National consultant for MTR of ABS project

Background

Project Title

Developing and Implementing the National Framework on Access to and Benefit Sharing of Genetic Resources and Associated Traditional Knowledge

Project Description?

This is the Terms of Reference for the UNDP-GEF Midterm Review (MTR) of the full -sized project titled Developing and Implementing the National Framework on Access to and Benefit Sharing of Genetic Resources and Associated Traditional Knowledge (PIMS 5310) implemented through the Ministry of Environmental Protection/ Foreign Economic Cooperation Office (FECO)/UNDP, which is to be undertaken in late 2018. The project started on the 1 April 2016 and is in its third year of implementation. In line with the UNDP-GEF Guidance on MTRs, this MTR process was initiated before the submission of the second Project Implementation Report (PIR). The MTR process must follow the guidance outlined in the document Guidance For Conducting Midterm Reviews of UNDP-Supported, GEF-Financed Projects (see Annex).

The project was designed to create in China the legal, administrative and practical capacity to authorize and enable providers (communities, minorities and individual providers) of genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge to share in the benefits from the utilization of those resources, in a manner that promotes improvement of the providers’ social welfare and provides a motivation for conservation and efforts to maintain the sustainability of those resources. The Project Objective is to develop and implement China’s national framework on access to and benefit sharing (ABS) of genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge in accordance with provisions of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and the NP.

This project aims to remove the above-mentioned barriers and achieve the project objective through the implementation of three inter-connected components. Component 1 addresses the need for national ABS policy decisions and a national regulatory and institutional framework on ABS. Component 2 supports capacity building and awareness raising. Component 3 consists of pilot demonstrations on ABS. The three components will result in the following project outcomes:

Outcome 1: All prerequisites completed to enable accession to the Nagoya Protocol

Outcome 2: National ABS regulatory framework is established and operational

Outcome 3: ABS demonstration legislation ready to be adopted and operating in two or more pilots.

Outcome 4: Overall capacity to implement the National ABS framework improved by at least 20%, as measured by UNDP’s Capacity Development Scorecard

Outcome 5: Enhanced awareness and understanding of the ABS regime and the value of genetic resources and traditional knowledge associated with genetic and biological resources for improved policy making and on-the-ground implementation of biodiversity conservation, sustainable use and fair and equitable sharing of benefits among the stakeholders.

Outcome 6: National ABS framework under implementation through 6 pilots in 6 jurisdictions achieving the following outcomes: (i) 3 leading agents for new drug production (ii) at least 3 ABS agreements negotiated between users and providers of genetic resources/derivatives; (iii) at least 3 ABS agreements negotiated for products already commercialized; (iv) at least 4 PIC processes with local communities implemented in accordance with the PIC/community protocol supported under component 1; and (v) enabling that direct financial community benefits be derived from utilisation of their local genetic resources and traditional knowledge.

Duties and Responsibilities

Scope of Work and Key Tasks

The MTR team will consist of two independent consultants that will conduct the MTR - one team leader (with experience and exposure to projects and evaluations in other regions globally) and one team expert from China. ?

The MTR team will first conduct a document review of project documents (i.e. PIF, UNDP Initiation Plan, Project Document, ESSP, Project Inception Report, PIRs, Finalized GEF focal area Tracking Tools, Project Appraisal Committee meeting minutes, Financial and Administration guidelines used by Project Team, project operational guidelines, manuals and systems, etc.) provided by the Project Team and Commissioning Unit. Then they will participate in a MTR inception workshop to clarify their understanding of the objectives and methods of the MTR, producing the MTR inception report thereafter. The MTR mission will then consist of interviews and site visits to three pilots provinces including Yunnan, Hunan and Guangxi involved in the implementation.

The MTR team will assess the following four categories of project progress and produce a draft and final MTR report. See the Guidance For Conducting Midterm Reviews of UNDP-Supported, GEF-Financed Projects (Guidance For Conducting Midterm Reviews of UNDP-Supported, GEF-Financed Projects), for requirements on ratings. No overall rating is required.

