View Notice

[Re-advertisement] National Project Terminal Evaluation Independent Evaluator for Strengthening Marine Protected Areas to Conserve Marine Key Biodiversity Areas in the Philippines
Procurement Process :IC - Individual contractor
Office :UNDP Country Office - PHILIPPINES
Deadline :28-Feb-20
Posted on :13-Feb-20
Reference Number :63437
Link to Atlas Project :
00076994 - Strengthening the Marine Protected Area System to Conser
Documents :
Terms of Reference
Offeror's Template/Financial Proposal
P11 Template
General Terms & Conditions for IC
Overview :

In accordance with UNDP and GEF M&E policies and procedures, all full and medium-sized UNDP support GEF financed projects are required to undergo a terminal evaluation upon completion of implementation. These Terms of Reference (TOR) sets out the expectations for a Terminal Evaluation (TE) of the Strengthening Marine Protected Areas to Conserve Marine Key Biodiversity Areas in the Philippines” (PIMS# 4389)


Evaluation approach and method

An overall approach and method for conducting project terminal evaluations of UNDP supported GEF financed projects has developed over time. The evaluator 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 (Annex C) The evaluator 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 evaluator is expected to follow a participatory and consultative approach ensuring close engagement with government counterpart and Project partners, including non-government organizations (NGOs), People’s Organizations (POs), provincial and municipal Local Government Units (LGUs) and private sector. Table 1 below lists down specific offices and organizations which are to provide feedback on Project implementation through Key Informant Interviews and/or Focus Group Discussions (FGDs).


Table 1. SMARTSEAS PH Project Partners

Agency Categories

Specific Agencies

National Government Agencies (NGAs)

  1. Office of the Undersecretary for Mining Concerns and Climate Change, GEF Operational Focal Point
  2. DENR Central Office – Policy and Planning Service
  3. DENR Central Office – Foreign Assisted and Special Projects Service 
  4. Biodiversity Management Bureau (BMB)
  • Offices of the Director and Assistant Director
  • Biodiversity Policy and Knowledge Management Division
  • Coastal and Marine Division
  1. Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources
  2. National Economic and Development Authority – Agriculture and Natural Resources Staff (NEDA-ANRES)
  3. Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG)

Local NGA Offices

  1. DENR Regional Offices (regions IV-A, IV-B, VII, XI and CARAGA)
  2. Provincial Environment and Natural Resource Office (PENRO)
  3. Community Environment and Natural Resource Office (CENRO)
  4. BFAR Regional Office
  5. BFAR Provincial Fishery Office

Provincial and municipal LGUs

  1. Batangas Province and LGUs (Balayan, Batangas City, Lobo, Mabini, Nasugbu, San Juan)
  2. Oriental Mindoro and LGUs (Calapan City, Gloria, Naujan, Pinamalayan, Pola, Puerto Galera
  3. Occidental Mindoro and LGUs (Lubang, Looc, Abra de Ilog, Paluan
  4. Palawan Province and LGUs (Aborlan, Narra, Sofronio Espanola, Brooke’s Point , Bataraza)
  5. Negros Oriental and LGUs (San Carlos City, Tayasan, Bindoy, Manjuyod, Ayungon, Amlan, Bais City, Guihulngan City, La Libertad, San Jose)
  6. Negros Occidental and LGUs (Calatrava, Toboso
  7. Cebu Province and LGUs (Alegria, Aloguinsan, Badian, Bantayan, Ginatilan, Moalboal, Samboan, Sta. Fe, Santander, San Remegio
  8. Davao City
  9. Davao de Sur Province and LGUs (Sta. Cruz)
  10. Davao del Norte Province and LGUs (Island Garden City of Samal, City of Panabo, Tagum City)
  11. Compostela Valley Province and LGUs (Mabini, Maco)
  12. Davao Oriental Province and LGUs (Lupon, San Isidro)
  13. Surigao del Sur Province and LGUs (Carrascal, Cantilan, Lanuza, Cortes, Tandag City)

Local Responsible Partners

  1. Conservation International Philippines (CIP)
  2. National Fisheries Research and Development Institute (NFRDI)
  3. Fishbase Information Network (FIN)
  4. HARIBON Foundation
  5. Kabang Kalikasan ng Pilipinas (WWF Philippines)
  6. RARE Philippines
  7. UP Marine Science Institute

Other Local Partners

  1. VIP MPAN and LEN Technical Working Group
  2. Palawan Council for Sustainable Development
  3. TSPS Protected Area Office
  4. Davao Integrated Development Program (DIDP)
  5. Lanuza Bay Development Alliance


Partner People’s Organizations


List of Stakeholders to be presented of the result of evaluation by the consultant

  1. Project Management Unit
  2. Biodiversity Management Bureau
  3. United Nations Development Programme
  4. Evaluation Review Group (i.e. NEDA-ANRES, DENR Policy and Planning, DENR FASPO, BMB - CMD, BFAR, PEMSEA, PCSD, DILG)
  5. DENR-SMARTSeas Project Board


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


Evaluation Criteria & Ratings

An assessment of project performance will be carried out, based against expectations set out in the Project Logical Framework/Results Framework (see  Annex A), 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 completed table must be included in the evaluation executive summary.   The obligatory rating scales are included in  Annex D.


