Public tenders for inspection in Philippines

Find all Consulting tenders in the world.
Finding business opportunities has never been easier.

Results for consulting. Make a new search!

PH- Natl Rds Improv. & Mgt Ph.2 - P079935

Department of Public Works and Highways | Published May 18, 2016  -  Deadline June 2, 2016
cpvs

Consulting Services For Bridge Engineering Inspection (luzon And Visayas) REQUEST FOR EXPRESSION OF INTEREST NAME OFCOUNTRY : REPUBLIC OF THEPHILIPPINES NAME OFPROJECT : NATIONAL ROADSIMPROVEMENTAND MANAGEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE II (NRIMP-II) BRIEFDESCRIPTION : CONSULTING SERVICES FOR ENGINEERING INSPECTION OF IDENTIFIED BRIDGES ALONG PRIMARY ROADS (N-1) IN LUZON AND VISAYAS TAGGEDWITH A RATING OF "POOR" AND "BAD" UNDER THE BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (BMS) LOAN CREDIT NO. : 7552-PH The Government of the Republicof the Philippines has received financing from the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD) toward the cost forthe National Roads Improvement and Management Program, Phase II (NRIMP 2). The Department intends to apply parts of the proceeds ofthis loan to payments under the contract for Consulting Services for Bridge Engineering Inspection (BEI) for identified prioritybridges in Luzon and Visayas. The scope of theproject includes, but not limited to the following: Review of any previousinspection reports;Determination and provision ofequipment and resources required for the inspection including preparation of a safety plan;Inspection of all relevantbridge attributes including measurements, testing and analysis as necessary to supplement thevisual inspection;andIdentification of the probablecauses and projected rate of deterioration and the effects of continued deterioration on the performance, durability and residuallife of the structure. The project shall also include Special Non-Destructive Tests as needed, whichinvolve: Calculation of load rating(refer to DPWH-JICA Manual for Load Rating of Bridges,  3rd Edition,2014);Determination of materialproperties and structural behavior;Identification of componentslimiting the performance of the structure due to the bridge current condition and capacity or are likely to deteriorate to such alevel within the next five years;Identification of factorswhich will influence thedynamic load allowance to be used in load rating. The BEI shall be undertaken in accordance with the requirements of theBMS Operation and User manual. The assignment is expected to becompleted within five (5) months. Within this period, it is anticipated that the consultants will render 155 professional man-months of services, including 13 man-months of internationalexperience. The Department of Public Worksand Highways now invites eligible consultants to express their interest in providing theservices. Interested consultants must provide information indicating that they are qualified to perform the above required servicesincluding description of similar assignments, experience, and capacity to complete the services in the timespecified. A consultant will be selected in accordance with the procedures set out in the WorldBank'sGuidelines: Selection and Employment of Consultants under IBRDLoans and IDA Credits and Grants by World Bank Borrowers (January2011, revised July 2014), under the Quality- and Cost- Based Selection (QCBS) method, which can be found at the Website:www.worldbank.org/procure. Special attention should be paid to World Bank rules on joint Ventures andAssociates. Interested consultants mayobtain further information at the address below during office hours (8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.) upon written request forappointment. DANTE B. POTANTE Director IV Department of Public Works andHighways Bonifacio Drive, PortArea Manila,Philippines Tel. No. (632)304-3271 One (1) original and five (5)copies of the Expression of Interest (EOI) shall be submitted that includes the following information. We encourage consultants toprovide the information requested specific to the requirements stated in this REOI which must be delivered/submitted to thefollowing address not later than 10:00 a.m. of June 2, 2016. EOI informationrequirements: 1.     Total number of employeesand breakdown of number of Key Technical Personnel by ProfessionalCategory. 2.     Highlights of similar assignments specifically related to the scope of work outlined in theREOI. 3.     Project Profiles for Similar Projects with a maximum of 15 total forPrimary Firm and Joint Venture members (if applicable). The Projects included should be completed consulting services contracts ofsize, complexity and technical specialty comparable to the project scope stated in the REOI that were completed by the Firm in thelast 10 years. The Project Profile at a minimum should include: a.    Contract Name b.    Contract Location c.    Name of Client d.    Start Date and Actual CompletionDate e.    Cost of Consultancy Contract and percentageparticipation for eachfirm (with conversion to Philippines Pesos on date of Contract Signing) f.     Number of Professional Man-Months providedby the Firm g.    Indicate if Primary ofAssociate h.     Description of Project/Services 4.    Project Profiles for Related Projects thatthe Primary Firm (or any Joint Venture Firm) completed in the last 10 years may also be submitted, limited to a maximum of 10 for all Firms. Department of Public Works andHighways (DPWH) Special Bids andAwards Committee (BAC) for Consulting Services & Goods, NRIMP-II Attention:          RAULC. ASIS Undersecretary Chairman, Special BAC for ConsultingServices and Goods, NRIMP-II NRIM ?UPMO Building, NCR Compound Department of Public Works and Highways 2nd Street, Port Area Manila,Philippines Tel. Nos.(632) 304-3302, (632) 304-3779 RAUL C.ASIS Undersecretary Chairman, Special BAC for Consulting Services & Goods, NRIMP-II

PH- Natl Rds Improv. & Mgt Ph.2 - P079935

Department of Public Works and Highways - NRIMP 2 BAC | Published August 10, 2015  -  Deadline September 24, 2015
cpvs

G-12 - Supply And Delivery Of Bridge Inspection Equipment Invitation forBids (IFB) Republic of thePhilippines Second National RoadsImprovement and Management Project (NRIMP-2) Loan / Credit Number: 7552-PH G-12 ? Supply and Delivery of Bridge InspectionEquipment 1.         This Invitation for Bids follows the General Procurement Notice for this Project that appeared in Development Gateway Market, of October 21, 2007. 2.         The Republic of the Philippines has received from the International Bank for Reconstruction and Developmenttoward the cost of Second National Roads Improvement and Management Project (NRIMP-2), and it intends to apply part ofthe proceeds of this loan to payments under the Contractfor G-12 ? Supply and Delivery of BridgeInspection Equipment. 3.         The Department of Public Works and Highways now invites sealed bids from eligible and qualified bidders for Supply and Delivery of Bridge InspectionEquipment, with warranty, and training. 4.         Bidding will be conducted using the International Competitive Bidding (ICB) procedures specified in the World Bank'sGuidelines: Procurement under IBRD Loans and IDA Credits, edition of May 2004 revised in October 2006, and is open to all Bidderseligible as defined in these Guidelines. 5.        Interested eligible Bidders may obtain furtherinformation from the Department of Public Works and Highways and inspect the bidding documents at the address given belowfrom 8:00am to 5:00 pm. 6.         Qualifications requirements include:the Bidder must be an authorized dealer, distributoror manufacturer of products listed in his Bid, and must have been in the Industry for at least five (5) yearsand the manufacturersupplied at least ten (10) similar items during the last two (2) years prior to the deadline for bid submission. A margin of preference for certain goods manufactured domestically shall not beapplied.The Bidder shall furnish documentary evidence to demonstrate that the Goods it offers meet thefollowing usage requirement: All Technical Specifications are mandatory. Bidders must demonstrate in their proposal that they meetall requirements. The Bidder shall furnish documentary evidence that it meets the following financial requirements: must have anaverage annual turnover for the last three (3) years equivalent to 1.5 times the annual cash flow for the contract based on the bidprice being considered for award, and have current asset over current liability ratio of more than one (1) during the last three(3) years. 7.         A complete set of Bidding Documents in Englishmay be purchased by interested bidders on the submission of a written Application to the address below and upon payment of anon-refundable fee of Five Thousand (5,000.00) Pesos (plus postal charges of PhP 1,000.00 (inland) or PhP 3,000 (overseas)) or theequivalent amount in a fully convertible currency. The method of payment will be cash or manager's check in favor of the Departmentof Public Works and Highways. The document may beobtained in person between 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. at the address below or will besent by courier (DPWH will not be responsible for loss by the courier). 8.        Bids must be delivered to the address below on or before September 24, 2015 at 10:00a.m. Electronic bidding will not be permitted. Late bids will berejected.  Bids will be opened in the presence of the bidders' representatives who choose to attend in person at the address below onSeptember 24, 2015 at 10:00 a.m.All bids must be accompanied by a bid security of not less than the following amount indicated oppositethe item or an equivalent amount in a freely convertible currency. Supply and Delivery of Bridge Inspection Equipment PhP    700,000.00 9.         The address referred toabove is: Undersecretary Raul C. Asis Chairman, Special NRIMP 2BAC Central Office c/o Carlos G. Mutuc Office of the Program Director NRIM-UPMO Building, NCRCompound Department of Public Works andHighways 2nd Street, Port Area,Manila Republic of the Philippines Telephone: +63-2-304-3779 RAUL C. ASIS Undersecretary Chairman, Special BAC for Consultancy Services and Goods for NRIMP 2

Studies for Sustainable Flood Mgmt. - P145391

Department of Public Works and Highways | Published January 25, 2016  -  Deadline February 4, 2016
cpvs