1. Project Strategy

Project Design:

• 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.
• Review the relevanced of the project strategy and assess whether it provides the most effective route towards expected/intended results.?
• Review how the project addresses country priorities
• Review decision-making processes

Results Framework/Logframe:

• Undertake a critical analysis of the project’s logframe 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.
• 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.

     2.Progress Towards Results

• Review the logframe indicators against progress made towards the end-of-project targets; populate the Progress Towards Results Matrix, as described in 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 the project objective and each outcome; make recommendations from the areas marked as “not on target to be achieved” (red).
• Compare and analyse the GEF Tracking Tool at the Baseline with the one completed right before the Midterm Review.
• Identify remaining barriers to achieving the project objective.
• By reviewing the aspects of the project that have already been successful, identify ways in which the project can further expand these benefits.

     3.Project Implementation and Adaptive Management

Using the Guidance For Conducting Midterm Reviews of UNDP-Supported, GEF-Financed Projects; assess the following categories of project progress:

• Management Arrangements
• Work Planning
• Finance and co-finance
• Project-level monitoring and evaluation systems
• Stakeholder Engagement
• Reporting
• Communications

    4.Sustainability

Assess overall risks to sustainability factors of the project in terms of the following four categories:

• Financial risks to sustainability
• Socio-economic risks to sustainability
• Institutional framework and governance risks to sustainability
• Environmental risks to sustainability

The MTR consultant/team will include a section in the MTR report setting out the MTR’s 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. The MTR consultant/team should make no more than 15 recommendations total.

Competencies

The MTR consultant/team shall prepare and submit:

     Expected Outputs and Deliverables

• MTR Inception Report: MTR team clarifies objectives and methods of the Midterm Review no later than 2 weeks before the MTR mission. To be sent to the Commissioning Unit and project management. Approximate due date: (August 25, 2018)
• Presentation: Initial Findings presented to project management and the Commissioning Unit at the end of the MTR mission. Approximate due date: (Sep. 21, 2018)
• Draft Final Report: Full report with annexes within 3 weeks of the MTR mission. Approximate due date: (Oct. 12, 2018)
• Final Report*: Revised report with annexed audit trail detailing how all received comments have (and have not) been addressed in the final MTR report. To be sent to the Commissioning Unit within 1 week of receiving UNDP comments on draft. Approximate due date: (Oct. 30, 2018)

*The final MTR report must be in English. If applicable, the Commissioning Unit may choose to arrange for a translation of the report into a language more widely shared by national stakeholders.

Institutional Arrangement

The principal responsibility for managing this MTR resides with the Commissioning Unit. The Commissioning Unit for this project’s MTR is UNDP China.

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. 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.

Duration of the Work

The total duration of the MTR will be approximately (6 of weeks) starting 1 Aug. 2018, and shall not exceed five months from when the consultant(s) are hired. The tentative MTR timeframe is as follows:

• (June 30): Application closes
• (July 20): Selection of MTR Team
• (Aug. 1-20): Prep the MTR Team (handover of project documents)
• (Aug. 21-25) ?5 days: Document review and preparing MTR Inception Report
• (Aug. 26-30) 1 day: Finalization and Validation of MTR Inception Report- latest start of MTR mission
• (Sep. 6-21) 15 days: MTR mission: stakeholder meetings, interviews, field visits
• (Sep. 21) 1 day: Mission wrap-up meeting & presentation of initial findings- earliest end of MTR mission
• (Sep. 22—Oct. 12) 10 days: Preparing draft report
• (Oct.? 30) 3 days: Incorporating audit trail on draft report/Finalization of MTR report
• (Nov. 15): Preparation & Issue of Management Response
• (Nov. 30): Expected date of full MTR completion

The date start of contract is (Aug. 1, 2018).

