According to the UNDP Evaluation Policy every project with a planned budget or actual expenditure between $3million and $5 million must plan and undertake either a midterm or final evaluation.  The aim of this evaluation is to assess the results achieved by the Climate Security in the Pacific Project in the timeframe of the project from 2nd July 2020 to 31st December 2022.

The connection between climate change and human security is complex and multilayered and crosses with political, social, environmental, economic, and demographic factors.

Climate change is often mentioned as an ultimate "threat multiplier", aggravating already fragile situations and potentially contributing to further social tensions in some parts of the world.

In the Pacific, the human security risks associated with climate-related disasters are not a distant future scenario but are already a reality for the majority of Pacific people. Pacific leaders, through the 2018 Boe Declaration, have recognized climate change as the single greatest threat to the livelihoods, security and well-being of the Pacific.

Although climate change is cited as the most significant security threat to the South Pacific, its likely effects on security and potential conflict are yet to be widely explored by the international and regional organizations present on the ground.

These fragility and instability risks will affect men, women and youth differently, and vary across the region both according to the timeframes under consideration and depending on the country contexts. Emerging critical climate security risks that Pacific Small Island Developing States face include impacts on human mobility, including displacement; potential for social tension linked to natural resource access and use; threats to food and water security, human health and productivity; and threats to territorial integrity and maritime boundaries due to sea-level rise.

Climate-related security risks affecting the Pacific will require greater examination, monitoring and coordinated action by many stakeholders at all levels to prevent potential irreversible economic, social, cultural and environmental damage with a range of potential security implications and a direct impact on social cohesion.

A practical and tailored response is needed to the region's unique political, economic, cultural, environmental and development circumstances to avoid reaching critical thresholds for social conflict and exhausting coping capacities.

Overall vision of climate security in the Pacific, and gaps that the project hopes to fill

Funded by the Peace Building Fund of the UN Secretary General, the 2-year project responds to potential security implications by providing capacity to Pacific countries, with a focus on low-lying Atoll Nations, to assess, better understand and address their critical climate security challenges. This will be achieved through the: application of tailored climate security assessment approaches; inclusive youth and gender sensitive dialogues; partnership with a range of stakeholders operating across the aspects of climate security and supporting the uptake of key findings in relevant national, regional, and international policy and resourcing strategies. These activities will add value through key regional frameworks and initiatives such as the Boe Declaration and Action Plan. The project is designed as a catalytic intervention to both strengthen the capacity for global advocacy as well as capacity to plan and respond to challenges at the community, national and regional level in Pacific Small Islands Developing States (SIDS). The project has three main outcomes that are geared towards: (i) empowering atoll states and regional actors to assess and address security threats of climate change; (ii) strengthening understanding, articulation and addressing of key climate related security risks with a focus on atoll nations and key climate security areas emerging in the region; and (iii) stronger advocacy by atoll nations and PICs in global forum for combatting climate change through greater emphasis on its impact on peace and security.

Achievements: the project has been operational since 2nd July 2020 and over the last 19 months, communities across all three atoll nations (Kiribati, Tuvalu, and Tuvalu) have participated in consultations and identification of priority community sites and pilot activities. These were made possible with the support and ownership from various lead agencies and focal points in each country – i.e. the Office of the President in Kiribati, the Climate Change Directorate in the Republic of Marshall Islands, and the Department of Climate Change in Tuvalu. Communities are becoming increasingly aware of security issues and risks of climate change on their livelihoods and overall well-being. The Republic of Marshall Islands was directly supported with COP-26 negotiations from the project. With thanks to the International Organization for Migration (IOM), the project supported the establishment of the Pacific Climate Security Expert Network (PCSN), with its first dialogue in December 2021 comprising technical experts from the academia, Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs), Council of Regional Organizations in the Pacific (CROP) agencies, and UN agencies. The project has also engaged in strategic regional co-operation via the Parliamentary knowledge-management events both at regional and national levels. The project’s co-operation with the Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat (PIFS) is enhanced by the shared-location of our project-supported Climate Security Expert since late December 2021. Work is now in-progress for embedding the concept of climate security into national adaptation plans and priorities, as well as policies and budgeting processes. Representatives from the three atoll nations, as well as from development partners (CROP agencies), the academia, and international technical agencies are taking part in promoting the visibility of climate security issues in the Pacific via podcasts and sharing of human-interest stories. The technical work on Climate Security Risk Assessment also commenced in December 2021, which will produce a Regional Risk Assessment and country-specific profiles.

