National Consultant for Final EvaluationNational Consultant for Final Evaluation of GIDP project, UNDP Lao PDRLocation : Vientiane, LAO PDRApplication Deadline : 13-May-21 (Midnight New York, USA)Time left : 7d 0h 14mAdditional Category : ManagementType of Contract : Individual ContractPost Level : National ConsultantLanguages Required : English Starting Date : 24-May-2021(date when the selected candidate is expected to start)Duration of Initial Contract : 20 working daysExpected Duration of Assignment : May - 31 July 2021UNDP is committed to achieving workforce diversity in terms of gender, nationality and culture. Individuals from minority groups, indigenous groups and persons with disabilities are equally encouraged to apply. All applications will be treated with the strictest confidence.UNDP does not tolerate sexual exploitation and abuse, any kind of harassment, including sexual harassment, and discrimination. All selected candidates will, therefore, undergo rigorous reference and background checks.BackgroundThe Governance for Inclusive Development Programme (GIDP) is a joint UN project (UNDP and UNCDF) that supports the government’s Sam Sang initiative to strengthen its public administration’s ability especially at the local level to achieve the goals of better service delivery, promote wider governance improvements and increase citizens’ systematic engagement, where basic services are coordinated, planned, tracked, and reported. GIDP was conceived to act as a platform for providing tools and scalable learning that encourage more inclusive service delivery and local development, which benefits a wide section of Lao people. The linkage to national partnerships and the GovernanceSector Working Group (GSWG) provides the opportunity for national policy advocacy and discussions on the progress of the GPAR GIDP and on governance matters in general.The GIDP has been formulated under the framework of the National Governance and Public Administration Reform Programme (NGPAR) of the Government of Lao PDR (GoL), with the Ministry of Home Affairs (MoHA) to lead the implementation, with cross-sector cooperation and implementation by the Ministry of Finance (MoF), Ministry of Planning and Investment (MPI), and Provincial and District administrations. GIDP is the third project implemented by UNDP-UNCDF under the NGPAR programme and is built on the established partnerships through two programmes within the government’s NGPAR - Strengthening Capacity and Service Delivery of Local Administration (GPAR SCSD Jun 2007-May 2011) and the National GPAR Programme Support Programme (GPAR NGPS 2012- June 2016).This programme is responsive to the growing emphasis on the need for multi-sector planning and the use of data/information to inform the content, nature, and scope of district plans. In line with national socio-economic development plans, the GIDP was expected to improve service delivery through the District Development Fund (DDF) mechanism vis-à-vis intergovernmental fiscal transfer system and two ‘model’ One Door Service Centres (ODSCs). This programme also systematically captures villagers’ perception on access and quality of basic services and promotes opportunities for collaboration with civil society in local development and services apart from enabling Provincial People’s Assembly (PPA) members to increase their oversight over the district administration.Recognizing the contribution that is made by the civil society organizations, the programme was expected to forge collaboration between local authorities and CSOs to identity innovative ways of improving service delivery and in promoting community participation for local development. The three GIDP outputs contributing to inclusive service delivery and development, accountability framework, citizen’s engagement and partnerships and policy dialogue are all interrelated and designed to create a virtuous loop that promotes good governance and accountability as well as sub-national and national partnerships. The lessons learned from the programme is expected to feed into the national policy dialogue on socio-economic development through the Governance Sector Working Group (GSWG).Cross-cutting theme: Gender mainstreaming contributing towards gender equality.Duties and ResponsibilitiesEvaluation PurposeThe purpose of this final external evaluation is two folds: accountability and institutional learning. The findings will inform the partners of GIDP about the programme’s achievements and support institutional learning of the stakeholders engaged, both from the Government and development partners. The evaluation is to guide UNDP -UNCDF and government partners to take stock of the progress made in public administration reforms and identify areas for making governance inclusive for all. The draft 9th NSEDP aims at improving the efficiency of the public sector in providing basic services to citizens through DDF, ODSCs, digitalization of services and in creating opportunities for citizens to provide feedback on improving services. It is, therefore, critical for the UNDP-UNCDF teams to understand the main strengths and weaknesses of the current project and to use it a reference guide for developing projects for improving governance. As such, the aim is not to only evaluate the achievements of GIDP but informing the direction and design of next public administration reforms project and UNDP’s continued involvement with MoHA within the governance sector in Lao PDR.With the 9th NSEDP- 2021-2025) currently being finalised by the GoL, this evaluation should identify ways for the next phase of public administration reforms in line with the NSEDP and in particular, the MoHA Five Year Plan (2021-2025) on improving governance through public administration reforms.Evaluation Scope and ObjectivesThe independent evaluation will be forward-looking and explore opportunities for UNDP to position itself as a strategic partner of GoL in the governance sector. The scope of the evaluation will specifically encompass the role MoHA, MPI, MoJ and in taking ownership of promoting wider governance improvements after the end of the programme and on the basis of the results of the GIDP. The evaluation will look at systems strengthening, and application of various tools developed by GIDP to improve accountability and citizen’s participation. The extent to which the programme learnings have fed into the national policy dialogue will be one of the areas of evaluation.Evaluation criteria and key guiding questionsThe evaluation will address 3 fundamental questions: What did the project intend to