Consultancy Services For The Feasibility Study And Preparation Of Detailed Engineering Design Of The Proposed Upper Marikina Dam, Greater Metro Manila Area Flood Management Project NAME OF COUNTRY         :       REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES NAME OF PROJECT           :        GREATER   METRO  MANILA   FLOOD    MANAGEMENT PROJECT, AUSTRALIA ? WORLD BANK PHILIPPINES DEVELOPMENT TRUST FUND (A-WBPDTF)GRANT UNDER THE PHILIPPINES PROGRAMMATIC TRUST FUND (PH-PTF) GRANT NO. TF017736-PH BRIEF DESCRIPTION            :     CONSULTANCY SERVICES FOR THE FEASIBILITYSTUDY AND PREPARATION OF DETAILED ENGINEERING DESIGN OF THE PROPOSED UPPER MARIKINA DAM, GREATERMETRO MANILA AREA FLOOD MANAGEMENTPROJECT GRANT NO.: TF017736-PH TheGovernment of the Republic of the Philippines has received financing from the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development(IBRD) toward the cost of the Greater Metro Manila Flood Management Project.  The Department intends to apply grant funds to payments under the contract forConsultancyServices for the Feasibility Study and Preparation of Detailed Engineering Design of the Proposed Upper Marikina Dam,Greater Metro Manila Area Flood Management Project. The Services include two main components to be based on international bestpractices, as follows: Component 1:                 FEASIBILITY STUDY ·         Review and evaluation of existing information ·         Site inspection, surveys and investigations ·         Hydrological analysis, development of database/information systems, and update of existing mathematicalmodels ·         Selection of the preferred dam site including dam type and appurtenant structures ·         Preparation of feasibility study that determines possible options and settles on preferred option through economicevaluation including social and environmental impact assessment Component 2:        PREPARATION OF DETAILED ENGINEERINGDESIGN ·         Conduct additional survey and investigation ·         Preparation of detailed engineering designs of the preferred option,including project implementation plan and O&Mrequirements ·         Preparation of Tender Documents Theassignment is expected to be completed within eighteen (18) months. Within this period, it is anticipated that the consultants will render 72.5 professional man-months ofservices. TheDepartment of Public Works and Highways now invites eligibleconsultants to express their interest in providing the services. Interested consultants must provide information indicatingthatthey are qualified to perform the above required services including description of similar assignments, experience in similarconditions, availability of appropriate technical personnel, and capacity to complete the services in the timespecified. Aconsultant will be selected in accordance with the procedures set out in the World Bank's Guidelines:Selection and Employment of Consultants under IBRD Loans and IDA Credits and Grants by World Bank Borrowersdated January 2011 ("Consultant Guidelines") which can be found at the Website: www.worldbank.org/procure. Special attentionshould be paid to World Bank rules on joint Ventures and Associates. Interestedconsultants may obtain further information at the address below during office hours (8:00 a.m. to5:00 p.m.) upon written requestfor appointment. PATRICK B. GATAN ProjectDirector Departmentof Public Works and Highways DPWH-NCRCompound, 2nd Street, Port Area Manila,Philippines Tel. No.(632) 304-3813 One (1)original and five (5) copies of the Expression of Interest (EOI) shall be submitted that includes the following information. Weencourage consultants to provide the information requested specific to the requirements stated in this REOI which must bedelivered/submitted to the following address not later than 2:00 p.m. of February 4, 2016. EOIinformation requirements: 1.    Total number of employees andbreakdown of number of Key Technical Personnel by ProfessionalCategory. 2.    Highlights of similar assignments specifically related to the scope of work outlined in theREOI. 3.    Project Profiles for Similar Projects with a maximum of 15 total for Primary Firm and JointVenturemembers (if applicable). The Projects included should be completed consultancy services contracts of size, complexity andtechnical specialty comparable to the project scope stated in the REOI that were completed by the Firm in the last 10 years. TheProject Profile at a minimumshould include: a.    Contract Name b.    Contract Location c.    Name of Client d.    Start Date an Actual Completion Date e.    Cost of Consultancy Contract and percentage participation for each firm (with conversion toPhilippine Pesos on date of contract signing) f.     Number of Professional Man-Months provided by the Firm g.    Indicate if Primary or Associate h.    Description of Project/Services 4.    Project Profiles for Related Projects that the Primary Firm (or any Joint Venture Firm) havecompleted in the last 10 years may also be submitted, limited to a maximum of 10 for all Firms. Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) Bids and Awards Committee (BAC) for Consultancy Services Attention:     RAUL C. ASIS Undersecretary Chairman, BAC for ConsultancyServices UPMO-FCMC DPWH NCR Compound, 2nd Street, Port Area, Manila, Philippines Tel. Nos. (632) 304-3813 RAUL C. ASIS Undersecretary Chairman, BAC forConsultancy Services NB:  The Terms of Reference forthe assignment is available on DPWH's website (www.dpwh.gov.ph)under the Section on Advertisements.

Technical Expert to Provide Advisory Services to UNDP during the implementation of DepEd Lot 4 - supply & delivery of Solar Power Systems for Un-energized Public Schools Nationwide

UNDP Country Office - PHILIPPINES | Published April 10, 2017  -  Deadline April 16, 2017
cpvs

Project Title: Support Services to the K-12 Basic Education Program of the Department of Education of the PhilippinesBackground: The project intends to provide development support services to the Department of Education (DepEd), in the course of its implementation of their 2016 K to 12 Basic Education Program and is funded from the Philippine Government budget, based on the allocations of the General Appropriations Act (GAA) of 2016. Within this project, UNDP will provide development and technical support services to DepEd in accordance with UNDP regulations, rules, policies and procedures as required by the Approved Procurement Plan and Budget agreed between UNDP and DepEd. On 23 March 2016, UNDP and DepEd formally signed an agreement whereby UNDP will procure the following goods and services for DepED:Lot 1 : SHS Regular Package (Standalone) – supply and installation of 184 packages of ICT equipment (7 PCs, UPS, printers, AVRs, accessories etc.) for 184 public schools offering Senior High School which is 99% completed with the remaining school in ARMM for remote installation;Lot 2 : SHS Special Package (arts & design, technical drafting, illustration TVL, programming, medical transcription TVL) + Pen Tablet – supply and installation of 889 packages of ICT equipment (each consisting of 51 PCs and UPS, printer, AVTs, accessories, etc.) for 889 public schools offering specialized senior high school program. This lot is in its final stages of completion with all packages delivered on March 20, 2017. Installation is 77% completed and will be finished by April 17, 2017;Lot 3 : Division Offices IT Equipment – supply and installation of13,042 units of ICT equipment for 209 Division offices of DepEd nationwide completed in October 10, 2016; andLot 4 : Package for Unenergized Public Schools – supply and installation of 4,401 solar power system to power laptops and tablets for 4,401 public elementary and high schools in areas without electricity nationwide. This package is currently under evaluation.The signing of the supply contract for the 4th Lot is just about to commence in April 2017. Once the contract comes into effect, UNDP will require the services of a Technical Expert to supplement the Country Office’s capacity to monitor the works that will be completed by the contractor.Scope of Services:Under the guidance and direct supervision of the Democratic Governance (DG) Programme Manager, and working closely with the DepED Project Manager, the Technical Expert is expected to provide technical advisory support to UNDP in the course of the implementation of Lot 4, including, but not limited to the performance of the following tasks:Conduct pre-shipment inspection and testing of the goods at the manufacturer’s sites, central and/or local consolidation warehouses, to ensure full compliance of the equipment sourced with the technical specifications and quality standards requested in the ITB and approved in the Purchase Order, and submit reports of findings on all such inspections;Conduct random supervision and spot checking of ongoing installation works, aimed at assessing the construction standards and practices of the contractor vis-à-vis the requirements under the contract;Identify concerns, risks or challenges that may be observed during the implementation of the project and communicate the findings and proposed risk mitigation measures / solutions to both the Contractor and the DG Programme Manager in a timely manner;Conduct the testing and commissioning of the completed Solar Power Systems installation at any and all location, prepare reports of any deviations found and make recommendations as to the proper rectifications that need to be undertaken, prior to confirming the final acceptance of the works, and authorizing the final payments;Participate in technical follow-up meetings and periodic coordination meetings that will be held between UNDP and DepEd, or UNDP and the contractor, as may be necessary, for purposes of tracking the status or progress of the contract implementation; andProvide UNDP with technical advice on ad hoc basis during the entire implementation of the project, especially during the installation phase as well as the Warranty and Technical Support period.Estimated Start Date and Duration of the Assignment:The Technical Expert is expected to be engaged by mid April 2017 through a non-exclusive Individual Contract (IC). The IC is intended for on-call intermittent engagement for a maximum of 60 working days spread over a period of 17 months, subject to extension based on satisfactory performance review. During this period, specific service requests (also known as call-offs) can be placed by UNDP at any time, in the form of issuance of Purchase Orders, indicating the total cost of the services for the duration of the call-off, which shall be based on the daily fee of the Technical Expert.Expected Outputs and Deliverables:Every time a request for services arises, UNDP will provide specific outputs and deliverables to the selected Technical Expert in line with the generic tasks outlined in Scope of services, and a Purchase Order will be issued to the Technical Expert to initiate the rendering of service, detailing the time frame, and the expected value of the services during the call-off.Duty station:The technical expert shall be home-based, except when called to attend meetings and/or conduct inspections, either within Metro Manila or in other regions within The Philippines where the Lot 4 implementation is ongoing.Qualifications:Education:Bachelor’s Degree in Engineering, Mechanical Engineering or Electrical Engineering. Academic degree/course or special training with specific focus on Renewable Energy is definitely an advantage.Work experience:Minimum five (5) years of professional relevant experience working in solar power systems, especially in the environment of developing countries;At least 3 years of experience working in large scale and institutional solar power or related development projects in the Philippines;Demonstrated knowledge and experience in the development and design of Solar Power Systems/solutions, technical specifications, as well as the national and international markets for solar technologies;Relevant experiences working with government agencies and financial institutions will be an asset.Language requirements:Fluency in English is required. Knowledge of the local language is an asset, but not strictly required, since the duty station is an English-speaking country.Communicates effectively to varied audiences, including during formal public speaking, and in writing reports using the English language.Scope of Price Proposal and Schedule of PaymentsThe Technical Expert is to be compensated based on a daily fee payable upon satisfactorily completion of each Deliverable and submission of related reports during every call-off. Payments shall be made following certification by the DG Programme Manager that the services related to each Deliverable have been satisfactorily performed and the Deliverables have been achieved by or before the due dates specified in the call-off. The Technical Expert’s performance will be evaluated against the following criteria:meeting TOR requirements,timeliness of work completion and report submission,work relations with contractors and other project counterparts,dependability / reliability in carrying out the assignments.Recommended Presentation of Offer:Applicants are requested to submit/upload in one file the following documents:Duly accomplished Letter of Confirmation of Interest and Availability that indicates professional fee only, as per template provided; If an Offeror is employed by an organization/company/institution, and he/she expects his/her employer to charge a management fee in the process of releasing him/her to UNDP under Reimbursable Loan Agreement (RLA), the Offeror must indicate at this point, and ensure that all such costs are duly incorporated in the financial proposal submitted to UNDP;Personal CV or P11, 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; Criteria for Selection of the Best OfferThe offers that will be received shall be evaluated based on the Combined Scoring method – where the qualifications and methodology will be weighted a max of 70%, and combined with the price offer which will be weighted a max of 30%.Application requirements may be emailed to procurement.ph@undp.org on or before 16 April 2017, Midnight New York, USA time. In view of the volume of applications UNDP receives, only shortlisted offerors will be notified.

