Project Terminal Evaluator – UNDP – Manila

Duties and Responsibilities
Scope of Work
The Evaluation consultant will primarily be responsible in the conduct of the project terminal evaluation. Under the overall guidance of the Evaluation Reference Group, and reporting to the UNDP evaluation manager, the evaluator shall assess the relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, and sustainability of the Accelerating the BUB through Inclusive and Effective Governance Project by reviewing progress towards project results based on the project document and annual work plans. The evaluation will also review the project’s theory of change vis-à-vis the project’s achievements and risks and assess the project’s potential effects on the target groups. It will likewise highlight strengths, weaknesses/gaps, good practices, and provide forward looking recommendations for future government financing projects.
The evaluation will also provide an analysis of the data generated from the client satisfaction surveys that were collected by partner CSOs. To the extent possible, the evaluation will assess the contributions of the project to the quality of life of the BUB beneficiaries, namely: Extreme Poor from urban and rural families (Pantawid Pamilya Pilipino Program- 4Ps beneficiaries), Youth (out- of school youth), Solo Parents, Senior Citizens, Women, Early Childhood Care and Development (ECCD) students, Supervised Neighborhood Play (SNP) (children who are not able to avail ECCD center- based services), Government Employees (child development workers, municipal/ city employees, etc), Persons with Disabilities (PWDs), fisher folks and farmers.
The conduct of the evaluation should be based on the following criteria and key guide questions and may employ the following methodological approaches.
a. Evaluation criteria and key guiding questions
1. Relevance

Did the project design and choice of activities and deliverables properly reflect and respond to specifically identified needs of the government and of the beneficiaries. How were the needs determined and assessed.
How valid is the Theory of Change. Were the planned and actual activities and outputs of the project consistent with the intended outcomes

2. Efficiency
To what extent was the project managed and delivered in a cost-effective way
How was the project managed in terms of timeliness
How did project risks influence the efficiency of project implementation. Were all major risks adequately identified before and during project implementation

3. Effectiveness
To what extent is the project successful in achieving results, both expected and unexpected
How effective was the project in building the capacities of partners and beneficiaries
To what extent has the use of UNDP accelerated the implementation of the project effective in the following areas: budgeting, procurement, HR augmentation, partnerships and CSO engagement, finance, and monitoring
To what extent has UNDP met standard integrity/accountability measures in the delivery of civil works projects, goods, and services
What are the innovative approaches or strategies that the project introduced
What value has UNDP added. Both expected and unexpected
Is the project reaching the intended beneficiaries, rights holders and duty bearers
To what extent has the project been effective in policy/systems influencing at the national and local level
Did the project build effective synergies with other existing initiatives
What are the results of the client satisfaction surveys carried out by partner CSOs
To what extent does the project integrate gender equality, women’s empowerment, and human rights

4. Sustainability
To what extent can project results be continued without the project’s further involvement
To what extent has the project built in systems to address future risks (e.g. wastage, over-budgeted specs)
What are the learnings and best practices

b. Methodology
Methodological approaches may include some or all of the following:
Evaluation should employ a combination of both qualitative and quantitative evaluation methods and instruments.
Document review of all relevant documentation. This would include a review of inter alia:
Project document (contribution agreement)
Theory of change and results framework
Programme and project quality assurance reports.
Annual work plans
Activity designs
Consolidated quarterly and annual reports
Results-oriented monitoring report.
Highlights of project board meetings
Technical/financial monitoring reports.
Semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders including key government counterparts, donor community members, representatives of key civil society organizations, UNCT members and implementing partners:
Development of evaluation questions around relevance, effectiveness, efficiency and sustainability and designed for different stakeholders to be interviewed.
Key informant and focus group discussions with men and women, beneficiaries and stakeholders.
All interviews should be undertaken in full confidence and anonymity. The final evaluation report should not assign specific comments to individuals.
Surveys and questionnaires including participants in development programmes, UNCT members and/or surveys and questionnaires involving other stakeholders at strategic and programmatic levels.
Field visits and on-site validation of key tangible outputs and interventions.
The evaluator is expected to follow a participatory and consultative approach that ensures close engagement with the evaluation managers, implementing partners and direct beneficiaries.
Other methods such as outcome mapping, observational visits, group discussions, etc.
Data review and analysis of monitoring and other data sources and methods.
Ensure maximum validity, reliability of data (quality) and promote use; the evaluation team will ensure triangulation of the various data sources.
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 UNDP, stakeholders and the evaluators.

Expected Outputs and Deliverables
The Evaluator is expected to deliver the following outputs with an indicative schedule. The total length of the contract shall ideally be two and a half (2.5) months, with a tolerance of one (1) month depending on the value-added work to be proposed compared to the

Required Skills and Experience
Qualifications of the Successful Individual Contractor
Educational Qualifications
Master’s Degree in economics, political science, social science, public administration, business management, or other relevant fields. A higher degree as well as specialized training in M&E, project management, etc. are advantageous

At least five (5) years of work or consultancy experience in the monitoring and evaluation of development programs and projects, with preference to those with demonstrated specialization/ experience in evaluations, and those with work experience in the government or international organizations.
A portfolio of at least two (2) published and unpublished research work in relevant policy/program areas and/or research output from consultancy projects in the last two (2) years. Research works may include applied research studies, e.g. evaluation, action research, policy papers, etc. At least one (1) of these should be an evaluation;
Demonstrated experience in the application of various quantitative and qualitative research methodologies, with demonstrated specialization in either quantitative or qualitative research, or both;

Language requirements
Fluency in the English language and proven ability to write high-quality technical reports (applicant will be required to provide work samples)

Click here to Apply Online