Terms of Reference
outcome: Local authorities and communities in rural and urban areas enabled and involved in planning and management of development activities, including the provision of services.
- 100 percent of district governments effectively accessing and managing devolved financial resources.
- Monitoring committees and citizen community boards (CCBs) established in 100 percent districts
- 50 percent public service facilities made functional in a gender balanced manner
- Perception of local government system and access to justice, including police functioning, by the poorest quintile improved by 50 percent.
The link between human development and quality of governance is strong and well established and is at the core of development issues in Pakistan. This is reflected in the national strategies to attain MDGs through, Improved governance and consolidating devolution, both as a means of delivering better development results and ensuring social and economic justice. These considerations underpin UNDP Pakistan's efforts in supporting governance processes and institutions that would improve their response to the needs of Pakistani citizens. The governance interventions are aimed at making policy formulation and implementation more effective and participatory; enhancing the credibility and effectiveness of key governing institutions; and supporting initiatives for citizens involvement in decisions that affect their lives. In this context the governance programme is working with the Government of Pakistan and national partners in three core areas of intervention: (i) devolution support; (ii) strengthening governing institutions; (iii) economic governance.Pakistan has introduced a devolved system of governance that is aimed at improving the quality of and access to public services delivery at the local levels. UNDP Pakistan supports government institutions in policy formulation and implementation of devolution at the national, provincial and local levels.Strong, credible and effective governing institutions that have the confidence of the citizens and the ability to deliver their mandate are the foundations of sound governance. UNDP Pakistan supports capacity strengthening of the key governing institutions such as Parliament and Election Commission of Pakistan and other public sector organizations and enables their engagement with other partners in civil society to improve the relevance and effectiveness of their mandate.Under the economic governance component, UNDP Pakistan is also involved in issues of public-private partnerships, advocating global compact, promoting corporate social responsibility, policy research on globalization and strengthening aid coordination. Outcomes are developmental changes between the completion of outputs and the achievement of impact, and are achieved in partnership with others. Partners are agents or actors with whom UNDP has, or intends to have, a substantive relationship in the pursuit of common outcomes. Partners may include stakeholders, if they are involved in working towards the outcome; beneficiaries of outcome actions; and donors involved in some way with UNDP on the outcome.
2. Objective of outcome Evaluation
An outcome evaluation is an in-depth examination of a related set of programmes, component of strategies intended to achieve a specific outcome. The objective of the outcome evaluation is to gauge the UNDP success in achieving the outcome and assess the underlying reason for achievement and non achievement
The evaluation team will judge relevance of the programmes to Country Programme Action Plan (CPAP) and United Nations Framework for Development (UNDAF) and its contribution to achieving the CPAP objectives.
The evaluation team should examine each programme component separately on the basis of effectiveness and efficiency. The evaluation team will assess the outcome of the programme whether the programme has made a difference in the planning and management practices of the local authorities in development activities.
The scope of the evaluation is determined by the following:
2.1 Outcome status: The key questions to be discussed under the outcome status are; what were the origin of the outcome and its constituent interventions?; How were the past experience, findings and recommendations of previous evaluations if any, dialogue with stakeholders used in design of outputs?; Assess the adequacy of background work carried out in project design; Determine whether or not the outcome has been achieved and, if not, whether there has been progress made towards its achievement. Identify the balance effort needed and the suitability or otherwise of pursuing the achievement of the outcome. List innovative approaches tried and capacities developed through UNDP assistance.
2.2 Underlying factors: An analysis of the underlying factors beyond UNDP’s control that influenced the outcome. What were the key assumptions made, internal and external factors? Distinguish the substantive design issues from the key implementation and/or management capacities and issues including the timeliness of generating outputs, the degree of stakeholder and partner involvement in the completion of the outputs, and how processes were managed/carried out. The outcome evaluation should examine UNDP work with other relevant actors and their influence/contribution in achieving the outcome.
2.3 UNDP contribution: The relevance of the outcome and the constituent components specifically for UNDP assistance. Also determine whether or not UNDP funded constituent outputs and other interventions—including the outputs, programmes, projects and soft and hard assistance— can be credibly linked to achievement of the outcome.