Construction Supervisor Consultant (For Filipino Nationals Only)

UNDP Country Office - PHILIPPINES | Published December 4, 2017  -  Deadline December 11, 2017
cpvs

The Construction Supervisor Consultant will be responsible to deliver and accomplish the construction of facilities, the Girls Education Centre in compliance with the project “Better Life for Out-of-Schools Girls to Fight Against Poverty and Injustice in the Philippines” goals and objectives. She/he is in charge of the day-to-day management and supervision, ensuring the overall efficiency and effectiveness of processes and activities undertaken to achieve timely delivery of infrastructures. She/he is furthermore accountable for providing technical assistance to UNESCO and its partners, including inputs to the development of the construction strategies as well as policies for the maintenance of the infrastructures.Scope of WorkUnder the overall supervision of the Programme Specialist for Education, UNESCO Office, Jakarta and on the ground, National Programme Officer, UNESCO Liaison Office, Manila, the Construction Supervisor Consultant will supervise the construction of the project components, monitor construction methods and quality control, certify that the quality of works conforms to the specifications, norms, standards and drawings. Responsibilities of Construction Supervisor Consultant under this heading includes, but not necessarily limited to following:Develop the terms of reference for request for proposals from construction firms for the preparation of blueprint for tender and budget quotation for Girls Education Centre in Palo, Leyte, Philippines.Develop the terms of reference for request for proposals from construction firms for the construction of Girls Education Centre in Palo, Leyte, Philippines.Responsible to ensure that effective implementation, monitoring and supervision of the development and construction of Girls Education Centre in Palo, Leyte, Philippines.Responsible to ensure effective quality control systems of the contractor and engineering consultancy companies’ work in compliance with technical specifications, Philippines Department of Education and UNESCO quality standards.Provide necessary technical support in project management, including risk management, cost control, scheduling, monitoring and reporting;Review design documents, modify design and make changes in contract in compliance with the works contract, where necessary;Review and update specification of works, develop guidelines for quality assurance and quality control system for the smooth implementation of project components;Prepare Supervision Manual delineating a consistent, comprehensive and uniform system of quality assurance and quality control for the components, including but not limited to systems of checks and reviews, description of type, frequency and procedures of on-site as well as laboratory tests and inspections, etc., that will be enforced during design and construction to ensure highest standards of quality;Supervise and monitor the Procurement/Tendering – involves preparation of tender documents; provision of technical assistance in the bid process for Contractor selection; and other related tasks.Supervision during Construction and Delivery – involves supervision and inspection during and after construction activities; review of construction plans, designs and schemes; coordination of contractor activities; and other related tasks;Monitor and evaluate performance of service provides by the contractor and engineering consultancy companiesIdentify and manage risks and initiate corrective action where necessary, so that maximum benefit to client and stakeholders is achieved.Ensure all technical inputs and cost estimates related to the construction components are accurate, timely provided and included in the project proposals and budgets.Other Administrative Assistance – involves other related logistical, managerial, reportorial, tasks in line with the project, among others.Take responsibility for overall progress and use of resources.Provide regular monthly report of the project during design and construction phases.Prepare interim - final project and handover reports and maintain the relevant project records.Supervise and monitor project budgets, cash flow and obligations to ensure that deliverables are met and payments to contractors and personnel are received on time.Coordinate with Operations and programmes required activities ensuring proper and timely actions from all stakeholders, UNESCO, Philippines Department of Education side, the contractors, the engineering consultancy companies, and others.Prepare handover documents that will include but not limited to legal papers andpolicies for the maintenance of the infrastructuresEnsure a sound handing over of facilities to project beneficiaries.Perform other tasks related to the project implementation as maybe requested by the Director & Representative, Head of Education Unit and National Programme Officer.If deemed necessary by UNESCO, the Individual consultant who is required to travel in order to perform the work described above, shall be paid based on the travel cost calculation in accordance with UNESCO’s usual travel provision to cover all travel related expenses, including daily subsistence allowance, tickets for the authorized travel and terminal expenses under the project budget Schedule of PaymentMonthly reports with the following due dates including the achievements and pending activities together with all or other-related outcomes in reference to the duties and responsibilities outlined in this terms of reference. This Construction Supervisor Consultant is expected to deliver the following on the date specified:First Month- Terms of reference for request for proposals from construction firms for the preparation of blueprint for tender and budget quotation for Girls Education Centre in Palo, Leyte, Philippines.- Report of Accomplishments: December 2017 Second Month- Selection Conference Report of construction firm for the preparation of blueprint for tender and budget quotation for Girls Education Centre in Palo, Leyte, Philippines.- Report of Accomplishments: January 2018Third Month- Terms of reference for request for proposals from construction firms for the construction of Girls Education Centre in Palo, Leyte, Philippines.- Report of Accomplishments: February 2018Forth Month- Selection Conference Report of construction firm for the construction of Girls Education Centre in Palo, Leyte, Philippines.- Report of Accomplishments: March 2018Fifth Month- Ground Breaking Plan and Report for the Girls Education Center, Palo, Leyte, Philippines.- Report of Accomplishments: April 2018Sixth Month- Construction Progress and Status Report of Girls Education Center, Palo, Leyte, Philippines.- Report of Accomplishments: May 2018Seventh Month- Construction Progress and Status Report of Girls Education Center, Palo, Leyte, Philippines.- Report of Accomplishments: June 2018Eight Month- Construction Progress and Status Report of Girls Education Center, Palo, Leyte, Philippines.- Report of Accomplishments: July 2018Ninth Month- Construction Progress and Status Report of Girls Education Center, Palo, Leyte, Philippines.- Report of Accomplishments: August 2018Tenth Month- Construction Progress and Status Report of Girls Education Center, Palo, Leyte, Philippines.- Report of Accomplishments: September 2018Eleventh Month- Construction Progress and Status Report of Girls Education Center, Palo, Leyte, Philippines.- Report of Accomplishments: October 2018 All payments shall be disbursed only upon written confirmation of acceptance of outputs by the Programme Specialist for Education. Duty StationThe Consultant will be required to report daily at the Manila Office and Project Sites. Domestic travel may be contingent on engagement requirements. Travel and related costs (i.e. transportation expenses and applicable daily subsistence allowance (DSA) during travels) for the engagement shall be borne by the Project. Corporate competencesCommitment to UNDP’s mission, vision and values;Sensitivity to cultural, gender, religion, race, nationality and age differences.Functional competencesExperience in working in the private sector, or in an outreach position relating with the government and private sector;Past experience and effective communication skills for dialoguing with senior level private sector executives;Strong initiative and desire to succeed, accountable and willingness to be pro-active in identifying suitable companies for BCtA membership and engaging in appropriate business opportunities;Experience and knowledge of the international development sector, e.g. through working at the UN in the private sector engagement and/or development field;Existing work experience in the Philippines and with the Philippines-based private sector organizations/companies, donor partners and UN agencies;Possess strong intellectual interest in economic development and the role of the private sector in driving poverty reduction; knowledge of private sector – development impact assessment;Past international work experience preferred;Demonstrated ability to function in a team environment & to deal with complex multi-stakeholder environment. QualificationsEducation:Advanced university degree in Civil or Structural Engineering, Architecture or other relevant technical areaExperience:Minimum 5 years of professional experience at national and international levels in the relevant field of civil engineering, especially in preparation of construction technical documentation;Experience in working in complex environments and large infrastructure and/or civil works, particularly in the field of construction technical project documentation development as well as construction supervision;Experience in community mobilization/ community monitoring sites, coupled with the ability to address and manage all aspects of monitoring of a construction (legal aspects of positioning, procurement, law and knowledge of construction contracts, construction information technologies, and follow-up).Experience in managing and supervising medium to large-scale construction works in the public sector;Working experience in the area of preparation, implementation and monitoring of technical/ (re)construction projects; methodological and calculation skills;Experience in technical design of high-rise structure is an asset;Knowledge of the UN rules, procedures and regulations would be an asset.Working experience in UN or other international development organization is an asset.Skills:Knowledge of procurement, tendering and contracting processes and requirements;Excellent and proven experience in dealing with contractors and local partners;Background/familiarity with building design and construction for natural disaster (typhoon and earthquake) prone areas in the Philippines.Language:Fluency in spoken and written EnglishCriteria for Selection of Best OfferThe offer will evaluated based on the Combined Scoring method – where the qualifications will be weighted a max. of 70% and combined with the financial offer which will be weighted a max of 30%.Application requirements:Applicants are requested to SUBMIT in one file the following documents to procurement.ph@undp.org:Duly accomplished Letter of Confirmation of Interest and Availability that indicates the all-inclusive lumpsum contract price, supported by a breakdown of costs, as per template provided; If an Offeror is employed by an organization/company/institution, and he/she expects his/her employer to charge a management fee in the process of releasing him/her to UNDP under Reimbursable Loan Agreement (RLA), the Offeror must indicate at this point, and ensure that all such costs are duly incorporated in the financial proposal submitted to UNDP;Personal CV or P11, 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 referencesApplication requirements should be emailed to procurement.ph@undp.org and registry.ph@undp.org on or before 11 December 2017.Documents for this Advertisement can be downloaded from this page:Financial Proposal TemplateP11 Form (Personal History Form)General Terms and Conditions for ICComplete Terms of ReferenceIn view of the volume of applications UNDP receives, only shortlisted offerors will be notified.