Duty Station

The consultant’s duty station/location for the contract duration is mainly home based with mission to Beijing and field visit to Yunnan, Guangxi And Hunan Provinces (Detailed agenda will be provided before the mission). Travel: International travel will be required to China during the MTR mission; The Basic Security in the Field II and Advanced Security in the Field courses must be successfully completed prior to commencement of travel; Individual Consultants are responsible for ensuring they have vaccinations/inoculations when travelling to certain countries, as designated by the UN Medical Director. Consultants are required to comply with the UN security directives set forth under https://dss.un.org/dssweb/

All related travel expenses will be covered and will be reimbursed as per UNDP rules and regulations upon submission of an F-10 claim form and supporting documents.

Required Skills and Experience

The selection of consultants will be aimed at maximizing the overall “team” qualities in the following areas:

• Recent experience with result-based management evaluation methodologies (5%);
• Experience applying SMART indicators and reconstructing or validating baseline scenarios (5%);
• Competence in adaptive management, as applied to biodiversity and ecosystem, especially ABS (5%);
• Experience working with the GEF or GEF-evaluations (20%);
• Experience working in Asia, especially in China (5%);
• Work experience in relevant technical areas for at least 10 years (5%);
• Demonstrated understanding of issues related to gender and biodiversity and ecosystem, especially ABS; experience in gender sensitive evaluation and analysis (15%);.
• Excellent communication skills(10%);
• Demonstrable analytical skills (10%);
• Project evaluation/review experiences within United Nations system will be considered an asset (10%);
• A Master’s degree in natural resources, environmental management, community development , or other closely related field (10%).

Consultant Independence:

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.

APPLICATION PROCESS

Scope of Price Proposal and Schedule of Payments

Financial Proposal:

• Financial proposals must be “all inclusive” and expressed in a lump-sum for the total duration of the contract. The term “all inclusive” implies all cost (professional fees, travel costs, living allowances etc.);
• For duty travels, the UN’s Daily Subsistence Allowance (DSA) rates will be followed by UN rules during the reimbursement, which should provide indication of the cost of living in a duty station/destination (Note: Individuals on this contract are not UN staff and are therefore not entitled to DSAs.? All living allowances required to perform the demands of the ToR are expressed as daily fees.)

Schedule of Payments:

10% of payment upon approval of the MTR Inception Report

30% upon submission of the draft MTR Report

60% upon finalization of the MTR Report

Recommended Presentation of Offer

1. Completed Letter of Confirmation of Interest and Availability using the template provided by UNDP;
2. Personal CV or a P11 Personal History form, indicating all past experience from similar projects, as well as the contact details (email and telephone number) of the Candidate and at least three (3) professional references;
3. Brief description of approach to work/technical proposal of why the individual considers him/herself as the most suitable for the assignment, and a proposed methodology on how they will approach and complete the assignment; (max 1 page)
4. Financial Proposal that indicates the all-inclusive fixed total contract price, supported by a breakdown of costs, as per template provided.? If an applicant is employed by an organization/company/institution, and he/she expects his/her employer to charge a management fee in the process of releasing him/her to UNDP under Reimbursable Loan Agreement (RLA), the applicant must indicate at this point, and ensure that all such costs are duly incorporated in the financial proposal submitted to UNDP.? See Letter of Confirmation of Interest template for financial proposal template.

Incomplete applications will be excluded from further consideration.

Criteria for Selection of the Best Offer

The award of the contract will be made to the Individual Consultant who has obtained the highest Combined Score and has accepted UNDP’s General Terms and Conditions.? Only those applications which are responsive and compliant will be evaluated. The offers will be evaluated using the “Combined Scoring method” where:

1. The educational background and experience on similar assignments will be weighted a max. of 70%;
2. The price proposal will weigh as 30% of the total scoring.

? Annexes to the MTR ToR

Include Guidance For Conducting Midterm Reviews of UNDP-Supported, GEF-Financed Projects and other existing literature or documents that will help candidates gain a better understanding of the project situation and the work required.

