VAC-9203 National Consultant - Project Mid Term Evaluation - Emergency Mine Action Project
Aden | Sanaa
- Organization: CTG - Committed To Good
- Location: Aden | Sanaa
- Grade: Level not specified - Level not specified
-
Occupational Groups:
- Medical Practitioners
- Humanitarian Aid and Coordination
- Monitoring and Evaluation
- Mine Action and Weapon Contamination
- Children's rights (health and protection)
- Emergency Aid and Response
- Project and Programme Management
- Closing Date: Closed
CTG overview |
CTG staff and support humanitarian projects in fragile and conflict-affected countries around the world, providing a rapid and cost-effective service for development and humanitarian missions. With past performance in 17 countries – from the Middle East, Africa, Europe, and Asia, we have placed more than 20,000 staff all over the world since operations began in 2006. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Overview of position |
Yemen is widely considered to be the worst humanitarian and development crisis in the world. The conflict, which started in September 2014 was further escalated in March 2015 to a comprehensive civil war, which has caused major loss of life, internal displacement, and destroyed critical infrastructure, government fragmentation, poor public service delivery, weakened population and institutional resilience and food insecurity verging on famine. Major roads and bridges across the country have been partially or/and fully destroyed, power transmittal lines have been severely damaged, and oil and gas production are totally disrupted. An estimated 23.4 million people - equivalent to more than 80 % of the population need humanitarian or protection assistance, including 13.4 million in acute need. More than 19 million people are food insecure. The escalation of conflict in Yemen 2015 has resulted in large tracts of land being contaminated with unexploded ordnance (UXO) in areas of direct and indirect land warfare which has spilled over into littoral waters. The aerial campaign added new threats of unexploded aircraft bombs, particularly cluster-type munitions in the middle and northern regions of the country. Existence of explosive remnants of war (ERW) and mines have worsened the living conditions of the already conflict-affected and famine prone populations by challenging humanitarian, and recovery activities such as waste and debris management, access to natural or other resources, access to rescue and social services, and the recovery of business activities. The protracted conflict has no immediate or obvious likely end in sight. Our strategy for assistance to the mine action sector in Yemen, one of the primary goals of the UN is to ensure the most efficient and effective response to the impact of landmines, unexploded ordnance (UXO) and other explosive remnants of war (ERW, including cluster- munitions and IEDs). According to the UN Policy on Mine Action and Effective Coordination, the primary responsibility for addressing the threats faced by the population from contamination remains with the affected State. To promote national ownership, responsibility, leadership and effective coordination, the CLIENT is mandated by the General Assembly to assist the national authorities in their efforts to review and strengthen existing co-ordination mechanisms and further develop a national mine action programm. The CLIENT’s Emergency Mine Action Project has contributed considerably to a wide spectrum of mine action activities in Yemen through supporting the National Mine Action Committee (NMAC) and the Yemeni Executive Mine Action Centre (YEMAC). CLIENT acts in an advisory role covering technical implementation and methodologies, policy issues at the central level, planning processes through the full project cycle and resource mobilisation. In addition, CLIENT supports the relevant national bodies with basic running cost, including incentives for personnel to affect Mine Action operations costs due to lack of national budget and payment of salaries since the start of conflict. The project addresses the physical and socio-economic impacts of explosive remnants of war and mines on people and communities by a) preventing the situation from worsening; b) relieving communities from the impact of current contamination and c) addressing the longer-term issues of convention obligations. Project outputs are:
Since its inception in October 2021, the activities supported or coordinated by the project reached over five million demining and Mine Risk Education (MRE) beneficiaries across the country in the 22 governorates and 297 districts. The field teams cleared over twelve million square meters of land from which they removed over 140,000 different pieces of explosive ordnance, mines, other Explosive Remnants of War (ERW) and Abandoned Explosive Ordnance (AXO) focus in nine governorates Abyan, Aden, Hajjah, Sa’ada, Amran, Sana’a, Taizz, Hadramaut and Al Jawf. The project has been funded by the following donors: Germany, The Netherlands, UK FCDO, US DoS PMWRA, UNOCHA and CLIENT. This mid-term evaluation is commissioned to assess the project’s progress towards restoration of services and access to key infrastructure, reducing injuries and fatalities, and normalisation of recovery and economic activity in targeted areas and may influence the continuation of the project or act as a terminal review should no further funding be available The mid-term project evaluation serves as an important learning and accountability tool, providing the donors, CLIENT, key national stakeholders, and authorities in the targeted governorates and districts with an impartial assessment of the results generated, including gender equality measures and women’s empowerment. The evaluation will assess the project’s relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, impact, and sustainability, identify and document lessons learned, and provide recommendations to inform future project phases should funding be made available. The findings and recommendations of the evaluation will guide the key stakeholders, relevant Yemen institutions and authorities, project donors, CLIENT, UN agencies, civil society organisations in implementation of related projects. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Role objectives |