Associate Evaluators for Case Study Development: Assessment of the Implementation of the Anti-Red Tape Act (Two [2] Individual Consultants)

UNDP Country Office - PHILIPPINES | Published June 20, 2018  -  Deadline June 29, 2018
cpvs

Associate Evaluators for Case Study Development: Assessment of the Implementation of the Anti-Red Tape Act (Two [2] Individual Consultants) 1. Project TitleUsing Strategic Monitoring & Evaluation (M&E) to Accelerate the Implementation of the Philippine Development Plan (PDP) 2017-2022 (Strategic M&E Project)2. Background and RationaleThe National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA) and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) Philippine country office have embarked on a partnership to strengthen the conduct of evaluations of priority government programs under the Philippine Development Program (PDP). Financed by NEDA and implemented with full UNDP country office support, the Strategic Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Project will help strengthen the M&E capacities of NEDA and key government agencies to support the achievement of the PDP and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) through evidence-based decision making.A key component of the project is the commissioning of independent evaluations on key themes and programs relevant to the PDP and the SDGs. These studies will evaluate the relevance, efficiency, effectiveness, and sustainability of priority social and economic programs that have been implemented or are being implemented by the government. The results of the evaluation studies are envisaged to inform how policies and programs are designed and implemented to achieve the desired results of the PDP and contribute to strengthening the government’s M&E systems.One of these evaluations is on the implementation of the Anti-Red Tape Act (ARTA). Passed in 2007 as Republic Act (R.A.) No. 9485, ARTA seeks to promote integrity and curb corruption through greater transparency about the public’s transactions with the government. The Act required the simplification of frontline service procedures, formulation of service standards to be observed in every transaction, and publication of these standards for clients’ information. ARTA applies to all government offices, national government agencies (NGAs), local government units (LGUs) as well as government-owned and controlled corporations (GOCCs) that provide frontline services. In adopting simplified and standardized procedures, the law sought to reduce red tape and thereby curb opportunities for graft and corruption. Recently, the Ease of Doing Business Act and Efficient Government Service Delivery Act (EODB Act, R.A. No. 11032), also known as the Expanded ARTA law, was passed to strengthen the service efficiency aspects of the 2007 law and to emphasize improving business competitiveness.To assess agencies’ compliance with ARTA and clients’ satisfaction on frontline services, the Civil Service Commission (CSC) has been conducting the Report Card Survey (RCS). Introduced in 2010, the RCS is held annually to rate frontline service offices’ compliance with ARTA requirements such as the presence of Citizen’s Charter, manned Public Assistance and Complaints Desks, Anti-Fixer campaign materials, and observance of “No Noon Break” policy. Apart from checking on these requirements, the RCS also surveys a sample of clients to assess their satisfaction on the services rendered by the frontline service office. CSC also collects bulk data on complaints from citizens through the Contact Center ng Bayan (CCB)An independent evaluation is necessary to gain an objective view of the implementation by NGAs, GOCCs, and LGUs of the ARTA; the results so far in terms of outcomes and, if feasible, impacts; and the mechanisms for monitoring and evaluation of the Expanded ARTA law.NEDA, through the UNDP, will commission such evaluation through the hiring of a team of individual consultants, including the Two Associate Evaluators for Case Study Development. Working with the evaluation team that will be led by a Governance Specialist / Lead Investigator, the associate evaluators will develop at least six (6) case studies of agencies who have improved their performance and whose performance have stagnated or worsened. An Evaluation Reference Group (ERG) has also been convened, with NEDA, CSC, DTI / National Competitiveness Council (NCC), and UNDP as members, to provide direction and input to the design and conduct of the study. 3. Objectives of the StudyThe proposed study on the implementation of ARTA aims to develop its relationship with and impact on frontline services and provide inputs to the implementation of the new EoDB law. The study seeks to draw lessons from the implementation of ARTA over the last eight (8) years, particularly, analyzing trends on the implementation of ARTA, identifying the elements and practices that helped improve the efficiency of frontline services and those which constrained the effectiveness of anti-red tape interventions, as well as to surface the law’s unintended consequences. Furthermore, the study seeks to design a standard framework and methodology for the conduct of future impact evaluations on the implementation of the Expanded ARTA.The study seeks to answer the following evaluation questions:Efficiency – How has ARTA been implemented by NGAs, GOCCs, and LGUs? What can the RCS and other databases of CSC reveal about ARTA implementation?How do agencies monitor their compliance to the standards in their Citizens Charters and revise the standards when necessary?Effectiveness – How has the implementation of ARTA policies improved frontline services? What are the elements which helped achieve the goals of ARTA, and what are the constraining factors?Has the improvement in frontline services of key national and local agencies translated in improved perceptions on business-friendliness and corruption? Why or why not?What factors influence various stakeholders in the implementation of ARTA? How do they collaborate to meet (or curtail) the goals of ARTA?What are good practices from the most improved agencies (provide innovative examples)?What support can be extended to agencies in difficult situations or those who fail in the RCS?What are the facilitating factors and barriers to the public’s utilization of the Citizen’s Charter?Relevance – To what extent are the various components of the ARTA program relevant to the implementation of the new Expanded ARTA?Sustainability –Based on the findings, how can ARTA be better implemented in light of the new EODB law?Are there areas that need further improvement to sustain/maximize the benefits already achieved by implementing ARTA?How should a future impact evaluation study for the Expanded ARTA be designed?What methodologies can be applied to assess the costs and benefits associated with ARTA?What methodologies and tools can be applied to measure NGAs’ implementation of the standards (e.g. processes, steps, and time) in their Citizens’ Charters?How can data collected by CSC be used to analyze the causal impact on ARTA outcomes, i.e., reducing corruption and improving ease of doing business?4. Scope of Services and MethodologyUnder the overall guidance of the ERG of the ARTA study and reporting directly and regularly to the Strategic M&E Project Coordinator of UNDP, the consultants will:Assess the efficiency and effectiveness of the implementation of entire ARTA program throughout the government and in selected NGAs in terms of:Processes and activities undertaken to comply with ARTA;Challenges and issues, including capacity constraints;Best practices, enabling factors, and lessons learned;Provide insights as to the extent the ARTA program has achieved its desired results or objectives of improving frontline services, easing doing business, and curbing corruption as well as the program’s unintended consequences through perceptions from key sectors such as academe, civil society, and private sector, and provide recommendations on how to sustain the efficiencies already achieved as well as to address the gaps;Design a standard framework and methodology for the conduct of future impact evaluations on implementation of the ARTA program, including recommendations on tools, techniques, and innovations that can be used to improve monitoring and data collection.In collaboration with the ERG, define a strategy to communicate and disseminate the results and findings of the evaluation study, including a) mapping of stakeholders with interest in the evaluation; b) a one-page brief and a maximum five (5)-page executive summary to accompany the dissemination of the report.In undertaking the evaluation, the evaluation team will undertake two methodological tracks. First, a quantitative track which will involve statistical testing and analysis of the existing data gathered by CSC through its RCS, inspection checklist, contact center complaints, and other means and tools to a) define the statistical reliability of the data; and b) draw trends and other insights from the data on how ARTA has been implemented by the agencies.For the qualitative track, which will be led by the associate evaluators for case study development, at least (6) case studies of NGAs/GOCCs (at least two (2)) and LGUs (at least four (4)) with relatively comparable service profiles and with equal number of improved and stagnant performers will be undertaken to a) identify the drivers and other factors for ARTA performance; and b) identify change in key stakeholders’ perceptions of corruption and ease of doing business. Key informant interviews and focus group discussions (FGDs) with government and non-government stakeholders (e.g., civil society, business, academe) will be conducted at the central office and select service delivery offices. Available data from the subject NGAs/GOCCs and LGUs will be analyzed. The two (2) associate evaluators will share an equal number of NGAs/GOCCs and LGUs.From the findings from these two tracks, the evaluation study will design a standard framework and methodology for the conduct of impact evaluations in the future on the implementation of the ARTA program in the context of the recent amendments. The framework may include the development of a case study tool for the regular in-depth assessment of the top ARTA performers.To undertake such, the Associate Evaluators for Case Study Development to be engaged for the study shall collectively undertake the following:Preparatory work, including:Prepare case study tool and guide questions for the conduct of the study; andIdentify proposed case studies and key informantsField Work, including:Gather data for the case studies through the conduct of key informant interviews, facilitation of focus group discussions, and other means;Analytical Work, including:Review and synthesize relevant literature and documents;Reporting, Presentation, and Dissemination of Results:Prepare and submit a final report, subject to review by the ERG for this study, including the raw and processed data used in building the report;The consultants will also be tasked to make a presentation of preliminary or final results of the evaluation in a public forum;The consultants will also i) condense the findings in a one-page summary and a maximum five (5)-page executive summary, and ii) recommend strategies on how to communicate and disseminate the evaluation study and its findings.The two (2) associate evaluators will each develop an equal share of the total number of case studies to be agreed up on with the UNDP and Lead Investgator, which shall be a total of two (2) NGAs/GOCCs and four (4) LGUs or their equivalent. The lead investigator is expected to oversee work and assure the quality of the outputs of the associate evaluators. The associate evaluators are expected to contribute draft sections to the evaluation report as agreed upon with the Lead Investigator and the Strategic M&E Project Coordinator of UNDP.5. Expected OutputsThe evaluation team is expected to deliver the following:An Inception Report collectively submitted by the team, as compiled by the lead investigator, which spells out the analytical framework, detailed methodology, and work plan for the evaluation. It should include the list of proposed NGAs/GOCCs for case study, including targeted locations of frontline service delivery offices (e.g., branches) to be visited, and the division of assignments among the associate evaluators. The inception report should include as attachments the following from the associate evaluators for case study development: Interview and discussion questionnaires;List of targeted key informants to be interviewed and/or included to focus group discussions (FGDs).A Draft Evaluation Report, according to the template or outline agreed upon at the inception stage, that provides an initial consolidation of the findings and recommendations of the study based on the data gathered and analyzed so far. Moreover:The draft report should include as attachments at least half of the case studies produced by the associate evaluators, as reviewed by the lead investigator.After presentation to the ERG, the consultants shall prepare a matrix or documentation of inputs from the ERG, with feedback on the inputs to be accepted and those not to be accepted and reasons for such recommendations.A Final Draft Evaluation Report which refines and completes the consolidation and synthesis of the findings and recommendations of the study based on all the data gathered and analyzed. The final draft evaluation shall also include:A proposed framework for evaluating the impact of the implementation of the Expanded ARTA and other recommendations to improve the collection of data to prepare for quality analyses;Proposed recommendations or action items for implementing agencies on improving ARTA implementation, presented in a matrix or other relevant format;All the case studies produced by the associate evaluators and reviewed by the lead investigator, as attachments to the report and with summary boxes/sidebars integrated into the report proper;After presentation to the ERG, the consultants shall prepare a matrix or documentation of inputs from the ERG, with feedback on the inputs to be accepted and those not to be accepted and reasons for such recommendations.A Final Publication-Ready Evaluation Report which makes necessary refinements or adjustments to the report based on the management responses to be provided by the CSC and other implementing agencies. The consultants are expected to respond to each of the Management Responses, in consultation with UNDP and NEDA. The consultants shall also:Present the evaluation report to a public forum, which may be the annual M&E Network Summit, as decided upon by the ERG. In doing so, they shall prepare a presentation slide deck;Produce condensed versions of the report, namely: i) a one-page summary of the key findings of the study; ii) a maximum five (5)-page executive summary;Submit a proposed communication plan containing recommended strategies and actions for communicating the study and its results to key stakeholders and the general public.The consultants are expected to deliver the said outputs according to the following schedule:Deliverables / OutputsTarget Due DatesReview & Approvals Required