Adapting to changing priorities: Key issues have been brought to the attention of the project team for further support. These relate to preserving national ownership of Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs) against climate change and sea level rise and confirming maritime boundaries. A mediation training programme on Climate Security is being designed to build capacity of mediation practitioners in the Pacific on climate-sensitive mediation.

National and regional contexts: Pilot initiatives implementation are planned for June 2022, along with the completion of Risk Assessments. A Donor Roundtable is planned for mid- September 2022 where findings of the Risk Assessments will be presented along with discussions on priority actions and interventions beyond the project’s lifetime.  

Offer: The project team is exploring how to extend its support for the establishment of the Coalition of Low-Lying Atoll Nations on Climate Change (CANCC). As CANCC features prominently in each of the project outcomes, the project team has maximized the opportunity to discuss concrete ways for supporting CANCC’s work. This includes convening a Roundtable along the margins of the Our Oceans Conference in RMI, Tuvalu and Kiribati (13-14 April 2022), where CANCC members could discuss priorities and plans, along with the draft Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between CANCC Parties involved. Establishment of the CANCC office in RMI and CANCC desks in Kiribati and Tuvalu are also planned for the project’s support.

Scope of Work

The evaluation presents an excellent opportunity to assess the achievements of this project and its overall added value to climate security in the Pacific. Further to this, the objectives of the evaluation will be to:

• Assess evidence-based findings and recommendations against OECD-DAC criteria.
• Determine future PBF commitments.
• Provide learning and accountability for past allocations.
• Assess the achievement of multi country project results supported by evidence (i.e. progress of project’s outcome and outputs targets).

• Assess the contribution and alignment of the project to relevant national development plan or environmental policies.
• Assess the contribution of the project results towards the relevant outcome and output of the Sub Regional Programme Document (SRPD) & United Nation Pacific Strategy (UNPS/UNDAF).
• Assess any cross cutting and gender equality and women’s empowerment.
•  Examination on the use of funds and value for money.
• Assess the impact of COVID19 on project’s implementation.

 The evaluation will be used for learning and accountability, and to contribute to the UNDP and the UN Peace Building Fund decision-making regarding further engagement on this issue. The evaluation must apply any political sensitivity to the evaluation methods.

The Evaluation will assess the Project according to standard evaluation criteria, as elaborated below, in line with the OECD DAC Guidelines on Evaluating Climate Security Projects and United Nations Evaluations Group norms and principles.

• Relevance
  • The degree to which the objectives are (and continue to be) relevant vis-à-vis   climate security, climate change, and environmental resource management i.e. whether they address the key drivers of climate security identified in the Theory of Change analysis.
  • Whether important climate security gaps exist or opportunities are being missed?
  • Did the activities and strategies fit the objectives, i.e. is there internal coherence between what the project is doing and what it is trying to achieve?
  • To what extent were the interventions relevant to the needs and priorities of the target groups/beneficiaries?
  • To what extent have gender, human rights and other cross cutting issues considerations been integrated into the project design and implementation?

• Effectiveness

• To assess the degree to which envisaged outputs and outcomes have been achieved and reported achievements, and whether the project has contributed to a reduction of the drivers of the conflict[1].
• Was the theory of change based on valid assumptions?
• the effectiveness of coordination and co-implementation between the UNCTs on both Pacific Office in Fiji and the FSM sub office
• the degree of coordination and collaboration with the authorities on both sides of UNDP Pacific Office in Fiji and FSM Sub Office border
• Assess the degree to which project implementation was flexible and adaptive to the context.
• To what extent did the Climate Security Project mainstream a gender dimension and support gender-responsive activities?
• To what extent did the Climate Security Project complement work with different entities, and have a strategic coherence of approach?
• How have stakeholders have been involved in the project’s design and implementation?

