UNDP Evaluation Team Lead Consultant – Senior Specialist 119 views

BACKGROUND
The UNSDG Human Rights Mainstreaming Multi-Donor Trust Fund (HRM MDTF) (hereinafter “the Fund”) commenced on 1 December 2010, with an initial operating period up to 31 December 2013. The Fund has been extended 5 times, and is currently due to end on 31 December 2024 .
The Steering Committee of the Fund is responsible for setting the strategic direction of the Fund, reviewing funding proposals and approving allocations. The Steering Committee decided in 2019 to initiate an independent, external evaluation of the Fund. This decision is supported by the Technical Secretariat of the Fund, which is responsible for, inter alia, “preparing periodic progress reports on the programme implementation and analyzing implementation bottlenecks and presenting recommendations to the Steering Committee on measures to accelerate the implementation”.

With the Delivering Together Facility planned to close in 2020, the Fund will again be the primary funding source for UN inter-agency work on human rights mainstreaming in development, including Human Rights Advisors at the Resident Coordinator Offices. In view of this, and in the context of the repositioning of the UN development system (UNDS), it is timely to evaluate the extent to which the Fund has progressed towards its objectives, identify achievements and shortcomings or bottlenecks, and develop evidence-based recommendations for the next phase of the Fund’s operations.

The Technical Secretariat of the Fund (hosted by DCO) has commissioned the evaluation on behalf of the Fund Steering Committee and will provide the management support. It will be overseen by a multi-stakeholder Reference Group.
The primary users of the evaluation will be the participating UN organizations of the Fund, DCO, the Administrative Agent (MPTFO), and Member States including the current contributors to the Fund. Additionaly, other potential donors and other entities that are members of the UNSDG are intended audiences of the evaluation.

CONTEXT
The Fund provides valuable financial support to the UNSDG to strengthen human rights mainstreaming in the UNDS through initatives at HQ, regional and country levels.

In 2008, the UN Secretary General issued a policy decision which reaffirmed “the centrality of human rights in the development work of the United Nations and stresses the universality of human rights and the unique role and mandate of the United Nations system in this regard.” The Secretary-General further tasked OHCHR and the UNDG Chair to initiate “an interagency process to explore the modalities to further strengthen system-wide coherence, collaboration and support for RCs and UNCTs in mainstreaming human rights, taking into account lessons learned from Action 2”. The establishment of the UN Development Group Human Rights Mainstreaming Mechanism (UNDG HRM) was the direct response to this directive. Such a dedicated mechanism enabled the UNDG to consolidate the achievements of the Action 2 programme from 2004-2008 as well as those from various workstreams under other existing UNDG Working Groups, and provided a platform for continued interagency collaboration to strengthen policy coherence and operational support to UNCTs.

The Fund was then established to “support the implementation of objectives and priorities of the UNDG HRM, established by the UNDG Principals on 30 November 2009, to further institutionalize the mainstreaming of human rights into UN operational activities for development by further strengthening system-wide coherence, collaboration and support for UNRCs and the UNCTs on human rights mainstreaming, as well as to strengthen the coherence of UN responses to national priorities, thus ensuring strong national ownership and capacity to fulfill human rights obligations. The MDTF will support strategic activities at global, regional and country level that ultimately contribute to the transformational change and/or impact at the country level.”

In contributing to the overall objective, the Fund focuses on four primary components:

• Promoting a coordinated and coherent UN system-wide approach towards the integration of human rights principles and international standards into UN operational activities for development;
• Providing coherent support for Resident Coordinators and UN Country Teams in mainstreaming human rights;
• Developing a coherent UN-system wide approach, through cooperation and collaboration among UN agencies, to providing support towards strengthening national human rights protection systems at the request of governments; and
• Contributing to the integration of human rights issues in the overall UNSDG advocacy on development agenda and global issues.

It is important to highlight that a significant objective of the Fund (further reinforced by the objectives and priorities of the UNDG/UNSDG human rights mainstreaming coordination mechanisms) was supporting policy coherence at HQ level, in order to strengthen system-wide coherence and collaboration on human rights mainstreaming at the country level. The UNDG also integrated relevant elements of the Human Rights up Front initiative, launched by the Secretary General in late 2013, into UNDG activities to mainstream human rights into development, some of which were supported by the Fund.