Governance Specialist/Lead Investigator for the Assessment of the Implementation of the Anti-Red Tape Act

UNDP Country Office - PHILIPPINES | Published June 21, 2018  -  Deadline June 29, 2018
cpvs

Governance Specialist/Lead Investigator for the Assessment of the Implementation of the Anti-Red Tape Act 1. Project TitleUsing Strategic Monitoring & Evaluation (M&E) to Accelerate the Implementation of the Philippine Development Plan (PDP) 2017-2022 (Strategic M&E Project) 2. Background and RationaleThe National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA) and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) Philippine country office have embarked on a partnership to strengthen the conduct of evaluations of priority government programs under the Philippine Development Program (PDP). Financed by NEDA and implemented with full UNDP country office support, the Strategic Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Project will help strengthen the M&E capacities of NEDA and key government agencies to support the achievement of the PDP and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) through evidence-based decision making. A key component of the project is the commissioning of independent evaluations on key themes and programs relevant to the PDP and the SDGs. These studies will evaluate the relevance, efficiency, effectiveness, and sustainability of priority social and economic programs that have been implemented or are being implemented by the government. The results of the evaluation studies are envisaged to inform how policies and programs are designed and implemented to achieve the desired results of the PDP and contribute to strengthening the government’s M&E systems. One of these evaluations is on the implementation of the Anti-Red Tape Act (ARTA). Passed in 2007 as Republic Act (R.A.) No. 9485, ARTA seeks to promote integrity and curb corruption through greater transparency about the public’s transactions with the government. The Act required the simplification of frontline service procedures, formulation of service standards to be observed in every transaction, and publication of these standards for clients’ information. ARTA applies to all government offices, national government agencies (NGAs), local government units (LGUs) as well as government-owned and controlled corporations (GOCCs) that provide frontline services. In adopting simplified and standardized procedures, the law sought to reduce red tape and thereby curb opportunities for graft and corruption. Recently, the Ease of Doing Business Act and Efficient Government Service Delivery Act (EODB Act, R.A. No. 11032), also known as the Expanded ARTA law, was passed to strengthen the service efficiency aspects of the 2007 law and to emphasize improving business competitiveness. To assess agencies’ compliance with ARTA and clients’ satisfaction on frontline services, the Civil Service Commission (CSC) has been conducting the Report Card Survey (RCS). Introduced in 2010, the RCS is held annually to rate frontline service offices’ compliance with ARTA requirements such as the presence of Citizen’s Charter, manned Public Assistance and Complaints Desks, Anti-Fixer campaign materials, and observance of “No Noon Break” policy. Apart from checking on these requirements, the RCS also surveys a sample of clients to assess their satisfaction on the services rendered by the frontline service office. CSC also collects bulk data on complaints from citizens through the Contact Center ng Bayan (CCB) An independent evaluation is necessary to gain an objective view of the implementation by NGAs, GOCCs, and LGUs of the ARTA; the results so far in terms of outcomes and, if feasible, impacts; and the mechanisms for monitoring and evaluation of the Expanded ARTA law. NEDA, through the UNDP, will commission such evaluation through the hiring of a team of individual consultants. In particular, a Governance Specialist / Lead Investigator will be required to provide expertise to the study and lead a team of three (3) associate evaluators. The evaluation will make use of available data, such as the CSC’s RCS and the complaints database of CCB, and develop case studies of improved and stagnant performing agencies. An Evaluation Reference Group (ERG) has also been convened, with NEDA, CSC, DTI / National Competitiveness Council (NCC), and UNDP as members, to provide direction and input to the design and conduct of the study. 3. Objectives of the StudyThe proposed study on the implementation of ARTA aims to develop its relationship with and impact on frontline services and provide inputs to the implementation of the new EoDB law. The study seeks to draw lessons from the implementation of ARTA over the last eight (8) years, particularly, analyzing trends on the implementation of ARTA, identifying the elements and practices that helped improve the efficiency of frontline services and those which constrained the effectiveness of anti-red tape interventions, as well as to surface the law’s unintended consequences. Furthermore, the study seeks to design a standard framework and methodology for the conduct of future impact evaluations on the implementation of the Expanded ARTA. The study seeks to answer the following evaluation questions:Efficiency – How has ARTA been implemented by NGAs, GOCCs, and LGUs? What can the RCS and other databases of CSC reveal about ARTA implementation?How do agencies monitor their compliance to the standards in their Citizens Charters and revise the standards when necessary?Effectiveness – How has the implementation of ARTA policies improved frontline services? What are the elements which helped achieve the goals of ARTA, and what are the constraining factors?Has the improvement in frontline services of key national and local agencies translated in improved perceptions on business-friendliness and corruption? Why or why not?What factors influence various stakeholders in the implementation of ARTA? How do they collaborate to meet (or curtail) the goals of ARTA?What are good practices from the most improved agencies (provide innovative examples)?What support can be extended to agencies in difficult situations or those who fail in the RCS?What are the facilitating factors and barriers to the public’s utilization of the Citizen’s Charter?Relevance – To what extent are the various components of the ARTA program relevant to the implementation of the new Expanded ARTA?Sustainability –Based on the findings, how can ARTA be better implemented in light of the new EODB law?Are there areas that need further improvement to sustain/maximize the benefits already achieved by implementing ARTA?How should a future impact evaluation study for the Expanded ARTA be designed?What methodologies can be applied to assess the costs and benefits associated with ARTA?What methodologies and tools can be applied to measure NGAs’ implementation of the standards (e.g. processes, steps, and time) in their Citizens’ Charters?How can data collected by CSC be used to analyze the causal impact on ARTA outcomes, i.e., reducing corruption and improving ease of doing business? 4. Scope of Services and MethodologyUnder the overall guidance of the ERG of the ARTA study and reporting directly and regularly to the Strategic M&E Project Coordinator of UNDP, the evaluation team will: Assess the efficiency and effectiveness of the implementation of entire ARTA program throughout the government and in selected NGAs in terms of:Processes and activities undertaken to comply with ARTA;Challenges and issues, including capacity constraints;Best practices, enabling factors, and lessons learned;Provide insights as to the extent the ARTA program has achieved its desired results or objectives of improving frontline services, easing doing business, and curbing corruption as well as the program’s unintended consequences through perceptions from key sectors such as academe, civil society, and private sector, and provide recommendations on how to sustain the efficiencies already achieved as well as to address the gaps;Design a standard framework and methodology for the conduct of future impact evaluations on implementation of the ARTA program, including recommendations on tools, techniques, and innovations that can be used to improve monitoring and data collection.In collaboration with the ERG, define a strategy to communicate and disseminate the results and findings of the evaluation study, including a) mapping of stakeholders with interest in the evaluation; b) a one-page brief and a maximum five (5)-page executive summary to accompany the dissemination of the report. In undertaking the evaluation, the evaluation team will undertake two methodological tracks:Quantitative – statistical testing and analysis of the existing data gathered by CSC through its RCS, inspection checklist, contact center complaints, and other means and tools to a) define the statistical reliability of the data; and b) draw trends and other insights from the data on how ARTA has been implemented by the agencies. The study may also identify and make use of other existing data from the PSA and line agencies, as well as local and global perception surveys. According to the CSC, the RCS tool has undergone at least two (2) revisions since 2010, with the 2017 revision being the most fundamental, entailing the need to verify the consistency and comparability of the data. Moreover, only the 2014 and 2015 RCS covered the same service offices of NGAs while other survey periods covered varying NGAs and Service Offices depending on the themes determined by CSC for that year.Qualitative – at least six (6) case studies of NGAs/GOCCs (at least two (2)) and LGUs (at least four (4)) with relatively comparable service profiles and with equal number of improved and stagnant performers will be undertaken to a) identify the drivers and other factors for ARTA performance; and b) identify change in key stakeholders’ perceptions of corruption and ease of doing business. Key informant interviews and focus group discussions (FGDs) with government and non-government stakeholders (e.g., civil society, business, academe) will be conducted at the central office and select service delivery offices. Available data from the subject NGAs/GOCCs and LGUs will be analyzed.From the findings from these two tracks, the evaluation study through the Lead Investigator will design a standard framework and methodology for the conduct of impact evaluations in the future on the implementation of the ARTA program in the context of the recent amendments. The framework may include a) on the quantitative side, improving the collection of data through the RCS and other means (e.g., public perceptions survey); and b) development of a case study tool for the regular in-depth assessment of the top ARTA performers. To undertake such, the consultants to be engaged for the study shall collectively undertake the following:Preparatory work, including:Design a framework and methodology for the evaluation of the ARTA;Prepare case study tool and guide questions for the conduct of the study; andIdentify proposed case studies and key informantsField Work, including:Gather data for the case studies through the conduct of key informant interviews, facilitation of focus group discussions, and other means;The consultants may recommend the conduct of a survey or other research tools which may be outside of the scope of this consultancy and will be procured separately.Analytical Work, including:Review and synthesize relevant literature and documents;Analyze the RCS and other available data from CSC or other sources to draw trends and other insights on ARTA implementation in general and specifically for the case agencies.Reporting, Presentation, and Dissemination of Results:Prepare and submit a final report, subject to review by the ERG for this study, including the raw and processed data used in building the report;The consultants will also be tasked to make a presentation of preliminary or final results of the evaluation in a public forum;The consultants will also i) condense the findings in a one-page summary and a maximum five (5)-page executive summary, and ii) recommend strategies on how to communicate and disseminate the evaluation study and its findings. The Governance Specialist / Lead Investigator will oversee the work and assure the quality of the outputs of the associate evaluators and to synthesize the findings and recommendations that feed into the draft report. In this light, s/he is expected to consolidate the contributions of the associate evaluators and submit the outputs as spelled out above; be the lead point of contact between the evaluation team and the evaluation stakeholders; and lead the development of the framework for future evaluation. 5. Expected OutputsThe Governance Specialist / Lead Investigator is expected to deliver the following:An Inception Report collectively submitted by the team, as compiled by the lead investigator, which spells out the analytical framework, detailed methodology, and work plan for the evaluation. It should include the list of proposed NGAs/GOCCs for case study, including targeted locations of frontline service delivery offices (e.g., branches) to be visited, and the division of assignments among the associate evaluators. The inception report should include as attachments the following from the associate evaluators:For the analysis: a) list of data sets to be secured and analyzed and analytical methods to be used; b) sample data analyses, tables, and/or visualizations; c) list of literature to be reviewed;For the case studies: a) interview and discussion questionnaires; b) list of targeted key informants to be interviewed and/or included to focus group discussions (FGDs).A Draft Evaluation Report, according to the template or outline agreed upon at the inception stage, that provides an initial consolidation of the findings and recommendations of the study based on the data gathered and analyzed so far. Moreover:The draft report should include as attachments at least half of the case studies produced by the associate evaluators, as reviewed by the lead investigator.After presentation to the ERG, the consultants shall prepare a matrix or documentation of inputs from the ERG, with feedback on the inputs to be accepted and those not to be accepted and reasons for such recommendations.A Final Draft Evaluation Report which refines and completes the consolidation and synthesis of the findings and recommendations of the study based on all the data gathered and analyzed. The final draft evaluation shall also include:A proposed framework for evaluating the impact of the implementation of the Expanded ARTA and other recommendations to improve the collection of data to prepare for quality analyses;Proposed recommendations or action items for implementing agencies on improving ARTA implementation, presented in a matrix or other relevant format;All the case studies produced by the associate evaluators and reviewed by the lead investigator, as attachments to the report and with summary boxes/sidebars integrated into the report proper;After presentation to the ERG, the consultants shall prepare a matrix or documentation of inputs from the ERG, with feedback on the inputs to be accepted and those not to be accepted and reasons for such recommendations.A Final Publication-Ready Evaluation Report which makes necessary refinements or adjustments to the report based on the management responses to be provided by the CSC and other implementing agencies. The consultants are expected to respond to each of the Management Responses, in consultation with UNDP and NEDA. The consultants shall also:Present the evaluation report to a public forum, which may be the annual M&E Network Summit, as decided upon by the ERG. In doing so, they shall prepare a presentation slide deck;Produce condensed versions of the report, namely: i) a one-page summary of the key findings of the study; ii) a maximum five (5)-page executive summary;Submit a proposed communication plan containing recommended strategies and actions for communicating the study and its results to key stakeholders and the general public. The evaluation team is expected to deliver the said outputs according to the following schedule:Deliverables / OutputsTarget Due DatesReview & Approvals Required