achieve during the period under review?To what extent has the project achieved its intended objectives?What factors have contributed to or hindered the project’s performance and eventually the sustainability of the results?RelevanceTo what extent has the GIDP programme addressed key governance issues as outlined in the 8th NSEDP-Outcome 2, MoHA Sector Plan 2021-25 and recommendations of the RTIM pertaining to governance?To what extent is the programme aligned with the national development needs and priorities including Sam Sang Directive and has been able to address relevant targets under SDG 16?As the programme is about inclusive development, how well does the design of the programme address the needs of the vulnerable groups such as women, ethnic groups, and persons with disabilities in the country?What opportunities has the programme created or identified in improving local governance?Has the programme pro-actively addressed emerging demands and opportunities unforeseen during the design of the intervention, adapting its theory of change to respond to changes in the country context and governance landscape, including national priorities, legislative and policy updates, changes in power relation among key stakeholders?Has the programme resulted in empowerment and capacity development of the local authorities and PPA members as envisaged in the programme design and if so, are the efforts sustainable?Is there any indication of the government continuing the efforts of promoting accountability and citizen’s as well as NPA /private sector engagement?EffectivenessIn which component did the programme have the least number of tangible achievements? What have been constraining factors and why? How can they or could they be overcome?How and to which extent have the three main components complemented each other, strategically contributed to the project’s objectives and made use of the initially proposed interlinkages of the three main components in a virtuous loop?To what extent were the overall objectives achieved / are likely to be achieved? How/to which extent have the activities/outputs strategically contributed to those?What were the major factors influencing the achievement or non-achievement of the objectives?To what extent are the intended beneficiaries satisfied with the results? How well are gender and ethnicity considerations been considered?To what extent has the programme work been able to form and maintain partnerships with other development actors, including other UN agencies, Development Partners, Civil Society Organisations, or government agencies?Has there been regular reviews of the progress to ensure that the programme is on track to achieve the desired results and to inform course corrections if needed? How has the programme reacted to challenges identified, including addressing recommendations from the Mid-Term Review and the GSWG Secretariat Capacity Assessment conducted in 2019?Has the governance mechanism (GIDP Programme Board) provided their guidance and functioned well? If not, comments and recommendations to be provided.Are the outcome indicators measured against baseline and target values (if available) and reflects quantitative and qualitative dimensions of the achievement?To what extent has the programme achieved or led to unexpected development results or outcomes, which were not originally envisaged in the Project Document and Theory of Change?EfficiencyHow cost-effective and time-efficient is the implementation of activities to achieve the outputs by programme implementing partners during the evaluation period? What measures are being taken to ensure competitiveness?What are the transaction costs for each component?How efficiently did the various modalities of the joint partners, UNDP and UNCDF provide the required support to the government in implementation of the programme?To what extent are the planned funding and timeframe enough to achieve the intended outcomes?How well did the implementing partners mobilise resources to fill the funding gaps as envisaged in the programme document? What lessons can be learned from this element? And how can the programme do better?SustainabilityAre stakeholders and national partners fully engaged in the decision-making, implementation, and monitoring of the programme?To what extent has the programme contributed to the wider governance improvements and what are the indications that the government will benefit from systems strengthening, capacity development and tools developed by the programme to realize inclusive development after the project’s completion? - What were the major factors which influenced non-achievement of sustainability of the programme?To what extent is the Government of Lao PDR increasing its capacity and ownership for improving public administration during the period in question? What impact has this had on external support?Is the Exit Strategy/Transition Plan developed by GIDP being implemented d is the plan regularly reviewed and adjusted according to the project progress, including its financial commitments and capacity?To what extent did the benefits of a programme or project will be able to continue after donor funding ceased?To what extent has the lessons learned fed into national policy dialogue on socio-economic development through the Governance Sector Working Group?InclusionAs the programme is about inclusive development, how well did the implementation of the programme in accordance with the plan address the most marginalized and vulnerable groups such as women, people with disabilities and ethnic minorities in the country.To what extent has the project contribution to wider governance improvement result in promotion and protection of marginalized and vulnerable groups such as women, persons with disabilities and ethnic minorities?Gender EqualityHow well did the project ensure that women, girls, boys, and men have equal access to basic service delivery? What lessons can be learned from this element? And how can the programme do better?As the programme is about increasing accountability and citizen engagement, how well did the programme ensure that women’s meaningful participation in the decision-making process at the local level?MethodologyThe evaluation methodology will adhere to the United Nations Evaluation Group (UNEG) Norms & Standards. The evaluation will be carried out by an independent evaluation team. The evaluation team should adopt an integrated approach involving a combination of data collection and analysis tools to generate concrete evidence to substantiate all findings. Evidence obtained and