Evaluation Ratings:

 Monitoring and Evaluation


2. IA& EA Execution


M&E design at entry


Quality of UNDP Implementation


M&E Plan Implementation


Quality of Execution - Executing Agency


Overall quality of M&E


Overall quality of Implementation / Execution


3. Assessment of Outcomes


4. Sustainability




Financial resources:








Institutional framework and governance:


Overall Project Outcome Rating


Environmental :




The overall likelihood of sustainability:



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 evaluator(s) 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. 



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.



The evaluators 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, and/or c) demonstrated progress towards these impact achievements.


Conclusions, Recommendations & Lessons

The evaluation report must include a chapter providing a set of conclusionsrecommendations and lessons


Implementation Arrangements

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


Evaluation Timeframe

The total duration of the evaluation will be 38 days spread over 4 months according to the following plan:



Completion Date

Preparations for the TE Team (handover of Project Documents)

1 day

March 3, 2020

Document review and preparing TE Inception Report

Finalization and Validation of TE Inception Report- latest start of TE mission

3 days

March 6-8, 2020

TE mission: stakeholder meetings, interviews, field visits

21 days

March 3 - 28, 2020

Mission wrap-up meeting & presentation of initial findings- earliest end of TE mission

  • Presentation of initial findings to PMU, UNDP CO, DENR Policy and Planning, Foreign Assisted and Special Projects Services (FASPS) and BMB representatives

1 day

April 12, 2020

Preparing draft TE report (incorporate feedbacks during audit trail into draft report)

Produce a final draft of the TE; Presentation of initial findings to PMU, UNDP CO, DENR Policy and Planning, Foreign Assisted and Special Projects Services (FASPS) and BMB representatives

10 days

April 17-28, 2020

Presentation of the final draft report to PMU, UNDP CO and DENR BMB representatives

1 day

May 4, 2020

Presentation of the final TE Report to the Project Board

1 day

May 22, 2020


Evaluation Deliverables

The evaluation team is expected to deliver the following:





Inception Report

Evaluator provides clarifications on timing and method

No later than 2 weeks before the evaluation mission.

Inception Report presented to PMU, UNDP CO and BMB representatives

1st Presentation

Initial Findings

End of the evaluation mission

Initial findings presented to PMU, UNDP CO PMU, DENR Policy and Planning, Foreign Assisted and Special Projects Services (FASPS) BMB representatives, and ERG members.

Draft Final Report

Full report, (per annexed template) with annexes

Within 3 weeks of the evaluation mission

Draft Final Report presented to PMU, UNDP CO, DENR Policy and Planning, Foreign Assisted and Special Projects Services (FASPS) and BMB representatives and other Evaluation Reference Group (ERG) members


Sent to CO, reviewed by RTA, PCU, GEF OFPs

2nd Presentation

Draft Final Report

1 week after the preparation of the draft final report

Draft Final Report presented to DENR-PPS, DENR-FASPS, DENR-BMB, UNDP, and ERG members

Final Report*

Revised report

Within 1 week of receiving UNDP comments on draft

Final Report presented to the Project Board; signed-off by PMU, BMB, CO and RTA


Sent to CO for uploading to UNDP ERC.

*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.

Payment Scheme

Consultants 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.




Upon submission and approval of the TE Mission Inception Report


Upon submission and approval of the 1ST draft terminal evaluation report


Upon submission and approval of (UNDP-CO and UNDP RTA) of the final terminal evaluation report and audit trail.


All travel expenses for trips outside Manila will be shouldered by UNDP Project.



Duties and Responsibilities

The project was designed to accelerate the establishment of Marine Protected Areas (MPA) and MPA Networks to include more marine key biodiversity areas (KBAs) in order to reduce and arrest the rapid degradation of marine and coastal habitats.

In this regard, the project directly addresses these barriers through an integrated approach aimed at strengthening the conservation, protection and management of key marine biodiversity areas in the Philippines. This will be achieved through partnerships with key national government agencies, national and local conservation NGOs and LGUs. Three major outcomes are derived from this approach:

Outcome 1: Conservation effectiveness of existing and new MPAs/MPANs is enhanced through improvements in spatial coverage and representativeness (particularly coverage of under-represented KBAs), strengthening of the national system for MPA identification, designation and management under the NIPAS legislative framework, and quantifiable improvements in management of at least 10% of identified Marine KBAs nationwide, with concomitant increases in local stakeholder participation and support.