Possible annexes include: (reference ToR Annexes in Annex 3 of Guidance For Conducting Midterm Reviews of UNDP-Supported, GEF-Financed Projects)

• List of documents to be reviewed by the MTR Team
• Guidelines on Contents for the Midterm Review Report
• UNEG Code of Conduct for Evaluators/Midterm Review Consultants
• MTR Required Ratings Table and Ratings Scales
• MTR Report Clearance Form
• Sample MTR Evaluative Matrix
• Progress Towards Results Matrix and MTR Ratings & Achievement Summary Tables (in Word)

ToR ANNEX A: List of Documents to be reviewed by the MTR Team

1. PIF
2. UNDP Initiation Plan
3. UNDP Project Document
4. UNDP Environmental and Social Screening results
5. Project Inception Report
6. All Project Implementation Reports (PIR’s)
7. Quarterly progress reports and work plans of the various implementation task teams
8. Audit reports
9. Finalized GEF focal area Tracking Tools at CEO endorsement and midterm (fill in specific TTs for this project’s focal area)
10. Oversight mission reports?
11. All monitoring reports prepared by the project
12. Financial and Administration guidelines used by Project Team

The following documents will also be available:

1. Project operational guidelines, manuals and systems
2. UNDP country/countries programme document(s)
3. Minutes of the (Project Title) Board Meetings and other meetings (i.e. Project Appraisal Committee meetings)
4. Project site location maps

ToR ANNEX B: Guidelines on Contents for the Midterm Review Report[1]

i.	Basic Report Information (for opening page or title page) Title of? UNDP supported GEF financed project UNDP PIMS# and GEF project ID#? MTR time frame and date of MTR report Region and countries included in the project GEF Operational Focal Area/Strategic Program Executing Agency/Implementing Partner and other project partners MTR team members Acknowledgements
ii.	Table of Contents
iii.	Acronyms and Abbreviations
1.	Executive Summary (3-5 pages) Project Information Table Project Description (brief) Project Progress Summary (between 200-500 words) MTR Ratings & Achievement Summary Table Concise summary of conclusions Recommendation Summary Table
2.	Introduction (2-3 pages) Purpose of the MTR and objectives Scope & Methodology: principles of design and execution of the MTR, MTR approach and data collection methods, limitations to the MTR Structure of the MTR report
3.	Project Description and Background Context (3-5 pages) Development context: environmental, socio-economic, institutional, and policy factors relevant to the project objective and scope Problems that the project sought to address: threats and barriers targeted Project Description and Strategy: objective, outcomes and expected results, description of field sites (if any) Project Implementation Arrangements: short description of the Project Board, key implementing partner arrangements, etc. Project timing and milestones Main stakeholders: summary list
4.	Findings (12-14 pages)
		4.1	Project Strategy Project Design Results Framework/Logframe
		4.2	Progress Towards Results Progress towards outcomes analysis Remaining barriers to achieving the project objective
		4.3	Project Implementation and Adaptive Management Management Arrangements Work planning Finance and co-finance Project-level monitoring and evaluation systems Stakeholder engagement Reporting Communications
		4.4	Sustainability Financial risks to sustainability Socio-economic to sustainability Institutional framework and governance risks to sustainability Environmental risks to sustainability
5.	Conclusions and Recommendations (4-6 pages)
	? 5.1?		Conclusions Comprehensive and balanced statements (that are evidence-based and connected to the MTR’s findings) which highlight the strengths, weaknesses and results of the project
	? 5.2		Recommendations Corrective actions for the design, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of the project Actions to follow up or reinforce initial benefits from the project Proposals for future directions underlining main objectives
6.	Annexes MTR ToR (excluding ToR annexes) MTR evaluative matrix (evaluation criteria with key questions, indicators, sources of data, and methodology) Example Questionnaire or Interview Guide used for data collection Ratings Scales MTR mission itinerary List of persons interviewed List of documents reviewed Co-financing table (if not previously included in the body of the report) Signed UNEG Code of Conduct form Signed MTR final report clearance form Annexed in a separate file: Audit trail from received comments on draft MTR report Annexed in a separate file: Relevant midterm tracking tools (METT, FSC, Capacity scorecard, etc.)

