processes. The rationale being that lessons learned will be used to inform replication throughout the country and directly support the national agenda.

In pursuit of the core objective, the programme will achieve the following outputs:

• Output 1: Partnership, coordination and participation platform for local LECReD planning and action is strengthened.
• Output 2: Data and knowledge systems established or identified to support evidence-based planning and policy development for LECReD at the local level.
• Output 3: Improved Local Level Planning and Management for LECReD.
• Output 4: Practical local experience in LECReDs interventions leads to learning and promotes replication.

As per the programme document, an independent final evaluation will be undertaken towards the end of the programme. The final evaluation will focus on reviewing performance and advising on the sustainability of the programme after its closure. This will include a detailed review of the risks and assumptions and indicators identified in the Results Framework.”

The planned final evaluation/review of the LECReD programme will assess the level of its implementation based on the effectiveness and efficiency of delivery and the operational and coordination structures of the programme that was carried out. - Preparatory work for this review has been undertaken by LECReD’s Programme Coordination Unit (PCU), the United Nations Technical Group (UNTG) and a participatory review meeting has been promoted with the Programme Technical Committee (PTC), composed of agency and Maldives government representatives.

Overall Goal of Evaluation

The purpose of this Final Programme Evaluation is to provide stakeholders with an overall independent appraisal of LECReD programme performance and impact. It also seeks to promote accountability, and record achievements, performance, impacts, good practices and lessons learnt from implementation of LECReD Programme.

Duties and Responsibilities

The consultant will be home-based with travel to Male’ and Laamu during the period of the assignment and is expected to conduct her/his assignment in a participatory manner, involving LECReD staff and stakeholders to ensure full ownership of the process and its results.  She/he will consult all key documentation, including programmatic and management related documents. In that regard, the consultant will:

• Review key documentation as suggested by the RCO/PCU and others that the consultant may deem important;
• Conduct individual interviews with LECReD team to have their perceptions of  the management structures and ideas on the possible strategies for sustainability beyond the programme closure;
• Conduct working sessions with all stakeholders as deemed relevant to discuss findings;
• Regularly brief senior management on all steps and findings on the process.

Evaluation Question:

The evaluation is based on the UNEG guidelines and it will apply the Development Co-operation Directorate (DCD-DAC) evaluation criteria of relevance, efficiency, effectiveness, and sustainability as well as the additional criterion of human rights and gender equality by addressing the following questions (note that the questions are not comprehensive and the evaluation consultant is expected to build on them for a thorough evaluation)

Relevance: The extent to which the objectives of a development intervention are consistent with the needs and interest of the people, the needs of the country.

1. How has the JP contributed to solve the needs and problems identified in the design phase, in particular with reference to the baseline situation?
2. To what extent was the joint programme aligned with national development strategies and the UNDAF (2014-2017)?
3. To what extent was the joint programme the best option to respond to development challenges described in the programme document?
4. To what extent are the objectives of the joint programme still valid in the context of national policy objectives?
5. To what extent have the implementing partners participating in the joint programme contributed added value to solve the development challenges stated in the programme document?

Effectiveness: Extent to which the objectives of the development intervention have been achieved.

1. To what extent did the joint programme attain the outputs and outcomes described in the programme document?
2. What were the major factors influencing achievement or non-achievement of the programme objectives?
3. What good practices, success stories, lessons learnt and replicable experiences have been identified? Please describe and document them.

1. To what extent did the joint programme help to increase stakeholder/citizen dialogue and or engagement on development issues and policies?
2. Were programme risks being appropriately managed?

Efficiency: Extent to which resource/inputs (funds, time, human resources, etc.) have been turned into results.

1. To what extent was the joint programme's management model (governance and decision-making structure) efficient in comparison to the development results attained?
2. To what extent were joint programme's outputs and outcomes synergistic and coherent to achieve better results when compared to single-agency interventions? What efficiency gains/losses were there as a result?
3. What type of work methodologies, financial instruments, and business practices did the implementing partners use to promote/improve efficiency?
4. What type of (administrative, financial and managerial) obstacles did the joint programme face and to what extent have these affected its efficiency?

Impact: Positive and negative effects of the intervention on development outcome.

1. To what extent and in what ways did the joint programme contribute to the higher level development objectives?
2. To what extent did the joint programme have an impact on the targeted beneficiaries? Were all targeted beneficiaries reached? Which were left out?
3. What unexpected/unintended effects did the joint programme have, if any?

