| Overview : TERMS OF REFERENCE TERMINAL EVALUATION CONTRACTOR FOR GMMA READY PROJECT PROJECT TITLE Enhancing Greater Metro Manila’s Institutional Capacities for Effective Disaster /Climate Risk Management towards Sustainable Development or GMMA READY Project PROJECT DESCRIPTION The implementation of the GMMA READY Project is a collaborative endeavour between and among a number of national and sub-national agencies, local government units (LGUs) and civil society organizations with the National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council (NDRRMC) - Office of Civil Defense (OCD) as Implementing Partner (IP) and the following agencies as Responsible Partners (RPs) with DILG and NEDA as Cooperating Agencies: - Philippine Institute of Volcanology and Seismology (PHIVOLCS)
- Philippine Atmospheric, Geophysical and Astronomical Services Administration (PAGASA)
- National Mapping and Resource Information Authority (NAMRIA)
- Mines and Geosciences Bureau (MGB)
- Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board (HLURB)
- Metro Manila Development Authority (MMDA)
- Climate Change Commission (CCC)
The Project aims to increase institutional capacities of key local and national risk management actors towards a disaster /climate resilient GMMA. The project has as coverage : Metro Manila in the national capital region and the contiguous provinces of Laguna, Cavite and Rizal in Region IVA and Bulacan in Region III. To project objectives is expected to be achieved through the systematic and integrated implementation and attainment of five (5) key outputs: Expected Output 1: GMMA’s vulnerabilities to disaster and climate change risks assessed; Expected Output 2: Priority disaster/climate risk mitigation actions for GMMA such as formulation and testing of an integrated contingency plan and establishment of early warning systems developed and implemented; Expected Output 3: Competencies of GMMA LGUs and critical partners to mainstream DRM/CRM into local planning and regulatory processes enhanced; Expected Output 4: Mainstreaming DRM/CRM into local land use/development plan(s) and regulatory processes of Metro Manila and selected GMMA LGUs demonstrated; and Knowledge management system, including a vigorous Community of Practice on Disaster/Climate Risk Management established. The objectives of the evaluation are to assess the achievement of project results, draw lessons and good practices that can both improve the sustainability of benefits from this project, aid in the overall enhancement of UNDP and GOP programming. SCOPE OF WORK Specifically, the terminal evaluation should be able to: 1. Assess Project Results. The final evaluation will assess achievement of the project’s objective, outputs and outcomes and provide ratings for the targeted objective and outcomes and the extent to which they were achieved. The evaluation will also assess if the project has led to any other short term or long term positive or negative consequences. While assessing a project’s results, the final evaluation will seek to determine the extent of achievement and shortcomings in reaching the project’s objective as stated in the project document and also indicate if there were any changes and whether those changes were approved. If the project did not establish a baseline (initial conditions), the evaluator should seek to estimate the baseline condition so that achievements and results can be properly established. Assessment of project outcomes should be a priority. Outcomes could include but are not restricted to stronger institutional capacities, higher public awareness (when leading to changes of behavior), and transformed policy frameworks or markets. An assessment of early or emerging impact should also be determined, if possible. The evaluator should assess project results using indicators and relevant tracking tools. To determine the level of achievement of the project’s objective and outcomes, the evaluation will be undertaken using the following criteria: Relevance, Efficiency and Effectiveness The evaluation of relevancy, effectiveness and efficiency will be as objective as possible and will include sufficient and convincing empirical evidence. Ideally, the project monitoring system should deliver quantifiable information that can lead to a robust assessment of the project’s effectiveness and efficiency. In rating the project’s outcomes, relevance and effectiveness will be considered as critical criteria. The evaluator will also assess other results of the project, including positive and negative actual (or anticipated) impacts or emerging long-term effects of a project. However, given the long term nature of impacts, it might not be possible for the evaluator to identify or fully assess them. Evaluator will, nonetheless, indicate the steps to be taken to assess long-term project impacts, e.g. impacts on local populations, especially the vulnerable like women, children and the elderly; replication effects and other local effects. Capacity Development. The effects of Project activities on strengthening the capacities of the IP, other responsible partners, concerned peoples’/community based organization (s); andconcerned local government unit(s) will be assessed. Leverage. An assessment of the Project’s effectiveness in leveraging funds that would influence larger projects or broader policies to support its goal should also be made. Awareness Raising. The Project’s contribution to raising awareness on environmental issues, as well as its contribution to promoting policy or advocacy activities and collaboration among communities will be assessed. Gender Mainstreaming. The Project’s contribution to mainstreaming gender perspective will be assessed. Financial Delivery. The following table should be completed to provide a summary of the planned and actual activities of the project as well as the expenditures up to the present. 