Procurement Notices

The Philippines is considered to be one of the world’s most biologically rich countries.  Its marine waters support the richest coral reef communities on the planet and its terrestrial ecosystems are similarly diverse, supporting a wealth of natural resources and a rich array of species diversity. It is one of the world’s 18 megadiversity countries, which together host more than 70% of the world’s species.  Together with Madagascar, it is also one of the only two countries in the world which are both a megadiverse country and a global conservation hotspot.  The entire country comprises a Conservation International Hotspot, and all remaining forest and coastal areas fall within one of four WWF Global 200 Ecoregions.  This makes the Philippines one of the planet’s highest conservation priorities.  The country is home to a vast assemblage of species, many of them found nowhere else in the world. The Philippines has among the highest rates of species discovery in the world (sixteen new species of mammals have been discovered in the last ten years alone).  New species are being discovered at a remarkable rate and this pattern shows no sign of slowing.  Current taxonomic estimates show that the Philippines has the highest level of endemism in the Indo-Malayan Realm on a per unit-area basis and the highest concentration of biodiversity on earth.

The primary government response to protect this important biodiversity has been the establishment of a system of protected areas through the National Integrated Protected Areas System (NIPAS). However, the system currently excludes other areas of critical connective habitat and other sites which are globally significant for biodiversity conservation. These are the Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs) and the surrounding production landscapes of PAs and KBAs which are important for connectivity of key biodiversity corridors. The result is a highly fragmented landscape, consisting of unsustainable agricultural and natural resources production systems and incompatible land uses which further expose the remaining natural habitats to threats. These are more evident at the level of local government units who are responsible for integrated management of lands under their jurisdiction, including PA/KBA territories, and the production landscape. To arrest fragmentation and ensure that activities in the surrounding landscape conserve species assemblages and maintain ecosystem functions, three major capacity constraints have been identified: (i) inadequate policies, systems, tools and capacities by government agencies at the national level to encourage local government unit (LGU) landscape level biodiversity conservation efforts; (ii) weak capacities and lack of tools by LGUs for mainstreaming biodiversity in landscape level and local development planning; and (iii) failure to integrate biodiversity concerns into local development planning, leading to unsustainable management of the surrounding landscape.

The Biodiversity Partnerships Project, hereinafter referred to as the BPP, directly addresses these barriers through an integrated approach aimed at strengthening enabling policies at the national level; enhancing capacities of LGUs, and demonstration in selected pilot sites. These would be achieved through partnerships with key national government agencies, LGUs and national and local conservation NGOs, to muster their resources and expertise.

Objective and Scope:

The objective of BPP is to demonstrate how Local Government Units (LGUs), with enhanced capacities, and working together with local and national partners, can plan and manage economic activities and growth in ways that meet landscape-level biodiversity conservation and sustainable use objectives in critical biogeographic regions.

The project, which is a programmatic initiative on biodiversity rather than the usual site-based projects, intends to generate the following major outcomes and corresponding outputs:

Outcome 1: National-level systems, policies, tools and capacities are in place to support LGU level biodiversity conservation efforts.

• Policy & tools for biodiversity impact assessments of national agricultural & natural resource policies, plans & programmes adopted by DA & DENR.

• National-level policy, programs & technical capacity to support biodiversity-friendly agricultural practices.

• Enhanced national-level system for regulation of trade in wild plant & animal resources.

• Policies to encourage investments in biodiversity-friendly business opportunities.

• National-level systems for knowledge management

Outcome 2: LGUs encompassing 1.6 Million hectares in five key biogeographic regions have the tools and capacities to integrate sustainable management into decentralized government structures.

• Tools, guidelines & methods developed to mainstream biodiversity in local development policy making, planning, budgeting, M & E.

• Toolkits & implementation capacity for application of SEAs, as well as, landscape & seascape level natural resource management, across multiple LGUs.

• LGU-level policy framework & technical capacity to support biodiversity-friendly agricultural practices in critical eco-regions.

• Strengthened local regulation of trade in wild plant & animal resources.

• Regulatory structures & incentive systems to encourage the development of biodiversity-friendly businesses, including investor codes of conduct, established at the LGU level.