[1] The Report length should not exceed 40 pages in total (not including annexes).

ToR ANNEX C: Midterm Review Evaluative Matrix Template

Evaluative Questions	Indicators	Sources	Methodology
Project Strategy: To what extent is the project strategy relevant to country priorities, country ownership, and the best route towards expected results?
(include evaluative question(s))	(i.e. relationships established, level of coherence between project design and implementation approach, specific activities conducted, quality of risk mitigation strategies, etc.)	(i.e. project documents, national policies or strategies, websites, project staff, project partners, data collected throughout the MTR mission, etc.)	(i.e. document analysis, data analysis, interviews with project staff, interviews with stakeholders, etc.)
Progress Towards Results: To what extent have the expected outcomes and objectives of the project been achieved thus far?
Project Implementation and Adaptive Management: Has the project been implemented efficiently, cost-effectively, and been able to adapt to any changing conditions thus far? To what extent are project-level monitoring and evaluation systems, reporting, and project communications supporting the project’s implementation?
Sustainability: To what extent are there financial, institutional, socio-economic, and/or environmental risks to sustaining long-term project results?

ToR ANNEX D: UNEG Code of Conduct for Evaluators/Midterm Review Consultants[1]

Evaluators/Consultants:

1. Must present information that is complete and fair in its assessment of strengths and weaknesses so that decisions or actions taken are well founded.
2. Must disclose the full set of evaluation findings along with information on their limitations and have this accessible to all affected by the evaluation with expressed legal rights to receive results.
3. Should protect the anonymity and confidentiality of individual informants. They should provide maximum notice, minimize demands on time, and respect people’s right not to engage. Evaluators must respect people’s right to provide information in confidence, and must ensure that sensitive information cannot be traced to its source. Evaluators are not expected to evaluate individuals, and must balance an evaluation of management functions with this general principle.
4. Sometimes uncover evidence of wrongdoing while conducting evaluations. Such cases must be reported discreetly to the appropriate investigative body. Evaluators should consult with other relevant oversight entities when there is any doubt about if and how issues should be reported.
5. Should be sensitive to beliefs, manners and customs and act with integrity and honesty in their relations with all stakeholders. In line with the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights, evaluators must be sensitive to and address issues of discrimination and gender equality. They should avoid offending the dignity and self-respect of those persons with whom they come in contact in the course of the evaluation. Knowing that evaluation might negatively affect the interests of some stakeholders, evaluators should conduct the evaluation and communicate its purpose and results in a way that clearly respects the stakeholders’ dignity and self-worth.
6. Are responsible for their performance and their product(s). They are responsible for the clear, accurate and fair written and/or oral presentation of study limitations, findings and recommendations.
7. Should reflect sound accounting procedures and be prudent in using the resources of the evaluation.

MTR Consultant Agreement Form

Agreement to abide by the Code of Conduct for Evaluation in the UN System:

Name of Consultant: __________________________________________________________________

Name of Consultancy Organization (where relevant): __________________________________________

I confirm that I have received and understood and will abide by the United Nations Code of Conduct for Evaluation.

Signed at _____________________________________? (Place)???? on ____________________________??? (Date)

Signature: ___________________________________

ToR ANNEX E: MTR Ratings

Ratings for Progress Towards Results: (one rating for each outcome and for the objective)
6	Highly Satisfactory (HS)	The objective/outcome is expected to achieve or exceed all its end-of-project targets, without major shortcomings. The progress towards the objective/outcome can be presented as “good practice”.
5	Satisfactory (S)	The objective/outcome is expected to achieve most of its end-of-project targets, with only minor shortcomings.
4	Moderately Satisfactory (MS)	The objective/outcome is expected to achieve most of its end-of-project targets but with significant shortcomings.
3	Moderately Unsatisfactory (HU)	The objective/outcome is expected to achieve its end-of-project targets with major shortcomings.
2	Unsatisfactory (U)	The objective/outcome is expected not to achieve most of its end-of-project targets.
1	Highly Unsatisfactory (HU)	The objective/outcome has failed to achieve its midterm targets, and is not expected to achieve any of its end-of-project targets.