used to assess the results of UNDP support should be triangulated from a variety of sources, including verifiable data on indicator achievement, existing reports, evaluations and technical papers, stakeholder interviews, focus groups, surveys and site visits where/when possible. Methodological approaches may include some or all of the following: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 workplans. Quarterly and annual reports. Results-oriented monitoring report. project board minutes. financial reports. Mid-term external project evaluation (2019) and UNDP CPD evaluation Exit Transition Plan (2020) Semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders including key government counterparts, donor community members, representatives of key civil society organisations, 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. In line with the UNDP’s gender mainstreaming strategy, gender disaggregation of data is a key element of all UNDP’s interventions and data collected for the evaluation will be disaggregated by gender, to the extent possible, and assessed against the programme outputs/outcomes.Evaluation products (deliverables)These products could include:Evaluation Inception report (10-15 pages). The inception report should be carried out following and based on preliminary discussions with UNDP-UNCDF after the desk review and should be produced and endorsed by UNDP before the evaluation starts (before any formal evaluation interviews, survey distribution or field visits) and prior to the country visit in the case of international evaluators (see template in the annex).Kick-off meeting. Evaluators can seek further clarification and expectation from UNDP, SDC, UNCDF and Government partners in the kick-off meetingEvaluation debriefings. Immediately following an evaluation, UNDP-UNCDF may ask for a preliminary debriefing and findings.Draft evaluation report (50 pages max including executive summary and lessons learned).1 The programme unit and key stakeholders in the evaluation should review the draft evaluation report and provide an amalgamated set of comments to the evaluator within an agreed period, addressing the content required (as agreed in the TOR and inception report) and quality criteria as outlined in these guidelines.A length of 40 to 60 pages including executive summary is suggested.Evaluation report audit trail. Comments and changes by the evaluators in response to the draft report should be retained by the evaluators to show how they have addressed comments.Final evaluation report (see template in the annex).Presentations to stakeholdersEvaluation brief and other knowledge products or participation in knowledge-sharing events, if relevant.CompetenciesExcellent interpersonal, communications and facilitation skillsCultural and gender sensitivity and ability to work with people from different backgroundsExperience with social science research.Fluent Lao and English.Required Skills and ExperienceNational Evaluation Consultant (20 working days)S/he will support the Team Leader and provide knowledge of governance sector as well as Lao cultural and development context; and when needed support as an interpreter between English and Lao. The consultant will advise the Team Leader on relevant aspects of the local context. The national consultant will also be responsible for the translation of the executive summary into Lao language. The National will consult with Team leaders and UNDP on the contents of the report to ensure accuracy.Required Qualifications:Master’s degree or equivalent in good governance, public administration, public policy and management, development studies, political science, social science or other relevant fields.Experience in undertaking an evaluation.Strong working knowledge of Lao PDR (in particular the social, economic and development context).Experience in governance initiative in Lao PDR is preferable.Thorough understanding of the development issues and challenges in the Lao PDR.Familiarity with the Lao Government’s governance programme, strategies, and policiesExperience with assessment methodologies; programme development and project implementationRequirements for submission of proposals:All interested and qualified International Consultant should apply on-line using the following links:UNDP Lao PDR Country Office website at https://www.la.undp.org/content/lao_pdr/en/home/jobs.html or In order to make your submission, please read the relevant documents available on the link belowTOR (Annex I)IC General Terms and Conditions _ Annex II;OFFEROR’S LETTER TO UNDP CONFIRMING INTEREST AND AVAILABILITY _ Annex IIIP11 FormDocuments to be included when submitting the proposals:Interested individual consultants must submit the following documents/information to demonstrate their qualifications:Technical Proposal (i) Explaining why you are the most suitable for the work; (ii) Providing a brief methodology on how you will approach and conduct the work including the work schedule for the delivery of outputs/deliverable; (iii) P11 Form Education and work experience, including past experience in similar projects and contact references of at least 3 references for whom you have rendered preferably the similar services;2. Financial proposal: OFFEROR’S LETTER TO UNDP (i) Detailed financial proposal: Lump sum offer with clear cost breakdown against each deliverable.Note: The financial proposal shall specify a total lump sum amount, and payment terms around specific and measurable (qualitative and quantitative) deliverables (i.e. whether payments fall in installments or upon completion of the entire contract). Payments are based upon monthly outputs, 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 this lump sum amount (including travel, per diems, and number of anticipated working days). All envisaged travel costs must be included in the financial proposal. UNDP accept travel costs not exceeding of an economy class air ticket.Instructions for on-line submissions:Step 1: Please prepare all required documents electronically;Step 2: Combine all documents in ONE SINGLE FILE (preferably in PDF, however Word format can be also accepted) and upload to the UNDP Jobs using the links above at once;Step 3: After that you will receive an auto reply from the UNDP jobs if your offer is received successfully.Incomplete proposals or proposals received after the deadline will be rejected.Please kindly refer to the Terms of Reference Annex I for MORE detailed information:If you are experiencing difficulties with online job applications, please contact firstname.lastname@example.org.