Request for Proposal
Reference No.: UNFPA/LBR/RFP/16/003
Reference No.: UNFPA/LBR/RFP/16/003
The purpose of the Liberia Country Programme Evaluation is twofold: First, it is to assess the achievements of the 4th country programme, the factors which may have eased or stalled the achievements of intended results, and to draw lessons learned from design through implementation to inform development of the next country programme cycle (i.e. 5th country programme). Second, it is to contribute to the clustered country programme evaluation (CCPE) on UNFPA’s engagement in highly vulnerable contexts.
The specific objectives of the independent evaluation of the UNFPA 4th country programme for Liberia are to:
a) Provide an independent assessment of the progress of the programme towards the expected outputs set forth in the results framework of the country programme;
b) Assess the extent to which the programme has contributed to the recent humanitarian efforts (i.e. Ebola response initiative) and provide an analysis of how UNFPA Liberia has positioned itself among national development partners.
c) Draw key lessons from the current mode of implementation and cooperation and provide a set of clear and forward-looking actionable and strategic recommendations for future programming; Timeframe:
The CPE will cover activities implemented from January 2013 to September 2016.
Geographic coverage:
The evaluation will cover eleven (11) of the 15 counties (namely Bomi, Bong, Gbarpolu, Grand Cape Mount, Grand Gedeh, Grand Kru, Lofa, Maryland, Montserrado, Nimba and River Gee counties). Other government line ministries/agencies involved in the CP implementation will also be covered as well.
Programme aspects:
The CPE will cover 4 outcomes and 11 outputs of the CPD 2013-2017. The focus will be on both development and humanitarian programmes.
EVALUATION CRITERIA AND EVALUATION QUESTIONS
Evaluation criteria:
The evaluation will be informed by the UNFPA Evaluation Handbook “How to design and conduct a CPE at UNFPA” and will cover four out of the five criteria of the Development Assistance Committee of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD/DAC): Relevance, Effectiveness, Efficiency and Sustainability[2] as well as two other UN-specific evaluation criteria—coordination and added value. The two additional UN-specific criteria will help address questions related to UNFPA’s strategic positioning.
Evaluation questions:
The evaluation team will put together a final list with a maximum of ten (10) evaluation questions at the design phase (to be approved by the Evaluation Manager, in consultation with the ERG). The questions shall address the following topics/issues:
Relevance:
a). To what extent the Country Programme addressed national priorities and needs of population in
relation to UNFPA mandate and comparative advantage?
Effectiveness:
b). To what extent has the country programme contributed to improving quality and affordability of
RH services?
c). To what extent has UNFPA-supported interventions contributed (or likely to contribute) to a sustained
increase in use of demographic and socio-economic information and data in the evidence-based
development and implementation of plans, programs and policies to (improve access to reproductive
health services including in areas associated with gender equality, population dynamics and HIV/AIDS)?
d). Has UNFPA support in the area of gender equality contributed to women’s empowerment and reduction
of gender based violence especially in rural and difficult-to-reach communities?
e). To what extent has UNFPA ensured that the needs of young people have been taken into account in the
planning and implementation of UNFPA-supported interventions under the country programme?
Efficiency:
f). To what extent did the intervention mechanisms (including funds, expertise and timing) were
converted to or impede the achievement of the programme outputs?
Sustainability:
g). To what degree has UNFPA been able to support its partners and the beneficiaries in developing
capacities and establishing mechanisms to ensure ownership and the durability of results?
Coordination:
h). To what extent has the UNFPA country office contributed to the functioning and coordination of
UNCT coordination mechanisms?
Added Value:
i). What are the main comparative strengths of UNFPA in Liberia, particularly in comparison to other
UN agencies in the Country?
UNFPA’s Engagement in Fragile Context:
j). How did UNFPA take into account the country’s vulnerability to disasters and emergencies in planning
and implementing its interventions?
k) To what extent was (or is) UNFPA, along with its partners, able (or likely) to respond to crises during
the period covered by the country programme[3]?