The governance of the Fund is set out in the Terms of Reference. The governance structure has beed revised from time to time to facilitate transparent, effective and efficient decision-making and to adapt to changes in the working mechanisms of the UNSDG. Currently the Fund is governed by a Steering Committee comprised of up to 6 Participating UN Organisations. The Adminsitrative Agent – the Multi-Partner Trust Fund Office (MPTFO) – is an ex-officio member of the Steering Committee. It is supported by a Technical Secretariat, hosted within the Development Coordination Office (DCO). Annual narrative and financial reports are shared with donors and published on the MPTFO Gateway. Several other formal engagements with donors have taken place since the launch of the Fund.
Since its establishment, the participating UN organisations have included: OHCHR, UNDP, UNESCO, UNFPA, UNICEF, ILO, the UN Staff System College and WHO. Current Participating UN Organisations are: OHCHR, UNDP, UNESCO, UNFPA, UNICEF and UN Women. Of these, the first four entities have been the most active entities, and have participated in the Fund since its inception. ILO, the Staff System College and WHO participated for shorter times and/or specific projects. UNICEF has not been a Participating UN Organisation of the Fund throughout the full term of the Fund. UN Women joined for the first time in February 2020.
The Fund has allocated some USD 16 million to initaitives under the primary components of the Terms of Reference since it commenced. The average annual expenditure has been USD 2-3 million, with fluctuations based on the availability of funds . Fund contributors are the Governments of Sweden, Norway, Germany, Demark, Finland, and Ireland. Donor support for the continuation of the HRM MDTF, and the scaled up ambition for 2020, was clearly demonstrated in 2018 and 2019, with new contributions of over USD 13 million. With the Fund now extended to 31 December 2024, this evaluation will provide a valuable evidence base for further strengthening the impact and sustainability of the Fund going forward.
Initiatives have been implemented at HQ, regional and country levels. The majority of the Fund’s resources have been directed towards the deployment of human rights advisors to the field, and the HQ-level policy coherence work. During the period of the evaluation, the Fund supported HRAs deployed in 26 countries and 2 regions with some variations depending on the year, at a total value of approximately 10.4 million (87% of all Fund transfers). Several of the deployments were also funded through UNCTs, OHCHR and other sources during the period under review. Small, country-specific programmes were also implemented in Costa Rica, Guinea Bissau, Indonesia, Morocco, Myanmar, Turkey, Uruguay, and Zambia during 2013-2015. Annual and financial progress reports from 2011 onwards are available on the MPTFO Gateway. Since 2011, the Steering Committee and Participating UN Organisations have applied lessons learned to increase the efficiency and impact of the Fund. However, an independent evaluation of the full programme of initiatives has not been undertaken.

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES
This evaluation will enable the Fund partners to benefit from a deeper understanding of the achievements, as well as areas where implementation could be improved, so as to strengthen the overall impact of the Fund going forward. The overall objectives of the evaluation are: (i) enhanced accountability of the partners involved in the implementation of the Fund; and (ii) a broadened evidence based for the design and implementation of the next multi-year results framework and for effective governance, management and operational processes of the Fund in the current development context. The specific objectives are to:

• Demonstrate accountability to stakeholders by assessment of the progress and contributions of the Fund towards mainstreaming of human rights in the UN development system, and in particular the towards the stated objectives and primary components of the Fund;
• Assess the Fund’s governance and management to identify if they can be improved in terms of efficiency and effectiveness;
• Assess the effectivenss and efficiency of the operational aspects of the Fund, and impact on coherence between UNSDG entities on human rights mainstreaming;
• Given the evolution of the UNSDG and reforms in the UN development system, in particular at country level, (including the funding landscape), what opportunities exist for the next phase of the Fund?
• Document lessons learned to improve programme design and provide evidence to inform the multi-year results framework for the Fund for 2021-2024.