Ratings for Project Implementation & Adaptive Management: (one overall rating)
6	Highly Satisfactory (HS)	Implementation of all seven components – management arrangements, work planning, finance and co-finance, project-level monitoring and evaluation systems, stakeholder engagement, reporting, and communications – is leading to efficient and effective project implementation and adaptive management. The project can be presented as “good practice”.
5	Satisfactory (S)	Implementation of most of the seven components is leading to efficient and effective project implementation and adaptive management except for only few that are subject to remedial action.
4	Moderately Satisfactory (MS)	Implementation of some of the seven components is leading to efficient and effective project implementation and adaptive management, with some components requiring remedial action.
3	Moderately Unsatisfactory (MU)	Implementation of some of the seven components is not leading to efficient and effective project implementation and adaptive, with most components requiring remedial action.
2	Unsatisfactory (U)	Implementation of most of the seven components is not leading to efficient and effective project implementation and adaptive management.
1	Highly Unsatisfactory (HU)	Implementation of none of the seven components is leading to efficient and effective project implementation and adaptive management.

Ratings for Sustainability: (one overall rating)
4	Likely (L)	Negligible risks to sustainability, with key outcomes on track to be achieved by the project’s closure and expected to continue into the foreseeable future
3	Moderately Likely (ML)	Moderate risks, but expectations that at least some outcomes will be sustained due to the progress towards results on outcomes at the Midterm Review
2	Moderately Unlikely (MU)	Significant risk that key outcomes will not carry on after project closure, although some outputs and activities should carry on
1	Unlikely (U)	Severe risks that project outcomes as well as key outputs will not be sustained

ToR ANNEX F: MTR Report Clearance Form

(to be completed by the Commissioning Unit and UNDP-GEF RTA and included in the final document)

Midterm Review Report Reviewed and Cleared By:

Commissioning Unit

Name: _____________________________________________

Signature: __________________________________________  Date: _______________________________

UNDP-GEF Regional Technical Advisor

Name: _____________________________________________

Signature: __________________________________________ Date: _______________________________

Please add Documents to be included when submitting application & Evaluation Criteria in your TOR;

Documents to be included when submitting application

Please provide Offeror’s Letter and proposal (download the format in the link provided) together with your CV while submitting application.  And please note that the system will not accept the uploading of more than one document so please merge or scan all your documents into one prior to uploading.

In the Offeror’s Letter and proposal, you will be asked to confirm your interest and availability for the assignment, and provide technical and financial proposal.

Technical proposal

• Explaining why you are the most suitable for the work with example/former experience demonstrating your competencies;
• Provide a brief methodology on how you will approach and conduct the work.

Financial Proposal

Please quote the daily rate for professional fee and others related.

Evaluation Criteria

The award of the contract will be made to the Individual Consultant who has obtained the highest Combined Score and has accepted UNDP’s General Terms and Conditions.  Only those applications which are responsive and compliant will be evaluated. The offers will be evaluated using the “Combined Scoring method” where:

• Technical evaluation - 70%;(includes 20% of Job Related Technical  Expertise; 25% of Relevant working experience; 25% of Methodology &   Approach to Assignment)
• Financial Evaluation - 30%.

UNDP applies a fair and transparent selection process that will take into account the competencies/skills of the applicants as well as their financial proposals. Qualified women and members of social minorities are encouraged to apply.

Offeror’s Letter and proposal Download Link:

https://pan.baidu.com/s/1fGaerJKDgbAUHJ9QQmrIHw