EVALUATION METHODOLOGY:**
Data collection
The evaluation will consider both primary and secondary sources for data collection. For the primary sources, semi-structured interviews with key informants at national and state levels as well as focus group discussions with beneficiaries and field visits observations shall be conducted as appropriate. Secondary sources will be desk review primarily focusing on programme annual reviews, progress and monitoring frameworks/reports as well as facility records/registers. Likewise, reports of thematic evaluations and findings of assessments conducted during the current CP shall also be considered.
Validation mechanisms
To ensure the validity of the data collected, the evaluation team will use a variety of methods. Besides a systematic triangulation of data sources and data collection methods and tools, the validation of data will be sought through regular exchanges with the CO programme managers; technical officers at national and field levels and members of the evaluation reference group.
Stakeholders’ participation
The evaluation team will consider the participation of partners and stakeholders in the evaluation process. This includes direct and indirect partners (including government, NGOs and CBOs) and the programme beneficiaries at national and sub-national levels. This inclusive approach is important to generate diverse views on the programme performance and expected outcomes.
EVALUATION PROCESS
The evaluation process can be categorized under five stages as follows:
Preparatory phase:
This phase will include:
· The nomination of the evaluation manager by the CO
· the constitution of the ERG
· the drafting of terms of reference for the evaluation;
· the gathering of initial documentation regarding the country programme (including a list of Atlas projects);
· the selection and recruitment of the evaluation team
· Stakeholders mapping: identification of partners and stakeholders to be visited for the purpose of the evaluation.
Design phase:
· Documentary review: all relevant documents (as per UNFPA Evaluation Handbook) shall be made available to the evaluation team for review;
· Configuration of the programme based on the intervention logic and theory of change; are the planned activities relevant to intended results to be achieved?
· Identification of key performance measures and its effectiveness to guide the judgment on the programme performance;
· Development of the evaluation questions based on the evaluation purpose and criteria;
· Identification of appropriate methods and tools for data collection and the development of a concrete work plan for the field phase.
Field work phase
During this phase the evaluation team will collect data from relevant sources based on the pre-set evaluation questions. Following this, the team is expected to provide a debriefing report which is comprised of preliminary findings and results as well as tentative conclusions and recommendations.
Analysis and report writing phase
In this phase, additional inputs from the debriefing together with other information coming from the analysis of the data already collected are expected to feed into the development of a first draft of the final evaluation report. This draft will be submitted to the ERG for review and comments which will then allow the evaluation team to make the second final draft. The second draft of the final evaluation report will be disseminated in a workshop attended by the CO staff and stakeholders including the key national partners. Inputs and comments arising from the discussion shall form the basis for making the final report.
Dissemination and follow-up phase:
During this phase, the country and regional offices as well as the Evaluation Office and other relevant divisions at UNFPA headquarters will be informed of the results of the evaluation. The evaluation report, accompanied by a document listing all recommendations will be communicated to all relevant units within UNFPA, with an invitation to submit their response. Once filled, this document will become the management response to the evaluation. The evaluation report, along with the management response, will be published in the UNFPA evaluation database. The evaluation report will also be made available to the UNFPA Executive Board and will be widely distributed within and outside the organization.
The detailed ToR is accessible at:
[1] Concept Note on the Clustered Country Programme Evaluation on UNFPA’s Engagement in Highly Vulnerable Contexts (EO, 2015)
[2] UNFPA CPEs cover all OECD-DAC evaluation criteria to the exception of the impact.
[3] The two CCPE additional standard evaluation questions have been grouped under this evaluation topic (EO, 2015).
HOW TO APPLY:
Interested candidates can submit a completed United Nations Personal History (P.11) form, together with a financial proposal. Applications without completed P.11 form will not be considered. The P.11 form can be accessed at http://www.unon.org/sites/default/files/P11.doc
Deadline for submission of proposals is Tuesday, 7th June 2016 at 17:00 GMT. All proposals should be submitted as follows :
To: suwo@unfpa.org
Cc. isesay@unfpa.org