SCOPE AND FOCUS AREAS
The evaluation will cover the period from 1 December 2010 to 31 December 2019. It will include all initiatives supported through the Fund at country, regional and HQ levels, as well as management, financial aspects, governance structures and processes including the Technical Secretariat and Steering Committee, and implementation by Participating UN Organisations and roles played by Fund partners. Besides the intended effects of the initiatives, the evaluation will identify any key unintended effects. The evaluation will pay particular attention to the impact on the Fund of the broader context, including the evolving status of the Fund itself throughout the period of the evaluation, changes to the UNDG/UNSDG architecture and inter-agency platform/s to which it has been linked since its establishment, and fluctuations in funding and agencies’ participation.
Primary and secondary data from HQ/global level will be particularly critical in assessing the substantive work of the Fund on global policy coherence and coordinated approaches to human rights mainstreaming. The evaluation will also include field surveys and more in-depth data collection for case studies in 5-6 countries where the RC/UNCT has benefited from one or more activities supported by the Fund to compliment other data (detailed country selection critiera will be provided to the Consultants by the Technical Secretariat in advance). The emphasis will be to conduct a pragmatic, low-cost evaluation that compliments existing information including structured feedback processes, reporting and assessments. The findings and recommendations will inform the future operations of the Fund.

EVALUATION CRITERIA AND PRELIMINARY EVALUATION QUESTIONS
The evaluation will focus on the following key questions, and be guided by OECD-DAC evaluation criteria (relevance, coherence, efficiency, sustainability, effectiveness and impact)

METHODOLOGY, PROCESS AND TIMEFRAME
Methodology:
The evaluation will be guided by the following standards: integrating Human Rights and Gender Equality in Evaluation, UNEG Norms and Standards for Evaluation in the UN system, the UNEG Ethical Guidelines for Evaluation. The evaluation will employ quantitative and qualitative methods as necessary.
The methodology will be further detailed by the evaluation team in the Inception report.

Primary data will be collected through semi-structured interviews with key informants and appropriately tailored surveys to relevant stakeholders, including RCs and selected UNCTs and other constituencies, and the agency focal points from the Participating UN Organisations of the Fund. Through remote means, in-depth information will be gathered from stakeholders in 5-6 countries to develop case studies on the interventions at country level.
Secondary data will be collected through desk reviews of Fund documents, workplans, budgets, progress and annual reports, databases and various other relevant documents and research. The inception report will outline sampling methods for review of secondary data where not feasible to review all Fund documentation.
Key secondary data sources include:

• Fund documentation including Steering Committee and RMC minutes, project proposals, end of project reports, progress and annual reports, financial data (2011 – 2019)
• UNDG/UNSDG publications (policy documents, tools, guidance etc) (2011 – 2019)
• UNDG/UNSDG working arrangements; planning documents and outputs of the UNDG inter-agency human rights mainstreaming coordination mechanisms (2011 – 2019)
• Member State documents guiding the work of the UNDS (QCPR 2012, 2016, A/RES/72/279)
• UNSDG Information Management System (IMS) – annual human Rights-related reporting (quantitative and qualitative) by UNCTs, QCPR indicators
• HRA evaluation (OHCHR, 2016)
• Informal HRA assessments carried out by DOCO in 2016 under ASG Kate Gilmour.
• Available analytics on use of key knowledge management tools (HuriTALK and HRBA Portal)

Validation: all evaluation findings should be supported with evidence. The evaluation team will use a variety of validation mechanisms to ensure quality of data collected. Data must be triangulated across sources and methods where possible. The evaluation team will validate the data with key stakeholders and ensure there are no factual errors or errors of interpretation and no missing evidence that could materially change the findings.

Process and timeframe
1. Finalise the draft Terms of Reference
2. Terms of Reference reviewed and approved by the Reference Group
3. Evaluation team engaged
4. Evaluation (total 3-4 months):

• Inception Report submitted to the Reference Group and other key stakeholders for feedback
• Inception Report approved by Reference Group
• Undertake data collection and analysis including HQ and field level
• Document key findings from country level case studies in powerpoint presentations (1 per country)
• Submit draft report to Reference Group for feedback
• Submit final report to the Reference Group

5. Steering Committee briefed on evaluation
6. Management response to evaluation developed and approved by the Steering Committee.
A Reference Group will be established, consisting of up to 6 representatives of the Fund Steering Committee including the Chair of the Steering Committee, the MPTFO, two (largest) donors and DCO (a stakeholder and host of the Technical Secretariat). The Reference Group will have the following responsibilities:

• Review, comment on and approve the Terms of Reference for the evaluation;
• Review, comment on and approve the Inception Report;
• Review and comment on the draft Evaluation Report;
• Acknowledge the final evaluation report as compliant with the Terms of Reference and submit it to the Fund Steering Committee.