Sustainability: Probability of the benefits of the intervention continuing in the long term.

1. Which mechanisms already existed and which have been put in place by the joint programme to ensure results and impact, i.e. policy, policy coordination mechanisms, partnerships, networks?
2. To what extent has the capacity of beneficiaries (institutional and/or individual) been strengthened such that they do not need support in the long term?
3. What steps could be to increase the likelihood of project benefits being sustained beyond the life of the programme?
4. To what extent can the joint programme be replicated or scaled up at local or national levels?

Human Rights and Gender Equality:

1. Are there any signs that suggest that the programme has contributed to gender equality and the empowerment of women Laamu?

Deliverables and assignment duration:

Under the supervision of the Resident Coordinator’s Office and the Programme Coordination Unit, the Consultant is expected to work on the deliverables presented below:

The consultant will be home-based with travel to Male’ and Laamu during the period of the assignment and is expected to conduct her/his assignment in a participatory manner, involving LECReD staff and stakeholders to ensure full ownership of the process and its results.  She/he will consult all key documentation, including programmatic and management related documents. In that regard, the consultant will: Review key documentation as suggested by the RCO/PCU and others that the consultant may deem important; Conduct individual interviews with LECReD team to have their perceptions of  the management structures and ideas on the possible strategies for sustainability beyond the programme closure; Conduct working sessions with all stakeholders as deemed relevant to discuss findings; Regularly brief senior management on all steps and findings on the process. Evaluation Question: The evaluation is based on the UNEG guidelines and it will apply the Development Co-operation Directorate (DCD-DAC) evaluation criteria of relevance, efficiency, effectiveness, and sustainability as well as the additional criterion of human rights and gender equality by addressing the following questions (note that the questions are not comprehensive and the evaluation consultant is expected to build on them for a thorough evaluation) Relevance: The extent to which the objectives of a development intervention are consistent with the needs and interest of the people, the needs of the country. How has the JP contributed to solve the needs and problems identified in the design phase, in particular with reference to the baseline situation? To what extent was the joint programme aligned with national development strategies and the UNDAF (2014-2017)? To what extent was the joint programme the best option to respond to development challenges described in the programme document? To what extent are the objectives of the joint programme still valid in the context of national policy objectives? To what extent have the implementing partners participating in the joint programme contributed added value to solve the development challenges stated in the programme document? Effectiveness: Extent to which the objectives of the development intervention have been achieved. To what extent did the joint programme attain the outputs and outcomes described in the programme document? What were the major factors influencing achievement or non-achievement of the programme objectives? What good practices, success stories, lessons learnt and replicable experiences have been identified? Please describe and document them. To what extent did the joint programme help to increase stakeholder/citizen dialogue and or engagement on development issues and policies? Were programme risks being appropriately managed? Efficiency: Extent to which resource/inputs (funds, time, human resources, etc.) have been turned into results. To what extent was the joint programme's management model (governance and decision-making structure) efficient in comparison to the development results attained? To what extent were joint programme's outputs and outcomes synergistic and coherent to achieve better results when compared to single-agency interventions? What efficiency gains/losses were there as a result? What type of work methodologies, financial instruments, and business practices did the implementing partners use to promote/improve efficiency? What type of (administrative, financial and managerial) obstacles did the joint programme face and to what extent have these affected its efficiency? Impact: Positive and negative effects of the intervention on development outcome. To what extent and in what ways did the joint programme contribute to the higher level development objectives? To what extent did the joint programme have an impact on the targeted beneficiaries? Were all targeted beneficiaries reached? Which were left out? What unexpected/unintended effects did the joint programme have, if any? Sustainability: Probability of the benefits of the intervention continuing in the long term. Which mechanisms already existed and which have been put in place by the joint programme to ensure results and impact, i.e. policy, policy coordination mechanisms, partnerships, networks? To what extent has the capacity of beneficiaries (institutional and/or individual) been strengthened such that they do not need support in the long term? What steps could be to increase the likelihood of project benefits being sustained beyond the life of the programme? To what extent can the joint programme be replicated or scaled up at local or national levels? Human Rights and Gender Equality: Are there any signs that suggest that the programme has contributed to gender equality and the empowerment of women Laamu? Payment Schedule: 10% on submission of inception plan; 30% on submission and approval of the 1st draft FE report; 60% on submission and approval of the final FE report. Deliverables and assignment duration: Under the supervision of the Resident Coordinator’s Office and the Programme Coordination Unit, the Consultant is expected to work on the deliverables presented below: FE Inception Report: This report will propose methods, resources and procedures to be used for data collection. It will also include a proposed timeline of activities and submission of deliverables. It will also propose initial lines of inquiry about the joint programme. Presentation on Initial Findings Draft Report (suggested structure on Annex 1) Final Report addressing all received comments The consultant is also expected to prepare a briefing note for the final Programme Board Meeting planned for late November. The FE will include its ratings of the programme’s results and brief descriptions of the associated achievements in a FE Ratings & Achievement Summary Table in the Executive Summary of the FE report. The assignment is expected to be completed in 30 working days. The consultancy will include work from home office (15 working days) and Consultations in Male’ and Laamu (15 working days, excluding travel and weekend days). During the assignment, the consultant will deliver the following: Location Duration (days) Tentative Dates Review of LECReD documents and preparation of FE inception report Deliverable 1 submitted Home based 5 01 Oct  – 07 Oct Consultations in Maldives and field visits, meetings with LECReD staff, counterparts and stakeholders, debriefing with LECReD management on the findings, presentation of key points of the review and initial findings Deliverable 2 submitted Maldives (Male and Laamu) 15 10 Oct – 31 Oct    Draft Evaluation Report Deliverable 3 submitted Home based 5 10 Nov – 14 Nov Final Evaluation Report Deliverable 4 submitted Home based 5 08 Dec – 12 Dec Total working days 30