• Intra-LGU data & knowledge-sharing & advocacy network to synthesize project lessons learned into national policy & decision-making

Outcome 3: Systems, policies, tools and capacities for landscape level biodiversity conservation and sustainable development are applied at eight pilot sites covering 700,000 hectares across five critical biogeographic regions (Luzon, Palawan, Negros-Panay, Mindoro and Mindanao).

• Biodiversity-friendly projects, programmes & policies achieved via impact assessments          incorporated into LGU planning process (all sites).
• Trans-boundary integrated planning achieved via the implementation of toolkits (QPL, CPM, NNNP, Lake Mainit, Mt. Hamiguitan).
• Biodiversity-friendly agricultural practices (e.g. use of indigenous crop varieties), achieved via enhanced & extended standards & associated        certification processes. (all        sites).
• Improved regulations & enforcement of wild animal & plant gathering & trade achieved via strengthening of permitting system & implementation of trade regulation. (CPM,  Malampaya, Mt. Hamiguitan).
• Biodiversity-friendly investment programs promoted in selected sites (Siburan, NNNP, CPM, Mt. Hamiguitan).
• Incentive systems and innovative financing programs to reduce destructive activities by PA/KBA dependent communities (PES in QPL and NNNP, pilot CCAs in PPLS, QPL, CPM,  NNNP and Mt. Hamiguitan).
• Data and knowledge management to underpin preceding themes (awareness campaigns, support to inter LGU knowledge sharing, biodiversity   monitoring, biological  assessments).

The TE will be conducted according to the guidance, rules and procedures established by UNDP and GEF as reflected in the UNDP Evaluation Guidance for GEF Financed Projects.

The objectives of the evaluation are to assess the achievement of project results, and to draw lessons that can both improve the sustainability of benefits from this project, and aid in the overall enhancement of UNDP programming.  

Evaluation Approach and Method:

An overall approach and method for conducting project terminal evaluations of UNDP supported GEF financed projects have developed over time. The Evaluation Team is expected to frame the evaluation effort using the criteria of relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, sustainability, and impact, as defined and explained in the UNDP Guidance for Conducting Terminal Evaluations of UNDP-supported, GEF-financed Projects. A set of questions covering each of these criteria have been drafted and are included with this TOR (TOR Annex C) The Evaluation Team is expected to amend, complete and submit this matrix as part of an evaluation Inception Report, and shall include it as an annex to the final report.

The evaluation must provide evidence‐based information that is credible, reliable and useful. The team is expected to follow a participatory and consultative approach ensuring close engagement with government counterparts, in particular the GEF operational focal point, UNDP Country Office, project team, UNDP GEF Technical Adviser based in the region and key stakeholders. The Evaluation Team is expected to conduct a field mission to Manila and selected project sites. Interviews will be held with the following organizations and individuals at a minimum:

• Biodiversity Management Bureau of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR);

• DENR Regional Offices

• Partner National Government Agencies (NGAs)

• Partner Non-Government Organizations (NGOs)

• Participating local government units representatives

   

The team will review all relevant sources of information, such as the project document, project reports – including Annual APR/PIR, project budget revisions, progress reports, GEF focal area tracking tools, project files, Mid Term Evaluation Report (MTR) and any other materials that the team considers useful for this evidence-based assessment. A list of documents that the project team will provide to the Evaluation Team for review is included in Annex B of this Terms of Reference.

ANNEX B

LIST OF DOCUMENTS TO BE REVIEWED BY THE EVALUATORS

The evaluation will use the following methods for data collection:

Document Review

• GEF Project Information Form (PIF), Project Document and CEO Endorsement – Partnerships for Biodiversity Conservation: Mainstreaming in Local Agricultural Landscapes (Biodiversity Partnerships Project)

• Implementing/Executing partner arrangements

• Annual Reports

• Quarterly Progress Reports

• APRs/PIRs (2012, 2014, 2015)

• Minutes of Project Board meetings

• Work and Financial Plans (2012-2016)

• MOAs, resolutions, or other official documents expressing local partners support to the project

• Key outputs produced by the project that will include handbook/guides, plans, maps,inventories

• Sample project communication (IEC) materials produced by the site partners

• List and contact details for project staff, key project stakeholders, including Project Boards, and other partners to be consulted

• Project sites, highlighting suggested visits

• Mid Term Review (MTR) Report

• Project Tracking Tool, at baseline, at mid-term, and at terminal points

• UNDP Development Assistance Framework (UNDAF)