Associate Evaluator for Quantitative Analysis: Assessment of the Implementation of the Anti-Red Tape Act (Individual Consultant)

UNDP Country Office - PHILIPPINES | Published June 21, 2018  -  Deadline June 29, 2018
cpvs

Associate Evaluator for Quantitative Analysis: Assessment of the Implementation of the Anti-Red Tape Act (Individual Consultant) 1. Project TitleUsing Strategic Monitoring & Evaluation (M&E) to Accelerate the Implementation of the Philippine Development Plan (PDP) 2017-2022 (Strategic M&E Project) 2. Background and RationaleThe National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA) and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) Philippine country office have embarked on a partnership to strengthen the conduct of evaluations of priority government programs under the Philippine Development Program (PDP). Financed by NEDA and implemented with full UNDP country office support, the Strategic Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Project will help strengthen the M&E capacities of NEDA and key government agencies to support the achievement of the PDP and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) through evidence-based decision making. A key component of the project is the commissioning of independent evaluations on key themes and programs relevant to the PDP and the SDGs. These studies will evaluate the relevance, efficiency, effectiveness, and sustainability of priority social and economic programs that have been implemented or are being implemented by the government. The results of the evaluation studies are envisaged to inform how policies and programs are designed and implemented to achieve the desired results of the PDP and contribute to strengthening the government’s M&E systems. One of these evaluations is on the implementation of the Anti-Red Tape Act (ARTA). Passed in 2007 as Republic Act (R.A.) No. 9485, ARTA seeks to promote integrity and curb corruption through greater transparency about the public’s transactions with the government. The Act required the simplification of frontline service procedures, formulation of service standards to be observed in every transaction, and publication of these standards for clients’ information.ARTA applies to all government offices, national government agencies (NGAs), local government units (LGUs) as well as government-owned and controlled corporations (GOCCs) that provide frontline services. In adopting simplified and standardized procedures, the law sought to reduce red tape and thereby curb opportunities for graft and corruption. Recently, the Ease of Doing Business Act and Efficient Government Service Delivery Act (EODB Act, R.A. No. 11032), also known as the Expanded ARTA law, was passed to strengthen the service efficiency aspects of the 2007 law and to emphasize improving business competitiveness. To assess agencies’ compliance with ARTA and clients’ satisfaction on frontline services, the Civil Service Commission (CSC) has been conducting the Report Card Survey (RCS). Introduced in 2010, the RCS is held annually to rate frontline service offices’ compliance with ARTA requirements such as the presence of Citizen’s Charter, manned Public Assistance and Complaints Desks, Anti-Fixer campaign materials, and observance of “No Noon Break” policy. Apart from checking on these requirements, the RCS also surveys a sample of clients to assess their satisfaction on the services rendered by the frontline service office. CSC also collects bulk data on complaints from citizens through the Contact Center ng Bayan (CCB) An independent evaluation is necessary to gain an objective view of the implementation by NGAs, GOCCs, and LGUs of the ARTA; the results so far in terms of outcomes and, if feasible, impacts; and the mechanisms for monitoring and evaluation of the Expanded ARTA law. NEDA, through the UNDP, will commission such evaluation through the hiring of a team of individual consultants, including an Associate Evaluator for Quantitative Analysis. Working with the evaluation team that will be led by a Governance Specialist / Lead Investigator, the associate evaluator will analyze available data, such as the CSC’s RCS and the complaints database of CCB, to draw trends and other insights on how ARTA has been implemented by government agencies. An Evaluation Reference Group (ERG) has also been convened, with NEDA, CSC, DTI / National Competitiveness Council (NCC), and UNDP as members, to provide direction and input to the design and conduct of the study. 3. Objectives of the StudyThe proposed study on the implementation of ARTA aims to develop its relationship with and impact on frontline services and provide inputs to the implementation of the new EoDB law. The study seeks to draw lessons from the implementation of ARTA over the last eight (8) years, particularly, analyzing trends on the implementation of ARTA, identifying the elements and practices that helped improve the efficiency of frontline services and those which constrained the effectiveness of anti-red tape interventions, as well as to surface the law’s unintended consequences. Furthermore, the study seeks to design a standard framework and methodology for the conduct of future impact evaluations on the implementation of the Expanded ARTA. The study seeks to answer the following evaluation questions:Efficiency – How has ARTA been implemented by NGAs, GOCCs, and LGUs? What can the RCS and other databases of CSC reveal about ARTA implementation?How do agencies monitor their compliance to the standards in their Citizens Charters and revise the standards when necessary?Effectiveness – How has the implementation of ARTA policies improved frontline services? What are the elements which helped achieve the goals of ARTA, and what are the constraining factors?Has the improvement in frontline services of key national and local agencies translated in improved perceptions on business-friendliness and corruption? Why or why not?What factors influence various stakeholders in the implementation of ARTA? How do they collaborate to meet (or curtail) the goals of ARTA?What are good practices from the most improved agencies (provide innovative examples)?What support can be extended to agencies in difficult situations or those who fail in the RCS?What are the facilitating factors and barriers to the public’s utilization of the Citizen’s Charter?Relevance – To what extent are the various components of the ARTA program relevant to the implementation of the new Expanded ARTA?Sustainability –Based on the findings, how can ARTA be better implemented in light of the new EODB law?Are there areas that need further improvement to sustain/maximize the benefits already achieved by implementing ARTA?How should a future impact evaluation study for the Expanded ARTA be designed?What methodologies can be applied to assess the costs and benefits associated with ARTA?What methodologies and tools can be applied to measure NGAs’ implementation of the standards (e.g. processes, steps, and time) in their Citizens’ Charters?How can data collected by CSC be used to analyze the causal impact on ARTA outcomes, i.e., reducing corruption and improving ease of doing business? 4. Scope of Services and MethodologyUnder the overall guidance of the ERG of the ARTA study and reporting directly and regularly to the Strategic M&E Project Coordinator of UNDP, the evaluation team will:Assess the efficiency and effectiveness of the implementation of entire ARTA program throughout the government and in selected NGAs in terms of:Processes and activities undertaken to comply with ARTA;Challenges and issues, including capacity constraints;Best practices, enabling factors, and lessons learned;Provide insights as to the extent the ARTA program has achieved its desired results or objectives of improving frontline services, easing doing business, and curbing corruption as well as the program’s unintended consequences through perceptions from key sectors such as academe, civil society, and private sector, and provide recommendations on how to sustain the efficiencies already achieved as well as to address the gaps;Design a standard framework and methodology for the conduct of future impact evaluations on implementation of the ARTA program, including recommendations on tools, techniques, and innovations that can be used to improve monitoring and data collection.In collaboration with the ERG, define a strategy to communicate and disseminate the results and findings of the evaluation study, including a) mapping of stakeholders with interest in the evaluation; b) a one-page brief and a maximum five (5)-page executive summary to accompany the dissemination of the report. In undertaking the evaluation, the evaluation team will undertake two methodological tracks. First, the quantitative track will entail the statistical testing and analysis of the existing data gathered by CSC through its RCS, inspection checklist, contact center complaints, and other means and tools to a) define the statistical reliability of the data; and b) draw trends and other insights from the data on how ARTA has been implemented by the agencies. The study may also identify and make use of other existing data from the PSA and line agencies, as well as local and global perception surveys. According to the CSC, the RCS tool has undergone at least two (2) revisions since 2010, with the 2017 revision being the most fundamental, entailing the need to verify the consistency and comparability of the data. Moreover, only the 2014 and 2015 RCS covered the same service offices of NGAs while other survey periods covered varying NGAs and Service Offices depending on the themes determined by CSC for that year. The qualitative track will be handled by two other associate evaluators who will be tasked to develop case studies on agencies which performed well or whose performance stagnated under ARTA. From the findings from these two tracks, the evaluation study will design a standard framework and methodology for the conduct of impact evaluations in the future on the implementation of the ARTA program in the context of the recent amendments. The framework may include improving the collection and management of data through the RCS and other means (e.g., public perceptions survey). To undertake such, the associate evaluator to be engaged for the study shall undertake the following:Preparatory work, including:Design a framework and methodology for the evaluation of the ARTA;Gather and test the RCS and other data sets of CSC and identify and gather other potential sources of available data to be used for the analysis.Analytical Work, including:Review and synthesize relevant literature and documents;Analyze the RCS and other available data from CSC or other sources to draw trends and other insights on ARTA implementation in general and specifically for the case agencies.Reporting, Presentation, and Dissemination of Results:Prepare and submit a final report, subject to review by the ERG for this study, including the raw and processed data used in building the report;The consultants will also be tasked to make a presentation of preliminary or final results of the evaluation in a public forum;The consultants will also i) condense the findings in a one-page summary and a maximum five (5)-page executive summary, and ii) recommend strategies on how to communicate and disseminate the evaluation study and its findings. The lead investigator is expected to oversee work and assure the quality of the outputs of the associate evaluator. The associate evaluator is expected to contribute draft sections to the evaluation report as agreed upon with the Lead Investigator and the Strategic M&E Project Coordinator of UNDP. 5. Expected OutputsThe evaluation team is expected to deliver the following:An Inception Report collectively submitted by the team, as compiled by the lead investigator, which spells out the analytical framework, detailed methodology, and work plan for the evaluation. It should include the list of proposed NGAs/GOCCs for case study, including targeted locations of frontline service delivery offices (e.g., branches) to be visited, and the division of assignments among the associate evaluators. The inception report should include as attachments the following from the associate evaluator for quantitative analysis: list of data sets to be secured and analyzed and analytical methods to be used;sample data analyses, tables, and/or visualizations;list of literature to be reviewed.A Draft Evaluation Report, according to the template or outline agreed upon at the inception stage, that provides an initial consolidation of the findings and recommendations of the study based on the data gathered and analyzed so far. Moreover:After presentation to the ERG, the consultants shall prepare a matrix or documentation of inputs from the ERG, with feedback on the inputs to be accepted and those not to be accepted and reasons for such recommendations.A Final Draft Evaluation Report which refines and completes the consolidation and synthesis of the findings and recommendations of the study based on all the data gathered and analyzed. The final draft evaluation shall also include:A proposed framework for evaluating the impact of the implementation of the Expanded ARTA and other recommendations to improve the collection of data to prepare for quality analyses;Proposed recommendations or action items for implementing agencies on improving ARTA implementation, presented in a matrix or other relevant format;After presentation to the ERG, the consultants shall prepare a matrix or documentation of inputs from the ERG, with feedback on the inputs to be accepted and those not to be accepted and reasons for such recommendations.A Final Publication-Ready Evaluation Report which makes necessary refinements or adjustments to the report based on the management responses to be provided by the CSC and other implementing agencies. The consultants are expected to respond to each of the Management Responses, in consultation with UNDP and NEDA. The consultants shall also:Present the evaluation report to a public forum, which may be the annual M&E Network Summit, as decided upon by the ERG. In doing so, they shall prepare a presentation slide deck;Produce condensed versions of the report, namely: i) a one-page summary of the key findings of the study; ii) a maximum five (5)-page executive summary;Submit a proposed communication plan containing recommended strategies and actions for communicating the study and its results to key stakeholders and the general public. The consultants are expected to deliver the said outputs according to the following schedule:Deliverables / OutputsTarget Due DatesReview & Approvals Required