Outcome 2: Financial resources available for the management of MPAs and MPANs are sufficient to meet all critical management needs and are growing in line with the expansion of the MPA system. Sources of revenue for MPA management are being progressively diversified, with the percentage of revenue being derived from Government fiscal sources declining to less than 50% by end- project.

Outcome 3: A comprehensive policy framework in place and effectively implemented for the conservation, protection and management of the country’s marine ecosystems and fishery resources, that harmonizes mandates, plans and activities amongst all key MPA stakeholders including BMB, BFAR and relevant Local Government Units.

The Project is being managed by the Biodiversity Management Bureau (BMB, formerly PAWB) which has established a Project Management Unit (PMU) to implement certain outputs and coordinate the work of partners in pilot sites. Below is the project summary.

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.  


Team Composition

The National Consultant will primarily support the International Consultant, the Team Leader, in the conduct of the evaluation mission.  S/he is expected to do the tasks but not limited to the following:

  1. Assist the team leader and provide inputs in the preparation of the TE Inception Report and Mid-term Evaluation Report;
  2. Assist in the conduct of the evaluation mission especially in the gathering and analysis of data and information;
  3. Provide the national context in the analysis of SMARTSeas’ results and accomplishments; and
  4. Provide recommendations for improvement considering the national context where SMARTSeas operates.

The Evaluation Team is expected to discuss among themselves their detailed division of work and should be clearly articulated in the TE Inception Report.

The National Consultant will coordinate with the Team Leader (International Consultant).  The UNDP CO and PMU will provide support to the development of the evaluation work plan in consultation with key project partners. The project team (PMU) will serve as the reference group for the evaluation and ensure the monitoring of satisfactory completion of evaluation deliverables.

SMARTSeas PH PMU will provide office space and access to office services such as, Internet and printing. Evaluator/s should provide their own computer and communications equipment.

In consultation with the Evaluation Team and as requested, the PMU personnel will make available all relevant documentation and provide contact information to key project partners and stakeholders, and facilitate contact where needed. The team will also assist in organizing any briefing de-briefing meetings including coordination of stakeholders’ input in the evaluation draft report.



Corporate competencies

  • Demonstrates integrity by modeling the UN's values and ethical standards;
  • Promotes the vision, mission, and strategic goals of UNDP;
  • Displays cultural, gender, religion, race, nationality, and age sensitivity and adaptability;
  • Treats all people fairly without favoritism.

Functional and technical competencies

  • Ability to work in a diverse and multi-cultural environment;
  • Self-motivated and ability to work under pressure and to meet strict and competing deadlines;
  • Displays analytical judgment and demonstrated ability to handle confidential and politically sensitive issues in a responsible and mature manner;
  • Demonstrates openness to change and ability to manage complexities;



Required Skills and Experience

Complete Terms of Reference with Annexes can be downloaded at our advertisement in the Procurement Notice site


Offers will be evaluated based on the combined scoring method :

  • Technical qualifications = 70%
  • Financial Proposal =    30%

A team of two independent consultants will conduct the TE - one team leader (with experience and exposure to projects and evaluations in other regions globally) and one team expert, from the Philippines.  The consultants must not have participated in the project preparation, formulation, and/or implementation (including the writing of the Project Document) and should not have a conflict of interest with the project’s related activities. 


The team expert who will be the national consultant will have the following qualities: 




Advanced degree in Environment and Natural Resources Management (ENRM), Environmental Planning or Resource Economics, or other closely related fields




At least 10 years of experience in natural resource economics or accounting preferably in marine protected areas or fisheries management;


At least 10 years of experience in the implementation of protected area management, MPA financing sustainability, MPA system-wide planning and monitoring, and capacity building for MPA management.


Demonstrated experience in conducting international development evaluations; prior experience in GEF Project evaluations would be an advantage;


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;














Fluency in the English language and excellent oral and written communication skills.





Applicants who will only receive 70 points from the assessment of the CV and Brief description of why the individual considers him/herself as the most suitable for the assignment will be qualified for the assessment of the Financial Proposal.


Recommended Presentation of Offer


Offerors must upload in one (1) file the documents below at the given link

You may download through this advertisement the editable version of the following:

  1. Duly accomplished Offeror's Letter to UNDP Confirming Interest and Availability for the IC that indicates the all-inclusive lumpsum contract price, supported by a breakdown of costs, as per template provided; If an Offeror is employed by an organization/company/institution, and he/she expects his/her employer to charge a management fee in the proces