Competencies

Corporate Competencies

• Demonstrates integrity by modeling the UN’s values and ethical standards;
• Promotes the vision, mission, and strategic goals of UNDP;
• Displays cultural, gender, religion, race, nationality and age sensitivity and adaptability;
• Treats all people fairly without favoritism;
• Fulfills all obligations to gender sensitivity and zero tolerance for sexual harassment.

Functional Competencies

• Inter-personal skills;
• Exceptional analytical skills, solution oriented program design skills;
• Research and evaluation skills including ability to synthesize information;
• Excellent oral, and effective presentation and report-writing skills;
• Ability to work under with minimum supervision, while meeting deadlines;
• Demonstrated ability of timely completion of assignments;
• Excellent social and communication skills;
• Strong facilitation skills;
• Ability to work in multi-disciplinary and multi-cultural settings;
• Good working knowledge of information technology;
• Excellent Managerial and analytical skills;
• Proven co-ordination and networking skills.

Required Skills and Experience

Education

• Master’s degree or its equivalent in the field of Urban and Regional Planning, Development Studies, Local Governance, natural resource management, social sciences or other relevant discipline. The candidate should preferably be specialized in the field of capacity building and institutional change management.

Experience

• A minimum of 5 years accumulated and recognized professional experience in related fields is required;

• In-depth understanding of development planning, climate change and the associated responsibilities at local and national level;
• Documented experience in monitoring and evaluation of projects/development programmes;
• Excellent knowledge of Institutional change review and human resource development and/or local development planning, sustainable development, and local governance, preferably with previous experience in an international organization;
• Excellent report writing skills;
• Excellent analytical, solution defining and creative skills;
• Experience in preparation of FE of Joint UN Programmes is a plus
• It is essential that the candidate be able to meet deadlines for reporting. 

Language Requirement

• Excellent written and communications skills in English.

Special consideration

The candidate should:

• Be familiar with and loyal to the goals of the UN
• Express enthusiasm and willingness to share experiences and transfer knowledge
• Take responsibility and make sure tasks are fully completed
• Be sensitive to gender issues and issues of concern to vulnerable groups
• Be flexible and prepared to pursue goals through teamwork
• The incumbent should be available for the suggested schedule 

Application Documents

• The application must include a letter of interest to undertake this task, the CV, Personal History Form (P11), and a financial proposal (indicating the daily fee (in MVR) for the assignment). The applicant must also submit the reference letters from past supervisors/clients. To download P11, kindly please visit the link: http://www.mv.undp.org/content/maldives/en/home/operations/jobs
• Please combine all the documents into one single file, as the system will allow for only one document to be uploaded.
• We will only accept online applications.