Associate Evaluator for Quantitative Analysis: Assessment of the Implementation of the Anti-Red Tape Act

UNDP Country Office - PHILIPPINES | Published July 17, 2018  -  Deadline July 25, 2018
cpvs

Associate Evaluator for Quantitative Analysis: Assessment of the Implementation of the Anti-Red Tape Act (Individual Consultant) 1. Project TitleUsing Strategic Monitoring & Evaluation (M&E) to Accelerate the Implementation of the Philippine Development Plan (PDP) 2017-2022 (Strategic M&E Project) 2. Background and RationaleThe National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA) and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) Philippine country office have embarked on a partnership to strengthen the conduct of evaluations of priority government programs under the Philippine Development Program (PDP). Financed by NEDA and implemented with full UNDP country office support, the Strategic Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Project will help strengthen the M&E capacities of NEDA and key government agencies to support the achievement of the PDP and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) through evidence-based decision making. A key component of the project is the commissioning of independent evaluations on key themes and programs relevant to the PDP and the SDGs. These studies will evaluate the relevance, efficiency, effectiveness, and sustainability of priority social and economic programs that have been implemented or are being implemented by the government. The results of the evaluation studies are envisaged to inform how policies and programs are designed and implemented to achieve the desired results of the PDP and contribute to strengthening the government’s M&E systems. One of these evaluations is on the implementation of the Anti-Red Tape Act (ARTA). Passed in 2007 as Republic Act (R.A.) No. 9485, ARTA seeks to promote integrity and curb corruption through greater transparency about the public’s transactions with the government. The Act required the simplification of frontline service procedures, formulation of service standards to be observed in every transaction, and publication of these standards for clients’ information.ARTA applies to all government offices, national government agencies (NGAs), local government units (LGUs) as well as government-owned and controlled corporations (GOCCs) that provide frontline services. In adopting simplified and standardized procedures, the law sought to reduce red tape and thereby curb opportunities for graft and corruption. Recently, the Ease of Doing Business Act and Efficient Government Service Delivery Act (EODB Act, R.A. No. 11032), also known as the Expanded ARTA law, was passed to strengthen the service efficiency aspects of the 2007 law and to emphasize improving business competitiveness. To assess agencies’ compliance with ARTA and clients’ satisfaction on frontline services, the Civil Service Commission (CSC) has been conducting the Report Card Survey (RCS). Introduced in 2010, the RCS is held annually to rate frontline service offices’ compliance with ARTA requirements such as the presence of Citizen’s Charter, manned Public Assistance and Complaints Desks, Anti-Fixer campaign materials, and observance of “No Noon Break” policy. Apart from checking on these requirements, the RCS also surveys a sample of clients to assess their satisfaction on the services rendered by the frontline service office. CSC also collects bulk data on complaints from citizens through the Contact Center ng Bayan (CCB) An independent evaluation is necessary to gain an objective view of the implementation by NGAs, GOCCs, and LGUs of the ARTA; the results so far in terms of outcomes and, if feasible, impacts; and the mechanisms for monitoring and evaluation of the Expanded ARTA law. NEDA, through the UNDP, will commission such evaluation through the hiring of a team of individual consultants, including an Associate Evaluator for Quantitative Analysis. Working with the evaluation team that will be led by a Governance Specialist / Lead Investigator, the associate evaluator will analyze available data, such as the CSC’s RCS and the complaints database of CCB, to draw trends and other insights on how ARTA has been implemented by government agencies. An Evaluation Reference Group (ERG) has also been convened, with NEDA, CSC, DTI / National Competitiveness Council (NCC), and UNDP as members, to provide direction and input to the design and conduct of the study. 3. Objectives of the StudyThe proposed study on the implementation of ARTA aims to develop its relationship with and impact on frontline services and provide inputs to the implementation of the new EoDB law. The study seeks to draw lessons from the implementation of ARTA over the last eight (8) years, particularly, analyzing trends on the implementation of ARTA, identifying the elements and practices that helped improve the efficiency of frontline services and those which constrained the effectiveness of anti-red tape interventions, as well as to surface the law’s unintended consequences. Furthermore, the study seeks to design a standard framework and methodology for the conduct of future impact evaluations on the implementation of the Expanded ARTA. The study seeks to answer the following evaluation questions:Efficiency – How has ARTA been implemented by NGAs, GOCCs, and LGUs? What can the RCS and other databases of CSC reveal about ARTA implementation?How do agencies monitor their compliance to the standards in their Citizens Charters and revise the standards when necessary?Effectiveness – How has the implementation of ARTA policies improved frontline services? What are the elements which helped achieve the goals of ARTA, and what are the constraining factors?Has the improvement in frontline services of key national and local agencies translated in improved perceptions on business-friendliness and corruption? Why or why not?What factors influence various stakeholders in the implementation of ARTA? How do they collaborate to meet (or curtail) the goals of ARTA?What are good practices from the most improved agencies (provide innovative examples)?What support can be extended to agencies in difficult situations or those who fail in the RCS?What are the facilitating factors and barriers to the public’s utilization of the Citizen’s Charter?Relevance – To what extent are the various components of the ARTA program relevant to the implementation of the new Expanded ARTA?Sustainability –Based on the findings, how can ARTA be better implemented in light of the new EODB law?Are there areas that need further improvement to sustain/maximize the benefits already achieved by implementing ARTA?How should a future impact evaluation study for the Expanded ARTA be designed?What methodologies can be applied to assess the costs and benefits associated with ARTA?What methodologies and tools can be applied to measure NGAs’ implementation of the standards (e.g. processes, steps, and time) in their Citizens’ Charters?How can data collected by CSC be used to analyze the causal impact on ARTA outcomes, i.e., reducing corruption and improving ease of doing business? 4. Scope of Services and MethodologyUnder the overall guidance of the ERG of the ARTA study and reporting directly and regularly to the Strategic M&E Project Coordinator of UNDP, the evaluation team will:Assess the efficiency and effectiveness of the implementation of entire ARTA program throughout the government and in selected NGAs in terms of:Processes and activities undertaken to comply with ARTA;Challenges and issues, including capacity constraints;Best practices, enabling factors, and lessons learned;Provide insights as to the extent the ARTA program has achieved its desired results or objectives of improving frontline services, easing doing business, and curbing corruption as well as the program’s unintended consequences through perceptions from key sectors such as academe, civil society, and private sector, and provide recommendations on how to sustain the efficiencies already achieved as well as to address the gaps;Design a standard framework and methodology for the conduct of future impact evaluations on implementation of the ARTA program, including recommendations on tools, techniques, and innovations that can be used to improve monitoring and data collection.In collaboration with the ERG, define a strategy to communicate and disseminate the results and findings of the evaluation study, including a) mapping of stakeholders with interest in the evaluation; b) a one-page brief and a maximum five (5)-page executive summary to accompany the dissemination of the report. In undertaking the evaluation, the evaluation team will undertake two methodological tracks. First, the quantitative track will entail the statistical testing and analysis of the existing data gathered by CSC through its RCS, inspection checklist, contact center complaints, and other means and tools to a) define the statistical reliability of the data; and b) draw trends and other insights from the data on how ARTA has been implemented by the agencies. The study may also identify and make use of other existing data from the PSA and line agencies, as well as local and global perception surveys. According to the CSC, the RCS tool has undergone at least two (2) revisions since 2010, with the 2017 revision being the most fundamental, entailing the need to verify the consistency and comparability of the data. Moreover, only the 2014 and 2015 RCS covered the same service offices of NGAs while other survey periods covered varying NGAs and Service Offices depending on the themes determined by CSC for that year. The qualitative track will be handled by two other associate evaluators who will be tasked to develop case studies on agencies which performed well or whose performance stagnated under ARTA. From