2. Assess Sustainability of Project Outcomes. The final evaluation will assess the likelihood of sustainability of outcomes at project termination, and provide a rating for this. Sustainability will be understood as the likelihood of continued benefits after the project ends. The sustainability assessment will give special attention to analysis of the risks that are likely to affect the persistence of project outcomes. The sustainability assessment should also explain how other important contextual factors that are not outcomes of the project will affect sustainability. The following dimensions or aspects of sustainability will be addressed: a) Financial, b) Socio –political, c) Institutional framework and governance, and d) Environmental. 3. Assess the Project’s Catalytic Role / Partnerships and Replicability. The final evaluation will also describe any catalytic or replication effect of the project. If no effects are identified, the evaluation will describe the catalytic or replication actions that the project carried out. Indicators for catalytic or replication effect would include partnerships established, IEC activities carried-out, local level acceptance and understanding of project, local level behavioral changes, if any, should be noted. 4. Assess the Project’s Monitoring and Evaluation System. The final evaluation will assess whether the project met the minimum requirements for project design of M&E and the implementation of the Project M&E plan. Projects must have adequate budget for execution of the M&E plan, and provide adequate resources during implementation of the M&E plan. Project managers are also expected to use the information generated by the M&E system during project implementation to adapt and improve the project. The final evaluation report will include separate assessments of the achievements and shortcomings of the project M&E plan and of implementation of the M&E plan. 5. Assess Processes that Affected Attainment of Project Results. It is suggested that the evaluator also considers the following issues affecting project implementation and attainment of project results, when relevant. Evaluators are not expected to provide ratings or separate assessment on the following issues but may consider them while assessing the performance and results: a) Preparation and readiness; b) Country ownership ; c) Stakeholders involvement ; d) Financial planning; e) Implementing/Executing Agency’s supervision and backstopping; f) Co-financing and Project Outcomes and Sustainability; and g) Delays and Project Outcomes and Sustainability. 6. Identify lessons and provide recommendations for future actions. The evaluator will present lessons and recommendations in the final evaluation report on all aspects of the project that they consider relevant. The evaluator will be expected to give special attention to analyzing lessons and proposing recommendations on aspects related to factors that contributed or hindered: attainment of project objectives, sustainability of project benefits, innovation, catalytic effect and replication, and project monitoring and evaluation. Evaluator should seek to provide a few well formulated lessons applicable to the type of project at hand or to UNDP E&E overall portfolio. Final evaluations should not be undertaken with the motive of appraisal, preparation, or justification, for a follow-up phase. Wherever possible, the final evaluation report should include examples of good practices for other projects in a focal area, country or region. To determine the level of achievement of the project’s objective and outcomes, the evaluation will be undertaken using the following criteria: Relevance, Efficiency, Effectiveness, sustainability and impact. Refer to TOR ANNEX 2 for set of questions covering each of the criteria. The evaluator may amend, complete, and submit the matrix as part of the inception report and as annex to the final report. The evaluation must provide evidenced based information that is credible, reliable and useful. The evaluator is expected to follow a participatory and consultative approach ensuring close engagement with responsible partners and other stakeholders of the project through UNDP, OCD and Project Team. The evaluator is expected to conduct field visits to project sites in the cities and municipality of Metro Manila and the provinces of Bulacan in Regions III and Rizal, Laguna, Cavite in region IVA. Interviews will be held with the following LGUs, individuals and agencies at a minimum. List and contact numbers shall be provided by the project team during the inception meeting: Team Managers or representatives from the Responsible Partners - CPDCs/DRRMOs of LGUs (17 MM an
- OCD PMD staff
- National Program Director, Project Manager, Assistant Project Manager
- UNDP representative
- Representatives from other partners
The evaluator will review all relevant sources of information, such as the Project Document, Project Annual and Quarterly reports, project budget revisions, progress reports, project files. List of documents for the review of the evaluator is attached in ANNEX 1. The evaluation findings of the evaluation will be based on the following: - A desk review of project documents including, but not limited to
- Field visits to GMMA READY -supported projects/areas
- Telephone and face-to-face interviews with intended users for the project outputs and other
- Stakeholders involved with the project. As appropriate, these interviews could be combined
- with email questionnaires.