• Efficiency

• Assess whether the Project has utilized Project funding as per the agreed work plan to achieve the projected targets.
• Analyze the role of the Project Board and whether this forum is optimally being used for decision making.
• Assess the timeline and quality of the reporting followed by the Project.
• Analyze the performance of the M&E mechanism of the Project and the use of various M&E tools (any socio-economic data available to the project etc.).
• Assess the qualitative and quantitative aspects of management and other inputs (such as equipment, monitoring and review and other technical assistance and budgetary inputs) provided by the project vis-à-vis achievement of outputs and targets.
• Identify factors and constraints, which have affected Project implementation including technical, managerial, organizational, institutional and socio-economic policy issues in addition to other external factors unforeseen during the Project design.
• To what extent did Climate Security project support achieve the results in its proposed timeline?
• How efficient was the overall staffing, planning and coordination within the project (including between the two implementing agencies and with stakeholders? Have project funds and activities been delivered in a timely manner?
• How efficient and successful was the project’s implementation approach, including procurement and other activities?
• How efficiently did the project use the Project Board?
• How well did the project collect and use data to monitor results? How well did it communicate with stakeholders and project beneficiaries on its progress? Did it use data to inform its implementation strategy?
• How well did the project communicate on its implementation and results?
• Overall, did the Climate Security project provide value for money? Have resources been used efficiently?

• Sustainability and Impact
  • Assess preliminary indications of the degree to which the Project results are likely to be sustainable beyond the Project’s lifetime (both at the community and government level),and provide recommendations for strengthening sustainability.
  • Did the intervention design include an appropriate sustainability and exit strategy?
  • How strong is the commitment of the Government and other stakeholders to sustaining the results of Climate Security support and continuing initiatives?

How has the project enhanced and contributed to the development of national capacity?

• National ownership

• Assess the degree of involvement of national partners, and aligning to existing priorities of the local government in targeted areas

• Lessons learnt/ Conclusions
  • An analysis of the main lessons learnt in relation to the effectiveness of foreseen strategies and theories of change to achieve a disaster risks management and climate resilience impact
  • An analysis of the main lessons learnt in relation to the effectiveness of implementation modalities

The review will cover the full period the project has been operational.

• Methodology:

The evaluation will be summative and will employ a participatory approach whereby discussions with and surveys of key stakeholders provide/ verify the substance of the findings. The evaluation will be based on gender and human rights principles and adhere to the UNEG Norms and Standards and Ethical Code of Conduct. Proposals submitted by prospective consultants should outline a strong mixed method approach to data collection and analysis, clearly noting how various forms of evidence will be employed vis-à-vis each other to triangulate gathered information. 

Proposals should be clear on the specific role each of the various methodological approaches plays in helping to address each of the evaluation questions. The methodologies for data collection may include but not necessarily be limited to:

Rigorous desk review of documentation supplied by Climate Security team based in Fiji covering Tuvalu including Project documents, previous evaluations, project reports, key intervention reports and policies, etc. Where possible and relevant more detailed monitoring information will be analyzed, such as community monitoring data and activity reporting.[2]

• Key informant interviews and focus group discussions, as appropriate, with major stakeholders (Interviews will be conducted in person or over video connection.) Stakeholders will be selected in close coordination with the UNCTs, and will at minimum include:
• RMI Government authorities with a key responsibility towards the project, including – primarily - relevant authorities at district level
• UN RC, IOM, UNDP, MPTF - PBF, and UN implementing agencies
• Other implementing agencies, such as local NGOs
• Other civil society organisations with no direct role in the project
• Project beneficiaries in the village clusters, i.e., villagers, border guards, youth, women
• Survey of key stakeholders, if relevant and direct observation in the field.

