Consultant - Terminal Evaluation for WWF GEF Project on Eastern Tropical Pacific Seascape

POSITION DETAILS

Location: Remote but travels to: Costa Rica, Panamá, Colombia and Ecuador

Starting Date: January, 2019

Duration: Approximately 25 days

Report due: February, 2019

PROJECT DATA

Project/Program Title

Improving mangrove conservation across the Eastern Tropical Pacific Seascape (ETPS) GEF Project ID 5771

Implementing Agency(s): WWF GEF Project Agency

Focal Area(s): International Waters GEF 5

Introduction and Project overview

World Wildlife Fund, Inc. (WWF) policies and procedures for all GEF financed full and medium-sized projects require a terminal evaluation (TE) upon completion of project implementation. The following terms of reference (TOR) set out the expectations for the TE for the project “Improving mangrove conservation across the Eastern Tropical Pacific Seascape (ETPS)”, hereafter referred to as the “Project”. The technical consultant selected to conduct this evaluation will be referred to as “evaluator(s)” throughout this TOR.

Project Background

Despite a growing recognition of the importance of mangroves and the many key services they provide, an estimated third of global coverage has been reduced in recent history through deforestation and degradation of the coastal buffer. This dramatic loss is already impacting coasts globally as the numerous ecosystem services provided by mangroves are reduced and lost. The ETPS region harbors the highest proportion of threatened mangrove species in South America along the Pacific coasts of Costa Rica, Panama, Colombia and Ecuador with extensions of some of the highest estimates for above ground mangrove biomass on the planet.

This Project was developed to implement a comprehensive, multi-government ratified and regionally articulated mangrove conservation strategy in the Eastern Tropical Pacific Seascape (ETPS) countries of Costa Rica, Panama, Colombia and Ecuador through on-the-ground management activities and the strengthening of national and local policies that inform ridge-to-reef development planning and practices relevant to mangrove conservation. The Project was organized around the following three components:

• Regional mangrove strategy development and implementation
• National mangrove action plans and policy strengthening.
• Local conservation actions

Scope and Objectives for the evaluation

WWF is seeking an independent evaluator to undertake a Terminal Evaluation of the Project. The TE will cover the GEF financed components and review the project co-financing delivered.

The objective of this evaluation is to examine the extent, magnitude and sustainability of any project impacts to date; identify any project design problems; assess progress towards project outcomes and outputs; and draw lessons learned that can both improve the sustainability of benefits from this project and aid in the enhancement of future related projects.

Evaluation approach and method:

The evaluation will comply with the guidance, rules and procedures established by WWF[1] and the GEF Terminal Evaluation[2] and Ethical Guidelines.[3] The evaluation must provide evidence‐based information that is useful, independent, participatory, respectful, credible, transparent, and ethical. The evaluator(s) must be unbiased and free of any conflicts of interest with the project. The evaluator(s) is expected to reflect all stakeholder views and follow a participatory and consultative approach. There should be close engagement with government counterparts, the GEF operational focal point, the Executing Agency Project Management Unit (PMU), partners and key stakeholders. Contact information has been provided on the cover page.

The evaluator will liaise with the WWF GEF Agency Project Manager as well as the PMU Project Manager for any logistical and/or methodological needs for the review. A draft report will be prepared and circulated to WWF GEF Agency and the executing office to solicit comments and suggestions.

The review process will include:

A. Desk review consisting of, but not limited to:

• Project Document and CEO Endorsement Letter;
• Support Mission Report;
• Relevant safeguards documents, including safeguards Categorization Memo, Safeguards Consultation Memo and Social Assessment prepared during project preparation;
• Annual Work Plans (AWP) and Budgets;
• Project Progress Reports (PPR) including Results Framework and AWP Tracking;
• GEF Agency reports, including Annual Monitoring Reviews (AMR) and Project Implementation Reports (PIRs);
• GEF Tracking Tools;
• Relevant financial documents, including financial progress reports; co-financing monitoring tables and co-financing letters from government;
• Meeting minutes (Project Steering Committee (PSC)) and relevant virtual meetings with the WWF- GEF AMU and support team; and
• Other relevant documents provided by the Executing Agency and partners.
  B.Field visits with PMU to project field sites;
  C. Interviews, discussions and consultations at local levels, national and international levels, including executing partners, GEF Operational Focal Points (OFP), Project Steering Committee (PSC) members and beneficiaries;
  D. Post-field visit debrief;
  E. Discussions with the GEF Agency team
  F. Draft report not to exceed 40 pages (excluding annexes) shared with GEF AMU and PMU for review and feedback. A sample outline will be provided; and
  G. Final TE report that has incorporated feedback and comments.

The WWF methodology for conducting project evaluations is a key element of our adaptive management approach. The evaluator(s) is expected to frame the evaluation effort using the six (6) core criteria of relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, results/impact, sustainability and adaptive capacity. Definitions of each of these criteria are available in Annex A. A sample of questions covering each of these criteria has been provided (Annex B). The evaluator(s) will provide a rating on relevance, effectiveness and efficiency to assess the level of achievement of project objectives and outcomes. A completed ratings table must be included in the evaluation executive summary. A performance Evaluation Ratings Summary template has been provided (Annex B) with the GEF required rating scales. A sample outline is provided (Annex C).