The Technical Secretariat will have the following responsibilities:

• Support administrative functions for the evaluation including preparing Terms of Reference and engaging and managing the evaluation team
• Convene and Chair the meetings of the Reference Group; consolidate the comments of the Reference Group and submit these to the evaluation team. [The Chair function does not entail any additional authority for decision-making within the Reference Group]
• Facilitate access to all relevant and available information required to perform the scope of work
• Facilitate introductions to countries and other stakeholders as appropriate
• Lead the consultative process of drafting the Management Response (in consultation with and based on the substantive lead/input and guidance from the implementing agencies)

The Steering Committee will have the following responsibilities:

• Supports identification of evaluation team
• Approves the Management Response

EVALUATION PROCESS AND INDICATIVE TIMELINE
The evaluation team will consist of 2 consultants over a 3-4 month period. The proposed start date is 15 June 2020 and completion date is 30 September 2020. The main responsibilities will be to carry out the evaluation as per the process outlined below

EXPECTED OUTPUTS AND DELIVERABLES
The evaluation team will produce the following deliverables:
Inception report to include, as a minimum:

• Stakeholder map
• Evaluation matrix (including final list of evaluation questions and indicators)
• Overall evaluation design and methodology, a detailed description of the data sources and data collection and analysis strategy.
• Roles and responsibilities of the team members and a work plan

5-6 powerpoint presentations documenting the key findings from the country level case studies
A debriefing presentation document (ppt format or max 5 pages), synthesizing the main preliminary findings, conclusions and recommendations of the evaluation, to be presented and discussed with the Reference Group during the debriefing meeting foreseen at the end of the Synthesis stage
A draft evaluation report for the Reference Group (Maximum 40 pages plus annexes)
A final report (addressing comments from the Reference Group) to be submitted to the Reference Group
Summary presentation of the evaluation report (ppt slides) for the Steering Committee
All deliverables will be drafted in English and shall follow the general structure and outlines as recommended by the UNEG except where otherwise instructed by the Steering Committee.
Due to current travel restrictions and social distancing requirements, the consultant team is expected to organise and lead online engagement with stakeholders, including: presentation and discussion of preliminary findings and recommendations to the Reference Group; and presentation of final evaluation to the Steering Committee.
COMPOSITION OF THE EVALUATION TEAM
The evaluation team should be familiar with the UN development system, the UNDG/UNSDG and have some substantive understanding of human rights mainstreaming within the UN development system.
The Evaluation Team Leader will have the overall responsibility during all phases of the evaluation to ensure the timely completion and high quality of the evaluation process, methodologies and outputs. In close collaboration with the second evaluator , and with the Reference Group and Technical Secretariat, she/he will lead the design of the evaluation, guide the methodology and application of the data collection instruments and lead the consultations with stakeholders. The Team Leader will delegate appropriate activites to the second evaluator to maximise efficiency of the Team. At the reporting phase, she/he is responsible for putting together the draft evaluation report, based on inputs from other members of the evaluation team, and finalizing the report based on inputs from the Reference Group.

EDUCATION

• Post graduate degree or equivalent in a relevant discipline.

EXPERIENCE

• At least 15 years of professional experience in development and human rights-related work at the international level
• Demonstrated expertise and experience in evaluations of complex global programmes in the field of development for UN agencies or other international organisations
• Experience in evaluation of human rights programmes desirable.
• A good knowledge of the UN development system, and the UNDG/UNSDG
• Knowledge related to UN reform at the country level
• Good technical knowledge of human rights and human rights-based approach to programming;
• Good understanding of UN programming processes
• Experience working with UN Agencies, Funds and Programmes at the field level is desirable.
• Ability to conduct basic quantitative data analysis (pivot tables) in Excel
• Fluency in English

DURATION

• This evaluation will be performed over a four month period for 50 working days.