1. Desk research: Document review of all relevant sources of information including the following:

• Project board meeting minutes
• Inception workshop report
• All project annual reports
• Oversight mission reports
• Financial data including actual expenditures by project outcomes, including management costs, documentation of budget revisions
• Co-financing data with expected actual contributions
• Audits reports
• Electronic copies of technical reports, in country workshop, consultation reports
• Any relevant socio-economic monitoring data
• List of contracts and procurement items
• Communication products

1. Interviews & focus group discussions with stakeholders:

These interviews can take place on an individual basis or in groups. Especially for the project beneficiaries, focus group discussions are envisaged.

All meetings and conversations will be held only once the appropriate approvals have been obtained, for which the UNDP will take primary responsibility. If approvals cannot be obtained on time, it is possible that some of these stakeholders may not be interviewed.

1. Validation

The review findings will be presented to the UNDP Pacific Office in Fiji and FSM Sub Offices to collect feedback on these main findings, and serve as a validation exercise.The team leader will ensure to connect virtually with agreed timeline with key stakeholders and UNDP taking note of any differences in the time zone.

National consultant will be conducting field sites validation and leading the interviews and logistics arrangement in country. The use of photographs and maps validating results in country is an added value.

Expected Outputs and Deliverables

1) Inception report with finalized and agreed terms of reference, evaluation matrix, questionnaires and agreed methodology of evaluation (3 working days after beginning of assignment/contract);

2) A comprehensive evaluation report with findings, recommendations, lessons learned.

It is expected that draft report will be submitted to UNDP in two working weeks after country missions have been undertaken by national consultants in Tuvalu and the final report with all comments and recommendations incorporated submitted to UNDP for final endorsement not later that in two working weeks after receipt of consolidated formal feedback with comments to a draft from the UNDP.

The draft Report and Final Reports: The Report should be logically structured, contain evidence-based findings, conclusions, lessons and recommendations, and should be free of information that is not relevant to the overall analysis. The Report should respond in detail to the key focus areas described above.

Presentation: For presenting and discussing the draft final report interactively, the consultants will facilitate a concluding workshop for the Project stakeholders.

Institutional Arrangement

Evaluation Team Composition

A team of four independent consultants will conduct the Final Evaluation - one team leader (with experience and exposure to projects and evaluations in other regions globally) and three national experts, from each of the three countries (Kiribati, RMI, and Tuvalu). The Team Leader will provide overall guidance of the Final Evaluation and be responsible for the overall design and writing of the Final Evaluation report, etc.

The RMI national expert will liaise with local partners and stakeholders, assess emerging trends with respect to regulatory frameworks, budget allocations, capacity building, work with the Project Team in developing the Final Evaluation itinerary, etc.

The consultants cannot 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 project’s related activities.

The evaluation will be fully independent and led by the Team Leader. The Team Leader will ensure inclusive process of evaluation process and work in close coordination with the national consultants for each of the countries (Kiribati, RMI, and Tuvalu) who will be providing on-site information. The Team Leader will also work closely with the Integrated and Results Management Unit, Monitoring and Evaluation Officers (at the planning the evaluation, field work and report review process), and will be supported by Climate Security project team. The national consultants who are based in each of the three countries will help facilitate contacts and set up meetings and organize and conduct field visits. The participation of the UNDP staff in the review is required, as this will provide an instant opportunity for validating the findings and will assist in internalizing the learning.

Duration of the Work

Up to 40 working days within September - December 2022 (incl. 10 days for the deskwork and preparation, 20 days for in-country mission to Tuvalu, 10 days for report finalization and presentation to the Country Teams of Fiji Pacific Office.

Duty Station

1. The local / international consultant is expected to be residing in Majuro, RMI. This assignment requires will be home-based. Travel costs within the country will be included in the financial proposal of the national consultants.
2. The Consultant will report to the Monitoring and Evaluation Analyst, UNDP Pacific Office in Fiji
3. All reports should be provided in both printed and electronic versions in the English language, with a detailed description of the fulfilled tasks, according to the present Terms of Reference, and the direct contribution of the expert. Analytical documents, reports and notes developed by experts should be attached to the reports as annexes, which will serve as a justification for payment.