• UNDP Country Programme Document (CPD)

• GEF focal area strategic program objectives

Key Informant Interviews

The evaluation will include interviews with key stakeholders:
 

• Members of the Project Board

• Members of the Inter-Agency Technical Working Group (ITWG)

• Officials of BMB

• Members of the BMB Project Facilitation Group (PFG)

• GEF Operational Focal Point

• Staff/Consultants of BPP

• Staff of UNDP Country Office

• Officers, staff of partner NGOs and DENR Regional Offices

• Local government unit officials and staff in pilot sites

• Partner Academe (UP ISSI)

Evaluation Criteria & Ratings:

An assessment of project performance will be carried out, based against expectations set out in the Project Logical Framework/Results Framework, which provides performance and impact indicators for project implementation along with their corresponding means of verification. The evaluation will at a minimum cover the criteria of: relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, sustainability and impact. Ratings must be provided on the following performance criteria. The competed table must be included in the evaluation executive summary.

Project Finance / Cofinance:

The Evaluation will assess the key financial aspects of the project, including the extent of co-financing planned and realized. Project cost and funding data will be required, including annual expenditures. Variances between planned and actual expenditures will need to be assessed and explained. Results from recent financial audits, as available, should be taken into consideration. The Evaluation Team will receive assistance from the Country Office (CO) and Project Team to obtain financial data in order to complete the co-financing table below, which will be included in the terminal evaluation report.

Mainstreaming:

UNDP supported GEF financed projects are key components in UNDP country programming, as well as regional and global programmes. The evaluation will assess the extent to which the project was successfully mainstreamed with other UNDP priorities, including poverty alleviation, improved governance, the prevention and recovery from natural disasters, and gender. In addition, the evaluation will be included in the country office evaluation plan.

Impact:

The Evaluation Team will assess the extent to which the project is achieving impacts or progressing towards the achievement of impacts. Key findings that should be brought out in the evaluations include whether the project has demonstrated: a) verifiable improvements in ecological status, b) verifiable reductions in stress on ecological systems, or c) demonstrated progress towards these impact achievements.

Conclusions, Recommendations & Lessons:

The evaluation report must include a chapter providing a set of conclusions, recommendations and lessons.  Conclusions should build on findings and be based in evidence. Recommendations should be prioritized, specific, relevant, and targeted, with suggested implementers of the recommendations. Lessons should have wider applicability to other initiatives across the region, the area of intervention, and for the future. 

Implementation Arrangements:

The principal responsibility for managing this evaluation resides with the UNDP CO in the Philippines. The UNDP CO will contract the Evaluation Team / firm and ensure the timely provision of per diems and travel arrangements within the country for the team. The Project Team will be responsible for liaising with the Evaluation Team to set up stakeholder interviews, arrange field visits, coordinate with the Government etc.

Evaluation Timeframe:

The Evaluation is expected to start by July 14, 2016 and have an estimated total input of 40 working days.  The final work plan will be agreed jointly by the Evaluation Team and UNDP upon submission of a draft work plan and methodology for discussion.

Table 4. Timetable for BPP TE Preparation

Evaluation Deliverables:

The evaluation team is expected to deliver the following:

Table 5. TE Deliverables

When submitting the final evaluation report, the evaluator is required also to provide an 'audit trail', detailing how all received comments have (and have not) been addressed in the final evaluation report. 

Expertise Required:

The BPP seeks to engage the services of two (2) independent national consultants who together will act as the Evaluation Team and perform the Terminal Evaluation of the Project.  The Biodiversity Mainstreaming Evaluation Expert will focus the evaluation on the BD-mainstreaming work in the local planning and development processes. The consultant must have at least demonstrated experience in handling international UNDP-GEF Biodiversity Project Terminal Evaluations in the past five (5) years.

The Project Team in consultation with UNDP CO will be responsible for logistical arrangements for the field visits including setting up meetings and organizing in country travel. The Project Team will be responsible for liaising with the Evaluation Team to set up stakeholder interviews, arrange field visits, coordinate with the Government etc.