2.4 Partnership strategy: Ascertain whether UNDP’s partnership strategy has been appropriate and effective. What were the partnerships formed for? How did partnerships arise? What was the role of UNDP? Did it identify a niche for itself? How did the partnership contribute to the achievement of the outcome? How did they function and sustain? What was the level of the participation of stakeholders? List key beneficiaries and their major perceptions. Examine the partnership among UN Agencies that both influenced the programme design and contributed to the achievement of results through provision of services of national and international volunteers.
2.5 Key Evaluation Aspects
Specifically, the outcome evaluation is expected to address the following aspects:
· Provide a detailed assessment of how well the interventions are focused on the needs and demands of the beneficiaries’.
2.5.2 Effectiveness and Impact:
· Whether the outcome has been achieved and, if not, whether there has been progress made towards the achievement of both qualitative and quantitative targets;
· With the current and planned interventions under the Country Programme 2004-10 in partnership with other actors and stakeholders, will UNDP be able to achieve the outcome within the set timeframe and inputs – or whether additional resources are required and new or changed interventions are needed?
· The level, degree and appropriateness of participation by the beneficiaries, stakeholders, government and donor partners.
· The role of governance as a cross cutting theme in the One UN reform. Its current role and suggestions for improvement for the upcoming years.
· Assess how the programmes and projects have utilized the funding and human resources to achieve intended results.
· What is the prospect of the sustainability of UNDP interventions related to the outcome and provide recommendations for ensuring sustainability.
· An analysis of the underlying factors beyond UNDP’s control that influence the outcome;
2.5.5 Network /linkages:
· Analyze how well Gender concerns have been integrated in UNDP project outputs and specific recommendations how to make it a cross-cutting theme in all UNDP projects at outcome level;
· What has been the role of UNDP soft-assistance activities in helping achieve the outcome?
· Type and scope of linkages formed during established with national authorities, private sector, civil society organizations and other donors.
2.5.6 Lessons learnt/ recommendations:
· formulate a set of specific recommendations for any re-orientation of the program, identify the necessary actions required to be undertaken, who should undertake those and what the deadline should be, in order to remove or minimize the problems identified and to ensure efficient and effective implementation and to maximize impact.
The Evaluation team should submit a detailed outline of the methods proposed to carry out the task. The methodology should include number of project (sample projects) to be included in the evaluation based on the criteria set by the SMU and number of beneficiaries (Sample respondent). The following key activities are necessary for the evaluation team to undertake during their assignment.
· Meetings with senior management and programme staffs of UNDP
· Meetings with the steering committee, (briefing and debriefing)
· Review documents (published and unpublished: project documents, Quarterly and Annual Progress reports, evaluations, monitoring reports, Country Programme Document, UNDAF etc)
· Meeting with government officials, relevant stakeholders, communities
· Field visits (projects area)
The evaluation team must have an expert in local governance, an institutional expert with participatory monitoring and evaluation approaches and competence in conducting gender sensitive analysis.
4. Other requirements
- The evaluation team will be housed in SMU UNDP
- The Evaluation Team will submit a draft report to Chief SMU and CD.
- The Evaluation team will provide one hard and one soft copy of the final draft.
- The Evaluation team will hand over the un published document to UNDP.
5. Deliverable and Layout of the report
A comprehensive evaluation report, with an executive summary, highlighting the evaluation
Methodology, key findings, lessons learned, rating on performance, best practices and
Recommendations would be the final product of evaluation. The contents of the report should
emerge from the corporate Guidelines for Outcome Evaluators and would essentially cover the
§ Executive summary
§ Description of the evaluation methodology
§ An analysis of the situation with regard to the outcome, the outputs and the partnership strategy;
§ Key findings, in the context of mainstreaming the MDGs and the need for integrating and strategizing the UNDP development assistance for gender equality and women empowerment.
§ Conclusions and recommendations
- An action item list to build an appropriate niche for UNDP interventions in the country.
- Strategies for continuing UNDP assistance towards the outcome;
- A rating on progress towards outcomes and progress towards outputs;
- A rating on the relevance of the outcome.
- Specific recommendations with regard to UNDP engagement in the One UN reform process related to gender equality and strategic priorities for future years in this area
§ The assessment should also review the relevance of the outcome and recommend appropriate modifications.
§ Annexes: These will include terms of reference (TORs), field visits, people interviewed, documents reviewed etc.
6. Time Frame
Tentative Time Frame for the Study is 40 working days with a contract period of November 20
2009 to December 30, 2009.