the findings from these two tracks, the evaluation study will design a standard framework and methodology for the conduct of impact evaluations in the future on the implementation of the ARTA program in the context of the recent amendments. The framework may include improving the collection and management of data through the RCS and other means (e.g., public perceptions survey). To undertake such, the associate evaluator to be engaged for the study shall undertake the following:Preparatory work, including:Design a framework and methodology for the evaluation of the ARTA;Gather and test the RCS and other data sets of CSC and identify and gather other potential sources of available data to be used for the analysis.Analytical Work, including:Review and synthesize relevant literature and documents;Analyze the RCS and other available data from CSC or other sources to draw trends and other insights on ARTA implementation in general and specifically for the case agencies.Reporting, Presentation, and Dissemination of Results:Prepare and submit a final report, subject to review by the ERG for this study, including the raw and processed data used in building the report;The consultants will also be tasked to make a presentation of preliminary or final results of the evaluation in a public forum;The consultants will also i) condense the findings in a one-page summary and a maximum five (5)-page executive summary, and ii) recommend strategies on how to communicate and disseminate the evaluation study and its findings. The lead investigator is expected to oversee work and assure the quality of the outputs of the associate evaluator. The associate evaluator is expected to contribute draft sections to the evaluation report as agreed upon with the Lead Investigator and the Strategic M&E Project Coordinator of UNDP. 5. Expected OutputsThe evaluation team is expected to deliver the following:An Inception Report collectively submitted by the team, as compiled by the lead investigator, which spells out the analytical framework, detailed methodology, and work plan for the evaluation. It should include the list of proposed NGAs/GOCCs for case study, including targeted locations of frontline service delivery offices (e.g., branches) to be visited, and the division of assignments among the associate evaluators. The inception report should include as attachments the following from the associate evaluator for quantitative analysis: list of data sets to be secured and analyzed and analytical methods to be used;sample data analyses, tables, and/or visualizations;list of literature to be reviewed.A Draft Evaluation Report, according to the template or outline agreed upon at the inception stage, that provides an initial consolidation of the findings and recommendations of the study based on the data gathered and analyzed so far. Moreover:After presentation to the ERG, the consultants shall prepare a matrix or documentation of inputs from the ERG, with feedback on the inputs to be accepted and those not to be accepted and reasons for such recommendations.A Final Draft Evaluation Report which refines and completes the consolidation and synthesis of the findings and recommendations of the study based on all the data gathered and analyzed. The final draft evaluation shall also include:A proposed framework for evaluating the impact of the implementation of the Expanded ARTA and other recommendations to improve the collection of data to prepare for quality analyses;Proposed recommendations or action items for implementing agencies on improving ARTA implementation, presented in a matrix or other relevant format;After presentation to the ERG, the consultants shall prepare a matrix or documentation of inputs from the ERG, with feedback on the inputs to be accepted and those not to be accepted and reasons for such recommendations.A Final Publication-Ready Evaluation Report which makes necessary refinements or adjustments to the report based on the management responses to be provided by the CSC and other implementing agencies. The consultants are expected to respond to each of the Management Responses, in consultation with UNDP and NEDA. The consultants shall also:Present the evaluation report to a public forum, which may be the annual M&E Network Summit, as decided upon by the ERG. In doing so, they shall prepare a presentation slide deck;Produce condensed versions of the report, namely: i) a one-page summary of the key findings of the study; ii) a maximum five (5)-page executive summary;Submit a proposed communication plan containing recommended strategies and actions for communicating the study and its results to key stakeholders and the general public. The consultants are expected to deliver the said outputs according to the following schedule:Deliverables / OutputsTarget Due DatesReview & Approvals Required

Project Liaison Officer for ARMM

UNDP Country Office - PHILIPPINES | Published September 19, 2017  -  Deadline September 26, 2017
cpvs

BackgroundUNDP is currently undertaking a project to provide development support services to the Department of Education (DepEd) in the course of its implementation of their 2016 K to 12 Basic Education Program, specifically the DepEd Computerization Programme (DCP). The project is funded from the Philippine Government budget and implemented in accordance with UNDP regulations, rules, policies and procedures as required by the Approved Procurement Plan and Budget agreed between UNDP and DepEd.The DepEd-UNDP project has commenced the implementation of the DCP Package for Unenergized Public Schools (DCP Batch 34), which will benefit 3,694 schools in Luzon and Mindanao, including about 1,300 schools in the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM).Given this huge number of beneficiary-schools in ARMM and the complex geographic and socio-political terrain of the region, it is necessary for the project to hire a Project Liaison Officer for ARMM. Said Independent Consultant must be a local of the region and must be residing in it or in a nearby province that is logistically accessible to the region (e.g., Zamboanga). The Project Officer will assist the DepEd Project Team in ensuring the smooth implementation of DCP Batch 24 in ARMM, coordinating with the project’s stakeholders in the region, and managing risks to the project specifically for ARMM region. For this contract, the Project Liaison Officer will initially cover both Mainland and Island provinces.Description of ResponsibilitiesThe Project Liaison Officer for ARMM will report directly to the Programme Manager of the UNDP-DepEd Development Support Services to 2016 K to 12 Basic Education Program (herein referred to as “Programme Manager”). The project is under the portfolio of the UNDP CO – Democratic Governance Unit which is headed by the Democratic Governance Team Leader.Under the overall guidance of the Programme Manager and in close coordination with the Democratic Governance and Procurement Teams of UNDP CO, the Project Liaison Officer for ARMM will carry out the following responsibilities:Closely coordinate with the project partners—including but not limited to DepEd-ARMM, the supplier of DCP Batch 34, and the civil society organizations (CSOs) tapped for citizen monitoring—in ensuring that their deliverables are fulfilled according to plan, issues are resolved, and deviations are addressed;Identify and map the project’s stakeholders in ARMM and collaborate with the Programme Manager in defining strategies and approaches to engaging these stakeholders;Identify and assess risks to the project in ARMM and collaborate with the Programme Manager and other key stakeholders in mitigating or addressing these risks;Together with the project stakeholders, conduct warehouse inspections, school-level spot checks, and other activities to ensure the preparedness of schools to receive the ICT packages and the timely delivery and installation of the said packages;Consolidate reports, inputs, and other information from the CSOs tapped for the citizen monitoring component of the project and from other project stakeholders;Regularly report the project’s status to UNDP CO and immediately elevate issues that require urgent attention by the Programme Manager. In particular, the Project Liaison Officer for ARMM will be expected to submit –A Monthly Progress Report, which provides a snapshot of the project’s implementation in ARMM and summarizes the Project Liaison Officer’s accomplishments;A Quarterly Status Report, which includes an updating of the project’s risks register, the socio-political situationer in ARMM as it affects the project, the consolidation of reports from citizen-monitors/CSO-partners and other stakeholders, among others;Perform other related tasks that may be assigned by the DepEd Programme Manager within the stated number of man-days.The duty station of the said Project Liaison Officer will be either in Cotabato or Zamboanga. In fulfilling his/her duties, he/she will be required to travel within ARMM and to provinces near or adjacent to the region (e.g., if the contractor’s warehouse for an ARMM province is situated outside ARMM). He/she may be required to report to Manila as well as to attend other project activities in other regions, as needed.Duration of AssignmentThe ARMM Project Liaison Officer's engagement is intermittent for a total of 150 person-days spread over one year based on the expected schedule of outputs and deliverables. At the convenience of UNDP, the Project Liaison Officer’s contract duration and/or total number of man-days may be shortened or expanded, and the deliverables may be re-scheduled, depending on the pace of the deliveries and installations of the ICT packages under DCP Batch 34 and other related activities; provided, that any extension will not be beyond the 31st of December 2018. Expected Outputs and Deliverables
  • 1