The evaluation will commence when formalities are completed by July 1, 2016. The Evaluation Team will present preliminary findings to the Project Board planned in August 2016. A draft Terminal Evaluation Report for comments will be submitted to UNDP within 15 days following the de-briefing. UNDP will coordinate comments from partners and share consolidated written comments with the consultants within 10 days after receiving the draft TE report. A final TE report with comments from partners incorporated will be submitted to UNDP no later than end of September 19, 2016; for consideration in the preparation of the Terminal Project Review/Project Implementation Review by UNDP-GEF.

The consultants must have extensive knowledge in the environmental and local development planning and institutional frameworks for biodiversity conservation in the Philippines. They must have experience in developing performance indicators, project appraisal and evaluation of development projects.  They would assess the project’s results, sustainability of project outcomes, project’s M&E system, processes in achieving project’s results, and identify lessons learned and recommendations. Specifically, he/she will provide analysis of the project’s overall performance vis-à-vis its replicability and sustainability in the Philippine context.

Evaluator Ethics:

The Evaluation Team will be held to the highest ethical standards and is required to sign a Code of Conduct upon acceptance of the assignment. UNDP evaluations are conducted in accordance with the principles outlined in the UNEG 'Ethical Guidelines for Evaluations'.

Schedule of Payment:

The Biodiversity Mainstreaming Evaluation Expert will be contracted by UNDP and remunerated according to the reviewed and accepted financial proposal. The contract will be output-based and payment issued only upon delivery of satisfactory outputs/milestones.

• First Tranche                 - 10%   Upon submission and approval of TE inception report;
• Second Tranche            - 30%   Upon submission and approval of the 1st draft terminal evaluation report;
• Third Tranche                - 60%    Upon submission and approval (UNDP-CO and UNDP RTA) of the final terminal evaluation report.

Corporate competences:

• Commitment to UNDP’s mission, vision and values;
• Sensitivity to cultural, gender, religion, race, nationality and age differences.

Functional competences:

• Experience in working in the private sector, or in an outreach position relating with the government and private sector;
• Past experience and effective communication skills for dialoguing with senior level private sector executives;
• Strong initiative and desire to succeed, accountable and willingness to be pro-active in identifying suitable companies for BCtA membership and engaging in appropriate business opportunities;
• Experience and knowledge of the international development sector, e.g. through working at the UN in the private sector engagement and/or development field;
• Existing work experience in the Philippines and with the Philippines-based private sector organizations/companies, donor partners and UN agencies;
• Possess strong intellectual interest in economic development and the role of the private sector in driving poverty reduction; knowledge of private sector – development impact assessment;
• Past international work experience preferred;
• Demonstrated ability to function in a team environment & to deal with complex multi-stakeholder environment.

QUALIFICATIONS:

Education:

• Advanced degree in Urban and Regional Planning, Environment and Natural Resource Management; Environmental Economy; Environmental Science, Agrobiodiversity or related fields;

Experience:

• Demonstrated experience in conducting project evaluations; prior experience in GEF Project evaluations would be an advantage
• At least 5-10 years of proven experience in local development planning with strong elements of biodiversity conservation and environmental assessment and management;
• Demonstrated strong knowledge of Monitoring and Evaluation methods for development projects; knowledge of UNDP’s results-based management orientation and practices;
• Familiarity with biodiversity conservation issues in the Philippines;
• A solid understanding of environmental management , with a focus on participatory processes, joint management, and gender issues;
• Fluency in the English language and excellent oral and written communication skills
• Willingness to undertake regular field visits and interact with different stakeholders, especially primary stakeholders;

Desirable:

• Knowledge of the biodiversity, climate change and land degradation - focal areas in which the project operates;
• Understanding of UNDP and GEF procedures;
• Experience in data processing and with computers.
• Experience in the evaluation of technical assistance projects, preferably with UNDP or other United Nations development agencies and major donors.  If possible, experience in the evaluation of GEF-funded capacity building projects.

Language:

• Very good command of oral and written English.

Criteria for selection process:

The offer will evaluated based on the Combined Scoring method – where the qualifications will be weighted a max. of 60% and combined with the financial offer which will be weighted a max of 40%.

Application requirements:

• Duly accomplished Letter of Confirmation of Interest and Availability using the template provided by UNDP;
• Personal CV or P11, 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.

Application requirements should be emailed to procurement.ph@undp.org and registry.ph@undp.org on or before 10 July 2016.