Expected Outputs of Evaluation:

The Terminal Evaluation report will include:

• Information on the evaluation, including when the evaluation took place, sites visited, participants, key questions, and methodology;
• Key findings by core criteria[4]; plus rationale for each criteria rating provided. Should include identification of key strengths, challenges and shortcomings;
• Risks to the sustainability of project outcomes;
• Review of Monitoring and Evaluation systems;
• Review implementation of safeguards assessments/mitigation plans and project compliance of WWF Environment and Social Integrated Policies and Procedures;
• Replication and catalytic effects of the project;
• Assessment of alignment with WWF priorities;
• Assessment of WWF GEF Agency, PMU and project partners;
• Lessons learned regarding: project design (theory of change), objectives, and technical approach; use of adaptive management; administration and governance arrangements; relevance; implementation of the work plan; achievement of impact; etc;
• Conclusions, and recommendations that include: recommendations on best practices towards achieving project outcomes and replication for other projects of similar scope.

Project finance / cofinance:

The Evaluation will assess the key financial aspects of the project, including the extent of co-financing planned and realized. The evaluator(s) will assess the appropriateness of and compliance with financial controls. Financial planning and reports should have supported timely decision making for effective project management. Cash flows should have been timely and sufficient to support on-going project activities. Co-financing actuals should be reviewed against commitments. Evidence and verification of due diligence and complaint management of funds, including any financial audits should also be assessed.

Project cost and financial source data will be required, including annual expenditure reports. Variances between planned and actual expenditures will need to be assessed and explained in the evaluation report. Results from recent financial audits, as available, should be taken into consideration. The evaluator(s) will receive assistance from the executing office to obtain financial data in order to complete the co-financing evaluation.

Implementation arrangements:

The principal responsibility for managing this evaluation resides with the WWF’s Conservation Strategies & Measures (CSM) team in coordination with the WWF GEF Project Manager. The CSM will select evaluator(s) and ensure the timely reimbursement, approve travel arrangements, and respond to questions concerning the scope and requirements for the evaluation. The PMU will be responsible for liaising with the Evaluator(s) to set up stakeholder interviews, arrange field visits, coordinate with the Government partners, etc.

Evaluation timeframe:

The total duration of the evaluation will be approximately 25 days according to the following plan:

Number of Days for Evaluator for each task:

• Document review and preparation of inception report= 4
• Submission of Inception Report= -
• Evaluation mission, stakeholder consultations and field visits= 13
• Debrief presentation on initial findings= 1
• Draft Evaluation Report= 5
• Final Report= 2

Evaluation deliverables:

In addition to the deliverables outlined below, the evaluator(s) is required also to provide an 'audit trail', detailing how feedback and comments have been addressed in the final evaluation report. Please note that the evaluation team may be contacted by the GEF Partnership for up to three years after completion of the terminal evaluation for information requests.

Deliverables:

Content, Timing and Responsibilities

1. Inception Report

1. Evaluator(s) provides clarifications on timing and method
2. No later than 2 weeks before the evaluation mission.
3. Evaluator(s) submits to WWF CSM

2. Presentation for verbal feedback

1. Initial Findings
2. End of evaluation mission
3. Evaluator (s) provides to PMU, EA, WWF, Operational Focal Points

3. Draft Report

1. Full report, (per annexed template) with annexes
2. Within 3 weeks of the evaluation mission
3. Evaluator submits to CSM, reviewed by PMU, EA, WWF office, WWF GEF Project, and GEF OFPs

4. Final Report

1. Revised report
2. Within 1 week of receiving WWF’s comments on draft
3. Evaluator submits to CSM

Evaluation Team Qualifications:

The evaluator(s) shall have prior experience in evaluating similar projects. The evaluator(s) selected should not have participated in the project preparation and/or implementation and should not have a conflict of interest with project related activities.

The Evaluator(s) must present the following qualifications:

• Minimum 7 years of relevant professional experience (e.g. evaluating GEF projects);
• Experience with GEF financed projects is an advantage;
• Technical knowledge in GEF International Waters an advantage;
• Knowledge of GEF Monitoring and Evaluation Policy is an asset;
• Recent experience conducting Evaluations or Mid-term Reviews for GEF projects is an asset;
• Previous experience with results‐based monitoring and evaluation methodologies
• Experience with WWF Project and Program Management Standards or Open Standards for the Practice of Conservation (www.cmp-openstandards.org) is preferred;
• Experience with social assessments, participatory project design and management, and community-based resource management preferred;
• Knowledge and experience in implementing or reviewing application of social and environmental safeguards policies in GEF (or similar) projects preferred;
• Spanish language skills are required;
• Experience in South America is an asset.

Evaluator Ethics:

Evaluation consultants will be held to the highest ethical standards. Evaluations are conducted in accordance with WWF principles[5] and the terms and conditions of the consulting agreement.

Payment modalities and specifications:

Payment, expense reimbursement, and other contractual terms and conditions are outlined in the agreement made between WWF and the evaluator(s). Payments are according to deliverables submitted.

Applicants are requested to apply online by submitting materials to Rachel.Kaplan@wwfus.org by December 14, 2018. Individual consultants are invited to submit applications together with their CV for these positions. Applications should contain a current and complete C.V. in English with contact information. The selection of candidates and contractual agreements will be in compliance with WWF procurement policies[1] and subject to GEF requirements.

WWF applies a fair and transparent selection process that will take into account the competencies/skills of the applicants as well as their financial proposals. Women and members of social minorities are encouraged to apply.