• Strong interpersonal and communication skills;
• Strong analytical, reporting and writing abilities skills;
• Openness to change and ability to receive/integrate feedback;
• Ability to plan, organize, implement and report on work;
• Ability to work under pressure and tight deadlines;
• Comprehensiveness of knowledge of project monitoring and evaluation
• Proficiency in the use of office IT applications and the internet in conducting research;
• Outstanding communication, project management and organizational skills;
• Excellent presentation and facilitation skills.
• Demonstrates integrity and ethical standards;
• Positive, constructive attitude to work;
• Displays cultural, gender, religion, race, nationality and age sensitivity and adaptability.

Educational Qualifications:

The local consultant should meet the following professional expertise criteria:

• Bachelor's degree in a relevant area such as: Climate Change, Environmental Management, Law and or relevant Development Studies

Experience

• More than 2 years’ experience of conducting evaluations of strategies, policies and/or development programmes in the area of Climate Change and Security;
• Demonstrated knowledge of evaluation strategies in international orgnisations or UN agencies
• Demonstarted knowledge on political, economic, social and gender situation in the Pacific and in RMI would be advantage .

• Good report writing skills, proven by evidence;

Language requirements

• Fluency of written and spoken English language is required;

Price Proposal and Schedule of Payments

Time Schedule and Deliverables

Contracts based on lump-sum

The financial proposal shall specify instalments and payment terms around specific and measurable (qualitative and quantitative) deliverables. Payments are based upon output, i.e. upon delivery of the services specified in the TOR.  In order to assist the requesting unit in the comparison of financial proposals, the financial proposal will include a breakdown of each of the five instalments’ amounts.

Preferred Currency of Offer: United State Dollars (USD)

For local contractors in RMI, Tuvalu and Kiribati UNDP shall effect payment in USD based on the prevailing UN operational rate of exchange on the month of payment. The prevailing UN operational rate of exchange is

available for public from the following link:

UNDP Contribution

1. UNDP Office vehicles for domestic travel;
2. Arranging field visits to meet with local counterparts and beneficiaries;
3. Project related documents such as Project Document, Annual Work Plans and/or Progress Reports, Board meeting minutes, Field monitoring reports, CDRs, HACT reports, Legal agreements, SESP/Risks update, M&E Plan, Gender Action Plan;
4. Security charges are not applicable.

Evaluation Method and Criteria

Individual consultants will be evaluated based on the Cumulative analysis

The award of the contract shall be made to the individual consultant whose offer has been evaluated and determined as a) responsive/compliant/acceptable; and b) having received the highest score out of a set of weighted technical criteria (70%). and financial criteria (30%). Financial score shall be computed as a ratio of the proposal being evaluated and the lowest-priced proposal received by UNDP for the assignment.

Technical Criteria for Evaluation (Maximum 70 points)

• Criteria 1:  Bachelor's degree in a relevant area such as: Climate Change, Environmental Management, Law and or relevant Development Studies  – 20%
• Criteria 2 : More than 2 years’ experience of conducting evaluations of strategies, policies and/or development programmes in the area of Climate Change and Security – 20%
• Criteria 3: Demonstrated knowledge of UN procedures and evaluation strategies- 20%
• Criteria 4: Demonstarted knowledge on political, economic, social and gender situation in the Pacific and in RMI would be advantage (10%)

Documentation required

Interested individual consultants must submit the following documents/information to demonstrate their qualifications. Please group them into one (1) single PDF document as the application only allows to upload maximum one document:

• Letter of Confirmation of Interest and Availability using the template provided in Annex II.
• Personal CV, 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.
• Technical proposal, including a) a brief description of why the individual considers him/herself as the most suitable for the assignment
• Financial proposal, as per template provided in