APPLICATION PROCEDURE

• The application package containing the following (to be uploaded as one file):
• Online application with brief description of why the Offer considers her/himself the most suitable for the assignment; and timelines associated with the deliverables
• Personal CV or P11, indicating all past experience from similar projects and specifying the relevant assignment period (from/to), as well as the email and telephone contacts of at least three (3) professional references.
• Note: The above documents need to be scanned in one file and uploaded to the online application as one document.
• Shortlisted candidates (ONLY) will be requested to submit a Financial Proposal.
• The financial proposal should specify an all-inclusive daily fee (based on a 7 hour working day – lunch time is not included)
• The financial proposal must be all-inclusive and take into account various expenses that will be incurred during the contract, including: the daily professional fee; cost of travel from the home base to the duty station and vice versa, where required; living allowances at the duty station; communications, utilities and consumables; life, health and any other insurance; risks and inconveniences related to work under hardship and hazardous conditions (e.g., personal security needs, etc.), when applicable; and any other relevant expenses related to the performance of services under the contract.
• In the case of travel requested by UNDP, payment of travel costs including tickets, lodging and terminal expenses should be agreed upon, between UNDP and Individual Consultant, prior to travel and will be reimbursed. In general, UNDP should not accept travel costs exceeding those of an economy class ticket. Should the IC wish to travel on a higher class he/she should do so using their own resources.
• If the Offeror 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 a Reimbursable Loan Agreement (RLA), the Offeror must indicate at this point, and ensure that all such costs are duly incorporated in the financial proposal submitted to UNDP.
• The Financial Proposal is to be emailed as per the instruction in the separate email that will be sent to shortlisted candidates.

EVALUATION

• Applicants are reviewed based on Required Skills and Experience stated above and based on the technical evaluation criteria outlined below. Applicants will be evaluated based on cumulative scoring. When using this weighted scoring method, the award of the contract will be made to the individual consultant whose offer has been evaluated and determined as:
• Being responsive/compliant/acceptable; and
• Having received the highest score out of a pre-determined set of weighted technical and financial criteria specific to the solicitation where technical criteria weighs 70% and Financial criteria/ Proposal weighs 30%.
• Technical Criteria Total 70% (700 points):
• Relevant background in terms of educational and professional experience per the TORs; (20%)
• Experience in evaluation (15%)
• Experience of working with the UN development system and knowledge of UN reform; (10%)
• Demonstrated understanding of the thematic content of this assignment including human rights; (10%)
• Interview scoring (15%)
• Having reviewed applications received, UNDP will invite the top three/four shortlisted candidates for interview. Please note that only shortlisted candidates will be contacted.
• Candidates obtaining a minimum of 70% (490 points) of the maximum obtainable points for the technical criteria (70 points) shall be considered for the financial evaluation.
• Technical Criteria weight overall: 70%;
• Financial Criteria weight overall: 30%.
• Financial Evaluation : Total 30% (300 points)
• The following formula will be used to evaluate financial proposal:
• p = y (µ/z), where
• p = points for the financial proposal being evaluated
• y = maximum number of points for the financial proposal
• µ = price of the lowest priced proposal
• z = price of the proposal being evaluated

CONTRACT AWARD

• Candidate obtaining the highest combined scores in the combined score of Technical and Financial evaluation will be considered technically qualified and will be offered to enter into contract with UNDP.

INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENT

• The Consultant will report to the Human Rights Policy Specialist at the MPTF office.

PAYMENT SCHEDULE

• Payments will be made following certification by the Technical Secretariat of the satisfactory delivery of the outputs as per the following terms:
• 20% upon satisfactory delivery of an Inception Report;
• 20% upon delivery of a satisfactory draft evaluation report;
• Remaining 60% will be payable upon satisfactory delivery of the final report

Annexes (click on the hyperlink to access the documents):

Annex 1: UNDP P-11 Form for ICs

Annex 2: IC Contract Template

Annex 3: C General Terms and Conditions

Annex 4: RLA Template

Annex 5: Individual Consultant General Terms & Conditions

Any request for clarification must be sent by email to procurement.mptfo@undp.org

The MPTF office will respond by email and will send written copies of the response, including an explanation of the query without identifying the source of inquiry, to all applicants.