- KIIs and FGD
EXPECTED OUTPUTS AND DELIVERABLES The Evaluator is expected to deliver the following: Inception Report. This is to be submitted by the evaluator before going into full- pledged data collection exercise. The inception report details what is evaluated and why, how each of the evaluation questions will be answered by way of: proposed methods, proposed data sources including data collection procedures. The evaluator shall also indicate in the inception report the proposed schedule of tasks, activities and deliverables and the evaluators’ team member assigned for each of the task/deliverable.The inception report provides the programme unit and evaluators with an opportunity that they share same understanding about the evaluation and clarify any issues and concerns. Initial Findings for Presentation to Project Management and UNDP. Towards the end of the exercise, the Evaluator will discuss its preliminary key findings and recommendations with the programme principals (OCD and UNDP) and present these at a key stakeholders’ meeting participated in by the responsible partners, selected local government units and beneficiary organizations. The Consultant shall use this feedback mechanism to finalize the report. Draft Final Report. The evaluator shall provide the programme principals ( OCD and UNDP) with the draft final report for review. Terminal Evaluation Report. All outputs are subject to the review and final approval of the contracting party. INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENT UNDP is the principal responsible for managing the evaluation. The Project team/OCD PMD will be responsible for liaising with the Evaluator to set up stakeholders interview and field visits with the following : - Team Managers or representatives from the Responsible Partners
- CPDCs/DRRMOs of LGUs
- OCD PMD staff
- National Program Director, Project Manager, Assistant Project Manager
- UNDP representative
- Representatives from other partners
The consultant shall provide his/her own computers, cameras, communication during the entire contract duration. Computers, projectors, camera and other equipment to be used during the inception meeting shall be provided by the Project. DURATION OF WORK The evaluation is expected to be completed within a period of two (2) months. The Project expects the Consultant to give an estimated lead time of two weeks for the responsible party (RP) and the implementing party (IP) to review outputs and give comments on the report outputs. DUTY STATION The Consultant shall have as his/her duly station for the contract duration at the OCD – Project Management Division. In pursuit of his/her other relevant activities, the Consultant is expected to travel to the Project areas /sites and offices of other concerned agencies. The Consultant is not required to report regularly at their duty station/location. QUALIFICATIONS OF THE SUCCESSFUL INDIVIDUAL CONTRACTOR Master’s degree (PhD an advantage) in Development Management, Economics, Social Sciences, Community Development and or other related fields At least seven (7) years of progressively responsible experience in development research, evaluation of development programmes, or project management, preferably in areas related to basic services, livelihood, governance, peace and conflict resolution, humanitarian assistance, internal displacement or community development Demonstrate familiarity with the UN System and managing donor-financed projects will be given preference. Previous experience with results based monitoring and evaluation methodologies, technical knowledge in the targeted focal area/s. Proven ability to write high-quality technical reports SCOPE OF PRICE PROPOSAL AND SCHEDULE OF PAYMENTS The total cost for this project is a lump sum amount to include all costs such as professional fee, travel and meeting costs, and overhead costs, among others. CRITERIA FOR SELECTION OF THE BEST OFFER The Technical and Financial Proposals shall comprise 70% and 30%, respectively of the evaluation criteria. 1. Technical proposal (70%) The technical proposal shall be comprised by the following documents: - CV of the Evaluator
- Plan of Approach and Methodology
The technical proposal shall be evaluated based on the following criteria: Background and experience of evaluator – 30% Plan of approach and methodology – 70% The plan of approach and methodology should be a comprehensive narrative explaining in detail how the evaluator plans to undertake the assignment, proposed list of respondents and data-collection methods, detailed work plan, framework and working outline of the evaluation report. 2. Financial Proposal (30%) The Financial Proposal should be all-inclusive covering professional fees, travel expenses, supplies and all other related expenses. A more detailed Terms of Reference (TOR) is attached in this procurement notice. All CV's and financial proposals, using the template attached to this notice, should be received by UNDP on or before 5 February 2016. All proposals should be addressed to : Procurement Team United Nations Development Programme 30th Floor, Yuchengco Tower, RCBC Plaza 6819 Ayala Avenue cor. Sen. Gil Puyat Avenue 1226 Makati City, Metro Manila Fax No. +632 889 6659 / 901 02 00 Email : procurement.ph@undp.org/registry.ph@undp.org | 