Scope The Project Evaluation will cover the period from 1st October 2021 to the date the evaluator is appointed and cover the project locations – Abyan, Aden, Hajjah, Sa’ada, Amran, Sana’a, Taizz, Hadramaut and Al Jawf. The evaluation will cover programme conceptualisation, design, implementation, monitoring, reporting and evaluation of the results. The evaluation will engage all project stakeholders - benefitting communities/institutions, authorities in the governorates and districts covered by the project, funding partners, CLIENT, UN agencies and partnering CSOs. The evaluation will assess progress made on key indicators agreed with all project stakeholders. In addition to assessing the relevance, effectiveness, efficiency of the project, the evaluation will: a) explore the key factors that have contributed to the achieving or not achieving of the intended results; b) determine the extent to which the project contributed towards restoration of services and access to key infrastructure (including community infrastructure), reducing injuries and fatalities, and normalisation of economic activity in targeted areas; addressing crosscutting issues of gender equality and women’s empowerment and human rights; and forging partnership at different levels, including with government institutions, donors, UN agencies, and communities; and c) assess potential sustainability of the project for continued realisation of results; and d) draw lessons learned and best practices and make recommendations for future mine action projects. Objectives Specific mid-term evaluation objectives are to:
What can be captured in terms of lessons learned for future Emergency Mine Action projects.
Evaluation criteria and key guiding questions Referencing and adopting from the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Development Assistance Committee (DAC) evaluation criteria, the evaluation will answer the following questions: Relevance / Coherence:
Effectiveness:
Efficiency:
Sustainability:
Human rights
Gender equality and empowerment
Disability
Mid-Term Evaluation Methodology This mid-term evaluation will adhere to the United Nations Evaluation Group’s Norms and Ethical Standards, OECD/DAC evaluation principles and guidelines and DAC Evaluation Quality Standards, CLIENT Evaluation Guidelines and CLIENT Evaluation Policy. Due to the security situation, travel to and in the country is constrained by the ongoing conflict. If it is not possible to travel to or within the country for the evaluation then the evaluation team should develop a methodology that takes this into account the conduct of evaluation virtually and remotely, including the use of remote interview methods and extended desk reviews, data analysis, survey and evaluation questionnaires. This should be detailed in the inception report and agreed with the Evaluation Manager. In case if evaluation will be carried out virtually, consideration should be taken for stakeholder availability, ability, or willingness to be interviewed remotely. In addition, their accessibility to the internet/computer may be an issue as many government and national counterparts may be working from home. These limitations must be reflected in the evaluation report. It is expected that the evaluation will employ a combination of both qualitative and quantitative evaluation methods. The evaluation team should propose their own methodology, which may include:
All analysis must be based on observed facts, evidence, and data. Findings should be specific, concise and supported by quantitative and/or qualitative information that is reliable, valid and generalizable. The broad range of data provides strong opportunities for triangulation. This process is essential to ensure a comprehensive and coherent understanding of the data sets, which will be generated by the evaluation. The final methodological approach including interview schedule, field visits and data to be used in the evaluation should be clearly outlined in the inception report and be fully discussed and agreed between CLIENT, stakeholders, and the evaluators. Evaluation Deliverables
Standard templates that need to be followed are provided in the Annexes section. It is expected that the evaluator will follow the CLIENT evaluation guidelines and UNEG quality check list and ensure all the quality criteria are met in the evaluation report. Evaluation team composition and required competencies
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Project reporting |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Key competencies |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Team management |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Further information |
Timeframe for the evaluation process The selected consultant will be expected to deliver the following outputs according to the following tentative schedule (starting from the time of contract signing)
The consultancy is expected to take a period of 35 working days starting in March 2023. The 35 working days will be spread over a period of two months to provide for delays and the need for additional time that may be required for implementing evaluations virtually recognising possible delays in accessing stakeholder groups. The consultants will inform the evaluation manager if additional time is needed to complete the evaluation.Fee payments will be made upon acceptance and approval by UNDP planned deliverables, based on the following payment schedule:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Disclaimer: At no stage of the recruitment process will CTG ask candidates for a fee. This includes during the application stage, interview, assessment and training. |
However, we have found similar vacancies for you: