Public tenders for consultant in Philippines

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

Results for consulting. Make a new search!
ConsultingPhilippines

Project Assistant

UNDP Country Office - PHILIPPINES | Published February 9, 2017  -  Deadline February 16, 2017
cpvs

Project Title: Achieving the SDGs through the Integrated Safe Water, Sanitation and Hygiene Approach – iWaSH Governance (Project 103332)/Pro-WATER: Promoting Water and Sanitation Access, Integrity, Empowerment, Rights and Resiliency (Project 91581)Background:The proposed joint programme is a collaborative multi-sectoral action supported by the Spanish Government in partnership with the UNDP, UNICEF, WHO, UN WOMEN together with the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG), Department of Health (DOH), National Water Resources Board (NWRB) and the Philippine Commission on Women (PCW); with selected Provincial and Municipal Governments, Civil Society Organizations, Academia, Private Sector, community groups, and women and girls.Aware of the current situation of fragmentation in implementing water, sanitation and hygiene at the level of local governments, the joint programme will emphasize inter-agency collaboration and complementation at all levels. It will ensure multi-sectoral participation most especially in the communities where the integration and harmonization will happen, at the same time, mainstreaming cross-cutting themes on resiliency, human rights, gender equality, climate change, integrity and accountability. Given this, the joint programme will bring about 3 major results:Improved governance of safe water, sanitation, and hygiene at all levels especially at the local levels;Broadened access through improved solutions that are demonstrated in the implementation of safe water, sanitation and hygiene that will benefit most especially women and girls in households, schools, health centers and public spaces;Generated knowledge utilized to aid policy advocacy, planning, capacity building based on the experiences and lessons learned from the implementation of integrated safe water, sanitation and hygiene. The iWaSH Governance Programme builds on the gains of the on-going SDG-F Joint Programme, Pro-WATER: Promoting Water and Sanitation Access, Integrity, Empowerment, Rights and Resiliency. It is a strategy to localize the SDG specifically in 455 waterless municipalities addressing key governance issues such as the fragmentation of policies, structures, and programmes and the lack of participation of community groups, especially women and girls, that continually hamper the efficient delivery of safe water, sanitation and hygiene. The programme is also designed to mainstream cross cutting concerns such as CCA, DRR, gender equality and public-private partnerships. Specifically, the programme will work towards ensuring that “empowered citizens and resilient communities have access to sustainable safe water and sanitation services, live healthy and productively through integrated safe water sanitation and hygiene”, and achieving these results: (1) DILG, DOH and NWRB programmes on basic water, sanitation and hygiene are better coordinated and well informed through regular consultations, monitoring, evaluation and reporting; (2) Waterless LGUs implement integrated safe water, sanitation and hygiene infrastructure projects, behavioural change campaigns, integrity monitoring and community organizing together with CSOs and Regional WATSAN Hubs; (3) National and local policies and governance instruments are responsive to institutionalize integrated safe water, sanitation and hygiene; (4) Knowledge on implementing integrated safe water, sanitation and hygiene are consolidated, packaged, disseminated and utilized by national government agencies, LGUs, Regional WATSAN Hubs, CSOs and the academe.The programme will be implemented in 10 Waterless Municipalities in 4 Provinces located in 3 Administrative Regions in Philippines. The proposed programme is consistent with the current government priorities in providing basic social services as spelled out in the Philippine Development Plan 2011-2016, specifically under Outcome 4 – Human development improved, Outcome 11.1 Access to Water Supply increased; Outcome 11.2 Waterless areas reduced; Outcome 11.3 Access to basic Sanitation increased; and Outcome 11.4 Zero open defecation achieved. The programme is also directly responsive to the two major sector plans developed by the Philippine government, these plans are the: Philippine Water Supply Sector Roadmap (PWSSR) formulated in 2010 and it currently being used to guide water programmes with the long-term vision of access to safe, adequate and sustainable water supply for all by 2025; and, the Philippine Sustainable Sanitation Roadmap (PSSR) formulated in 2010 which is being used as a reference by government agencies in designing and implementing sanitation and hygiene programmes in the Philippines and the National Sustainable Sanitation Plan 2010-2028. It will also complement on-going implementation of the government programmes on WASH specifically Salintubig by DILG; the Philippines Approach to Total Sanitation (PhATS) and Zero Open Defecation Programme (ZODP) by DOH, the Integrated Water Resource Management (IWRM) by NWRB and the Bottom-Up-Budgeting (BUB) of DILG, Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD), and Department of Education (DepEd).The iWaSH Governance Programme will be implemented by the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) in close partnership with the Department of Health (DOH) and the National Water Resources Board (NWRB). The Regional Water and Sanitation Hubs (Regional WATSAN Hubs), an innovation developed by UNDP and DILG to deliver capacity building products and services of water to Local Government Units (LGUs) will be the responsible partner of the programme. A Regional WATSAN Hub is composed of academic institutions, CSOs and water/sanitation/hygiene service providers, established together with the UNDP during the implementation of MDGF 1919 in 15 (out of the 17) administrative regions in the Philippines.Scope of WorkThe Project Assistant will work with the UNDP Democratic Governance Team and the PRO WATER/iWASH Team and provide technical, administrative, operational and logistical support in implementing various project activities in the Philippines. The staff shall be based within the UNDP Democratic Governance Unit, headed by the Governance Team Leader. The scope of work includes:Under the overall guidance of the DG Team Leader, the Project Assistant will carry out the following responsibilities:Summary of Key Functions:Assist in the financial administration and analysis of programme resources of PRO WATER/iWASH Governance projects;Process financial transactions of projects through ATLAS;Provide administrative support to the Pro-WATER and iWASH in the organization of meetings, workshops and seminars;Support the projects’ procurements and distribution of knowledge products.Provides support in organizing documents of the two projects and facilitating closure of the projects;Perform other administrative tasks of processing and facilitating mission travels and travel plans.Specifically, the Project Assistant will undertake the following tasks:Provides effective support to the management of the Pro-WATER and iWASH projectsAssists in preparing budget revisions of the projects: Prepares the Annual Work Plan (AWP) to reflect new year’s budget, or any ad hoc budget increase or decrease. Submits AWP for signature with all supporting documents. Uploads fully signed budget revisions to ATLAS and maintain copies in project file. Follows-up and ensures that all budgets are sent to commitment control;Sends AWP to executing agencies and follows-up to ensure accuracy and likeness of budgets in their system;Assists in providing the projects’ COA to COs or other UNDP units such as HR whenever necessary;Assists in the presentation of information for audit of projects.Financial Management and MonitoringPrepares non-PO vouchers for development projects;Maintains the internal expenditures control system including timely corrective actions on unposted vouchers, including the vouchers with budget check errors, match exceptions, unapproved vouchers;Creates requisitions in Atlas, register of goods receipt in Atlas;Makes budget check for requisitions, POs and vouchers;Assists in the preparation of shadow budgets for the projects in order to keep track of expenditures and resource balance;Assists in generating ATLAS expenditure reports on the projects to regularly keep track of disbursements rates. Compares various ATLAS expenditure reports in order to provide the most reliable data and updates monthly expenditure table as necessary;Liaises with implementing partner - DILG and UN partners as appropriate to obtain quarterly if not monthly expenditure reports for projects and updates expenditure table as necessary;Supports the year-end closure exercise of the projects to ensure timely financial reporting of current year’s activities and timely commencement of following year’s activities;Provides administrative supportSupports in the organization of meetings, seminars and workshops, missions and other ProWATER and iWASH activities (eg. conference room booking, assisting in preparing and sending invitations, following up on invitations with phone calls, assisting in preparing agenda and/or background documentation) and coordinating logistics with relevant units whenever necessary;Supports procurement for projects by assisting in developing TOR, sending requests to the procurement team for purchase of goods or recruitment of consultants, and following up to ensure that contracts are issued timely. Also makes sure that payments are effected promptly.Prepares and updates schedules of meetings and appointments;Drafts routine correspondences, follow up and respond to queries on project matters;Maintains the projects’ filing system, database/record of information;Participates in meetings and conferences as may be assigned.Other FunctionsRespond to queries on project-related concerns;Prepare and update schedules of meetings and appointments of the project;Participate in meetings and conferences as may be assigned; andPerforms other functions which may be assigned by the DG Team Leader/Program Analyst and the Project Manager/Project Coordinator.Expected Outputs and DeliverablesThe Project Assistant is expected to submit a summary of activities, and accomplishment report to the Programme Analyst of Democratic Governance and Project Manager/Project Coordinator of PRO WATER and iWASH Governance Projects for review and to the Team Leader, Democratic Governance for final approval.Each payment shall be made within two weeks after the receipt of approved summary of activities and accomplishment report.Institutional ArrangementThe Project Assistant will be under the over-all management of the Team Leader, Democratic Governance Team, and direct supervision of the Programme Analyst who will coordinate with the PRO WATER Team.The Project Assistant is expected to provide/present monthly progress/status report to the Democratic Governance Team.The Project Assistant is required to regularly report in the UNDP CO and will inform the Programme Analyst and Team Leader of the Democratic Governance Team in the event that he/she will not report to office.The Team Leader, upon the recommendation of the Programme Analyst, will approve reports submitted by the Assistant.Duration of WorkThe expected duration of engagement is for 3 months (February - May 2017)Qualifications Education University Degree in Business Administration, Accounting, Economics or Finance and other Social Sciences courses.Experience 5 years of relevant financial and administrative or programme experience is required at the national or international level;Experience in monitoring of large projects is desiredExperience in organizing events including workshops/meetings involving international participants.Familiarity of UNDP system, rules and procedures is an advantage.Experience in the usage of computers and office software packages (MS Word, Excel, etc) and knowledge of spreadsheet and database packages, experience in handling of web based management systems.Language Requirements Excellent command of English and Filipino, both spoken and writtenFunctional CompetenciesProficiency in MS Word, Excel, PowerPoint, database packages and web browsers.Good organization, administrative and communication skills.Good interpersonal skills and able to coordinate well with UNDP partner agencies.Ability to work in a multidisciplinary and multicultural teamStrong motivation and ability to work and deliver under pressure and short deadlinesScope of Price Proposal and Schedule of PaymentsPricing option to be implemented for the contractor will be monthly remuneration upon submission of approved accomplishment report. Criteria for Selection of the Best OfferA Combined Scoring method will be used in evaluating the offers received. The qualifications and methodology will be weighted 70%, and combined with the price offer which will be weighted 30%.Recommended Presentation of Offer and Application ProcessApplicants are requested to submit 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 references; Application requirements should be emailed on or before 16 February 2017, close of business, Manila Time. In view of the volume of applications UNDP receives, only shortlisted offerors will be notified.

National Mid-Term Reviewer (For Filipino Nationals Only)

UNDP Country Office - PHILIPPINES | Published October 6, 2017  -  Deadline October 15, 2017
cpvs

This is the Terms of Reference (ToR) for the UNDP-GEF Midterm Review (MTR) of the full-sized project entitled, “Strengthening Marine Protected Areas to Conserve Marine Key Biodiversity Areas in the Philippines” (PIMS# 4389), implemented through the Department of Environment and Natural Resources – Biodiversity Management Bureau (DENR-BMB) which started on August 2014 and currently on its third year of implementation. In line with the UNDP-GEF Guidance on MTRs, this MTR process is initiated before the submission of the second Project Implementation Report (PIR). This ToR sets out the expectations for this MTR. This MTR process follows the guidance outlined in the document Guidance For Conducting Midterm Reviews of UNDP-Supported, GEF-Financed Projects.BACKGROUNDThe Philippines is located within the Coral Triangle, which is considered a global centre of marine diversity, with diverse coral reefs, sea grass beds, mangrove and beach forests, fisheries, invertebrates, seaweeds, and marine mammals. The Philippine waters have been identified as the “center of centers” of marine shorefish biodiversity because of a higher concentration of species per unit area in the country than anywhere in Indonesia and Wallacea (Carpenter et al. 2005). The country has nine marine biodiversity corridors, which were identified based on their position as transition areas between the marine biogeographic regions and their strategic importance as gateways for the exchange of propagules and energy.The primary government response to protect this important biodiversity has been the establishment of marine protected areas or fish sanctuaries as mandated by the National Integrated Protected Areas System (NIPAS) and Fisheries Code. At present, there are only 33 MPAs under National Integrated Protected Area System (NIPAS) and are managed by the national government, and 1,620 under Fisheries Code which are Local Government Unit (LGU)-managed. However, overfishing and illegal fishing, pollution from coastal and commercial development, domestic and industrial wastes, land conversion, extractive industries and many other adverse factors continue to pose environmental threats to the country’s fragile coastal ecosystem. The impending effects of climate change can further exacerbate the current situation.Despite the number of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) from both state and LGU-managed, the assessment is that the current spatial coverage of the MPAs is ineffective in improving species habitat to enhance fishery productivity and biodiversity. Similarly, effective MPA management is still hindered by inadequate bio-geographic representation and spatial coverage, insufficient and unpredictable funding levels for the long-term sustainability of MPAs and an MPA network system; and weak institutional framework for the identification, establishment and management of a national marine PA system and incoherent policy frameworks, mandates and strategies amongst central and local actors that inhibit the sustainable management of marine resources on a seascape basis.In this regard, the project directly addresses these barriers through an integrated approach aimed at strengthening the conservation, protection and management of key marine biodiversity areas in the Philippines. This will be achieved through partnerships with key national government agencies, national and local conservation NGOs and LGUs. Three major outcomes are derived from this approach: Outcome 1: Conservation effectiveness of existing and new MPAs/MPANs is enhanced through improvements in spatial coverage and representativeness (particularly coverage of under-represented KBAs), strengthening of the national system for MPA identification, designation and management under the NIPAS legislative framework, and quantifiable improvements in management of at least 10% of identified Marine KBAs nationwide, with concomitant increases in local stakeholder participation and support.Outcome 2: Financial resources available for the management of MPAs and MPANs are sufficient to meet all critical management needs and are growing in line with the expansion of the MPA system. Sources of revenue for MPA management are being progressively diversified, with the percentage of revenue being derived from Government fiscal sources declining to less than 50% by end- project.Outcome 3: A comprehensive policy framework in place and effectively implemented for the conservation, protection and management of the country’s marine ecosystems and fishery resources, that harmonizes mandates, plans and activities amongst all key MPA stakeholders including BMB, BFAR and relevant Local Government Units.The Project is being managed by the Biodiversity Management Bureau (BMB, formerly PAWB) which has established a Project Management Unit (PMU) to implement certain outputs and coordinate the work of partners in pilot sites. Below is the project summary.OBJECTIVE OF THE MTRThe MTR is expected to assess progress towards the achievement of the project objectives and outcomes as specified in the Project Document, and assess early signs of project success or failure with the goal of identifying the necessary changes to be made in order to set the project on-track to achieve its intended results. The MTR will also review the project’s strategy, its risks to sustainability. DETAILED SCOPE OF THE MTRThe MTR team will assess the following four categories of project progress. These categories are: project strategy, progress towards results, project implementation and adaptive management, and sustainability.For extended descriptions of the abovementioned categories, it can be seen in the “Guidance For Conducting Midterm Reviews of UNDP-Supported, GEF-Financed Projects”.Project StrategyProject design:Review the problem addressed by the project andReview the relevance of the project strategy and Were lessons from other relevant projects properly incorporated into the project design?Review how the project addresses country priorities. Review country ownership. Was the project concept in line with the national sector development priorities and plans of the country (or of participating countries in the case of multi-country projects)?Review decision-making processes: were perspectives of those who would be affected by project decisions, those who could affect the outcomes, and those who could contribute information or other resources to the process, taken into account during project design processes?Review the extent to which relevant gender issues were raised in the project design. See Annex 9 of Guidance For Conducting Midterm Reviews of UNDP-Supported, GEF-Financed Projects for further guidelines.Recommend areas for improvement if there are major areas of concern. Results Framework/Logframe:Undertake a critical analysis of the project’s theory of change as indicated in the results framework assess how “SMART” the midterm and end-of-project targets are (Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Relevant, Time-bound), and suggest specific amendments/revisions to the targets and indicators as necessary.Are the project’s objectives and outcomes or components clear, practical, and feasible within its time frame?Examine if progress so far has led to, or could in the future catalyse beneficial development effects (i.e. income generation, gender equality and women’s empowerment, improved governance etc.) that should be included in the project results framework and monitored on an annual basis.Ensure broader development and gender aspects of the project are being monitored effectively.Develop and recommend SMART ‘development’ indicators, including sex-disaggregated indicators and indicators that capture development benefits.2.) Progress Towards ResultsProgress Towards Outcomes Analysis:Review the results framework’s indicators against progress made towards the end-of-project targets using the Progress Towards Results Matrix and following the Guidance For Conducting Midterm Reviews of UNDP-Supported, GEF-Financed Projects; colour code progress in a “traffic light system” based on the level of progress achieved; assign a rating on progress for each outcome; make recommendations from the areas marked as “Not on target to be achieved” (red).In addition to the progress towards outcomes analysis:Compare and analyse the GEF Tracking Tool at the baseline with the one completed right before the Midterm Review.Identify remaining barriers to achieving the project objective in the remainder of the project.By reviewing the aspects of the project that have already been successful, identify ways in which the project can further expand these benefits. 3.) Project Implementation Management Arrangements:Review overall effectiveness of project management as outlined in the Project Document.Have changes been made and are they effective and efficient? Is the structure of the PMU responding to the demands of the Project??Are responsibilities and reporting lines clear?Is decision-making transparent and undertaken in a timely manner?Recommend areas for improvement.Review the quality of execution of the Executing Agency/Implementing Partner(s) and recommend areas for improvement.Review the quality of support provided by the GEF Partner Agency (UNDP) and recommend areas for improvement. Work Planning:Review any delays in project start-up and implementation, identify the causes and examine if they have been resolved.Are work-planning processes results-based?If not, suggest ways to re-orientate work planning to focus on results?Examine the use of the project’s results framework/ logframe as a management tool and review any changes made to it since project start. Finance and co-finance:Consider the financial management of the project, with specific reference to the cost-effectiveness of interventions.Review the changes to fund allocations as a result of budget revisions and assess the appropriateness and relevance of such revisions.Does the project have the appropriate financial controls, including reporting and planning, that allow management to make informed decisions regarding the budget and allow for timely flow of funds?Informed by the co-financing monitoring table to be filled out, provide commentary on co-financing: is co-financing being used strategically to help the objectives of the project? Is the Project Team meeting with all co-financing partners regularly in order to align financing priorities and annual work plans?Project-level Monitoring and Evaluation Systems: Review the monitoring tools currently being used:Do they provide the necessary information? Is the systems results-based? Do they involve key partners? Are they aligned or mainstreamed with national systems?Do they use existing information? Are they efficient? Are they cost-effective? Are additional tools required? How could they be made more participatory and inclusive?Examine the financial management of the project monitoring and evaluation budget.Are sufficient resources being allocated to monitoring and evaluation? Are these resources being allocated effectively? Stakeholder Engagement:Project management: Has the project developed and leveraged the necessary and appropriate partnerships with direct and tangential stakeholders?Participation and country-driven processes: Do local and national government stakeholders support the objectives of the project? Do they continue to have an active role in project decision-making that supports efficient and effective project implementation?Participation and public awareness: To what extent has stakeholder involvement and public awareness contributed to the progress towards achievement of project objectives? Reporting:Assess how adaptive management changes have been reported by the project management and shared with the Project Board.Assess how well the Project Team and partners undertake and fulfil GEF reporting requirements (i.e. how have they addressed poorly-rated PIRs, if applicable?)Assess how lessons derived from the adaptive management process have been documented, shared with key partners and internalized by partners.Communications: Review internal project communication with stakeholders: Is communication regular and effective? Are there key stakeholders left out of communication? Are there feedback mechanisms when communication is received? Does this communication with stakeholders contribute to their awareness of project outcomes and activities and investment in the sustainability of project results?Review external project communication: Are proper means of communication established or being established to express the project progress and intended impact to the public (is there a web presence, for example? Or did the project implement appropriate outreach and public awareness campaigns?)For reporting purposes, write one half-page paragraph that summarizes the project’s progress towards results in terms of contribution to sustainable development benefits, as well as global environmental benefits.4.) SustainabilityValidate whether the risks identified in the Project Document, Annual Project Review/PIRs and the ATLAS Risk Management Module are the most important and whether the risk ratings applied are appropriate and up to date. If not, explain why.In addition, assess the following risks to sustainability:Financial risks to sustainability:What is the likelihood of financial and economic resources not being available once the GEF assistance ends (consider potential resources can be from multiple sources, such as the public and private sectors, income generating activities, and other funding that will be adequate financial resources for sustaining project’s outcomes)?Socio-economic risks to sustainability:Are there any social or political risks that may jeopardize sustainability of project outcomes? What is the risk that the level of stakeholder ownership (including ownership by governments and other key stakeholders) will be insufficient to allow for the project outcomes/benefits to be sustained? Do the various key stakeholders see that it is in their interest that the project benefits continue to flow? Is there sufficient public/stakeholder awareness in support of the long-term objectives of the project? Are lessons learned being documented by the Project Team on a continual basis and shared/transferred to appropriate parties who could learn from the project and potentially replicate and/or scale it in the future?Institutional Framework and Governance risks to sustainability:Do the legal frameworks, policies, governance structures and processes pose risks that may jeopardize sustenance of project benefits? While assessing this parameter, also consider if the required systems/mechanisms for accountability, transparency, and technical knowledge transfer are in place. Environmental risks to sustainability:Are there any environmental risks that may jeopardize sustenance of project outcomes?MTR ARRANGEMENTS The principal responsibility for managing this MTR resides with the Commissioning Unit. The Commissioning Unit for this project’s MTR is UNDP Philippines.The commissioning unit will contract the consultants and ensure the timely provision of per diems and travel arrangements within the country for the MTR team. The Project Team will be responsible for liaising with the MTR team to provide all relevant documents, set up stakeholder interviews, and arrange field visits.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.PAYMENT MODALITIES AND SPECIFICATIONS Consultants will be contracted by UNDP and remunerated according to the reviewed and accepted financial proposal. The contract will be output-based and payment issued only upon delivery of satisfactory outputs/milestones.First Tranche 10% - Upon submission and acceptance of the MTR mission Inception Report;Second Tranche 30% - Upon submission and acceptance of the 1ST draft MTR report;Third Tranche 20% - Upon submission and acceptance of the 2nd draft MTR report addressing comments from IP, UNDP-CO and UNDP-GEF RTA;Fourth Tranche 40% - Upon submission and acceptance of the final MTR report.QUALIFICATIONSEducation:advanced degree in Economics, Finance, Business Management or Entrepreneurial Management, Community Development, Ecology or any related field.Experience:She/he should have a minimum of least 10 years experience in the implementation of protected area management, MPA financing sustainability, MPA system wide planning and monitoring, and capacity building for MPA management.At least 10 years of experience in natural resource economics or accounting preferably in marine protected areas or fisheries.Language:Excellent oral and written communication skills in EnglishCriteria for selection process:The offer will evaluated based on the Combined Scoring method – where the qualifications and methodology will be weighted a max. of 70%, and combined with the financial offer which will be weighted a max of 30%.Application requirements:Duly accomplished Letter of Confirmation of Interest and Availability using the template provided by 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.Application requirements should be emailed to procurement.ph@undp.org and registry.ph@undp.org on or before 15 October 2017.In view of the volume of applications UNDP receives, only shortlisted offerors will be notified.TERMS OF REFERENCE is attached.

Senior Technical Advisor (Filipino Nationals Only)

UNDP Country Office - PHILIPPINES | Published March 1, 2017  -  Deadline March 10, 2017
cpvs

Project Title: Resiliency and Preparedness towards Inclusive Development (RAPID) ProgrammeProject Description/Background:The Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) assisted Project on “Enabling Regions X and XI to Cope with Climate Change,” or the Project Climate Twin Phoenix, being implemented by the Climate Change Commission (CCC), was developed into a program known as the “Resiliency and Preparedness Towards Inclusive Development (RAPID)” Programme in 2013. It expanded its coverage to include Typhoon Yolanda-affected areas, in addition to the Typhoon Sendong and Typhoon Pablo-affected regions.The RAPID Program contributes to the achievement of the United Nations Development Assistance Framework (UNDAF) Outcome 4, Adaptive capacities of vulnerable communities and ecosystems are strengthened to be resilient to threats, shocks, disasters and climate change.The Program aims to strengthen capacity of local government units and communities along the coastline of San Pedro and San Pablo Bay to manage risks from and adapt to the overall impacts of climate change towards resilient and sustainable development. The target LGUs include those located along the coastline of San Pedro and San Pablo Bays, namely: city of Tacloban and municipalities of Palo, Tanauan, Dulag, Tolosa, Mayorga, Mac Arthur, and Abuyog in Leyte, Basey and Marabut in Western Samar, and Lawaan and Balangiga in Eastern Samar - and barangays located therein. Below are the specific outputs expected of the Program:Output 1. Climate/Disaster risk vulnerability assessment. The disaster risk and climate change vulnerability and natural resource assessments provide the foundation of decision making in addressing climate and disaster risks. The projections, scenarios, modelling, and other outputs of the risk assessments, will contribute to the design and content of succeeding program activities, particularly in mainstreaming disaster risk reduction (DRR) and climate change adaptation (CCA) in local planning processes in Output 4 and in implementing mitigation measures in Output 2.Output 2. Priority preparedness and mitigation actions. The capacity of target LGUs (city, municipalities and barangays) and communities to respond to disasters depends on the effectiveness of its emergency and early warning systems. Focus will be on establishing and/or strengthening systems and mechanisms to facilitate coordination in disaster preparedness. Systems and protocols for early warning will be developed i.e. LGU-specific and inter-LGU contingency plans; community-based and managed early warning systems; evacuation center design guidelines; and dual-purpose evacuation center.Output 3. Awareness raising and capacity building. The intention is to enhance awareness and understanding of local governments, communities and other stakeholders of the concepts, practices and linkages of disasters, climate change and development through community learning and development. Awareness and advocacy campaigns will be conducted to make DRR/CCA relevant to community needs, and provide information on practical actions that they can take to reduce risk.Output 4. Mainstreaming Climate/Disaster Risks in Land Use and Development Plans. Proper land use planning that recognizes risks from hazards, including from climate change, is integral to appropriate recovery and reconstruction and provides the foundation upon which communities are rebuilt along a resilient development pathway. Under this output, coastal zones derived from new storm surge and inundation maps will be incorporated in the land use plans, as well as CCA, DRR and coastal resource management priorities. Activities also include formulation of technical guidelines and methodologies on mainstreaming DRR-CCA into the comprehensive development plans, local development investment programs, and integrating DRR-CCA into the NEDA Board Investment Coordination Committee (ICC) Project Evaluation Guidelines and Project Development and Evaluation Manual.Output 5. Building resiliency of the poor and vulnerable. The purpose is to develop sustainable livelihoods and improve access to risk sharing/transfer and other financial services and mechanisms for climate and disaster risk management. Safety nets will be designed, particularly in climate-proofing livelihoods. Financial mechanisms and services for risk transfer and risk reduction for households through micro-insurance and social insurance programs will be identified.Output 6. Knowledge and information sharing. The purpose is to document knowledge, good practices, lessons learned from project initiatives and share them to the public. Localized communication and dissemination of knowledge will empower communities to protect themselves against hazards and the adverse.In light of these targets by the project, a Senior Technical Advisor (STA) shall be hired to provide technical oversight and ensure the delivery of high-quality Program activities and outputs. The STA, with the Project Manager, will also ensure the timely and efficient delivery of activities and outputs based on the approved Program’s work and financial plan. Scope of Work:I. Provide technical advice, assistance, guidance and final clearance for all project outputs related to:1) Climate/Disaster risk and vulnerability assessment of the 12 LGUsMulti Hazard MappingNatural Resource Assessment/AccountingImprovements to the Climex.db and development of the database in 12 LGUsClimate Change Vulnerability AssessmentClimate and Disaster Risk Mapping2) Priority disaster mitigating measuresCommunity Based Early Warning SystemIntegrated Contingency PlanningInformation, Education & Communication ProgramRe-engineering standards demonstrated through the construction of a resilient inter-LGU multipurpose evacuation centerDemonstration of Risk Mitigation Option (e.g. Mangrove Plantation in Coastal Areas)3) Capacity Building Program for LGUs4) DRR/CCA Mainstreaming into land-use, socio-economic plans and investment programs at national and local levelsEnhanced CLUP of the 12 LGUsEnhanced CDP of the 12 LGUsEnhanced CDP Guidelines of DILGEnhanced LDIP and AIP of 12 LGUsBaywide Coastal Zoning in San Pedro and San Pablo BaysDRR/CCA Integrated in Investment PProgramming Processes (ICC Evaluation Guidelines and Project Development and Evaluation Manual) of NEDA5) Knowledge Management and IEC Materials Development6) Community Based Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Program in 150 BarangaysII. Provide/recommend appropriate management approach and strategies to hasten the implementation and achievement of Program activities and outputs, taking into account the approved Program timelines.III. Review and clearTerms of References (TORs) of responsible partners, consultants and sub-contractors of the Program ensuring clarity of tasks, deliverables and timelines.IV. The STA shall report to the National Program Director (CCC Executive Director) for the RAPID Programme.V. Perform other duties/functions as may be deemed necessary for project implementation and coordination.Scope of Price Proposal: The financial proposals from possible candidates should be expressed in lump sum amount inclusive of all financial costs related to this engagement (i.e. transportation/travel to and from residence-Manila and/or within Metro Manila, transportation/travel to outside of Metro Manila, supplies & materials, reproduction, communications including internet). Schedule of Payments and Expected Outputs/Deliverables:

Programme Associate

UNDP Country Office - PHILIPPINES | Published September 6, 2017  -  Deadline September 14, 2017
cpvs

TERMS OF REFERENCEA.Identification of the PostPost Title : Programme Associate Location : Manila, PhilippinesAdditional Category : Democratic Governance TeamType of Contract : Individual ContractorLanguages Required : English, FilipinoDuration of Initial Contract : six (6) monthsDuration of Assignment : six (6) monthsB.Background Under the overall guidance and direct supervision of the Portfolio Team Leader, the Programme Associate for Democratic Governance performs programme management tasks, including participation in programme design/development, implementation, monitoring and evaluation. The post undertakes technical and administrative services related to programme activities that support UNDP priorities and initiatives on democratic governance.The Programme Associate works in close collaboration with the operations, programme and project teams in the CO, relevant UNDP HQ and Regional Center staff, as well as, implementing partners and donors, promoting a client-oriented approach consistent with UNDP rules and regulations for resolving complex programme-related issues and information delivery.C.Duties and ResponsibilitiesSummary of Key Functions:Develop and implement programme strategies, processes and procedures;Support the management of the Democratic Governance programme ;Provide administrative support to the Programme Team; Support and create strategic partnerships and implement resource mobilization strategy; Facilitate knowledge building and knowledge sharingEnsures the development and implementation of programme strategies, processes and procedures focusing on achievement of the following results:Presentation of thoroughly researched information for preparation of CCA, UNDAF, CPD, effective application of RBM tools;Presentation of information/reports for identification of areas for support and interventions;Implementation of the CO partnerships and resources mobilization strategies and preparation of the relevant reports. 2. Provides effective support to the management of the CO Democratic Governance programme focusing on the achievement of the following results:Present thoroughly researched information for formulation of country programme, preparation of programme profile and draft project documents, work plans, budgets and proposals on implementation arrangements;Review of lessons learned and best practices from programme/project implementation to recommend possible alternative approaches to new programme/project design;Coordinate and liaison with counterparts (government offices, non-governmental organizations, donor agencies, private sector, UNDP, UN agencies) towards formulation and approval of programme proposals;General User in Atlas if authorized by Senior Management;Initiate a project, entry of project information into Atlas and preparation of the required budget revisions;Ensure the preparation of Annual Work Plans (AWP) and prepare regular Portfolio reports for submission to UNDP (country, regional and headquarters) and donor agencies;Provide appropriate guidance to the executing/implementing partners on UNDP policies and procedures for programmes/projects under National Implementation (NIM), recommending courses of action and providing appropriate inputs to facilitate operational activities and routine implementation of projects, tracking/monitoring use of financial resources;Maintain effective monitoring and feedback systems, covering progress of programme and project outputs and activities towards defined outcomes, as well as best practices and lessons learned from programme implementation;Establish/maintain close coordination and liaison and undertake appropriate consultations with national counterparts, government implementing agencies, civil society, UN agencies and donors towards effective programme implementation;Follow up on performance indicators/success criteria, targets and milestones, preparation of reports;Analyze programme situation, identifying operational and financial problems and developing/implementing solutions;Prepare and conduct audit of NIM projects and ensuring implementation of audit recommendations. 3. Provides administrative support to the Democratic Governance Programme Unit focusing on achievement of the following results:Verify and clear budget revisions to ensure adequate resource allocation, reflecting budget adjustments before approval of Portfolio Team Leader;Ensure coordination and follow-through with executing/implementing agencies both in the review and approval of financial requests, as well as, in the financial closure of programmes;Verify the appropriateness, completeness and accuracy of regular financial reports and related documents before submission to Portfolio Team Leader and concerned UNDP units;Monitor financial status/availability and projected expenditures of portfolio programmes and projects, and synthesis of the same in the Portfolio’s financial overview;Review project-related reports from Implementing Agencies to ensure compliance with UNDP and donor requirements;Ensure proper control of the supporting documents for payments and review of NIM projects’ Financial Reports;Maintain internal expenditures control system which ensures that vouchers processed are matched and completed, transactions are correctly recorded and posted in Atlas;Conduct timely corrective actions on unposted vouchers, including the vouchers with budget check errors, match exceptions, unapproved vouchers;Provide support in organizing national and international missions, meetings and conferences of portfolio-related activities. 4. Provides support in creation of strategic partnerships and implementation of the resource mobilization strategy focusing on achievement of the following results:Analyze information on donors, preparation of donor’s profile and database and establishment of contacts with donor counterparts;Assist in the development and follow-through of pipeline projects on an ongoing basis;Assist in the preparation of proposals and briefing materials for donors and programme contributors;Establish and maintain liaison with potential donors and programme contributors;Establish and maintain partnerships, networks and collaborative work on democratic governance among various sectors in government, civil society and development partners;Track and report mobilized resources. 5. Ensures facilitation of knowledge building and knowledge sharing in the CO focusing on achievement of the following results:Participate in the production, maintenance, and organization of Portfolio knowledge products, programme reports, and documents;Participate in CO, regional, and practice area on-line discussions and sharing, particularly on democratic governance;Prepare briefing reports and other public information materials regarding programme and project-related concerns as requested by government agencies, UNDP/UN agencies, and other programme partners, and ensure regular contributions on Portfolio activities to the UNDP website;Contribute to the maintenance of Portfolio database of consultants, terms of reference, and workplans and proposals;Organize training for the operations/ project staff on programme matters;Synthesize lessons learnt and best practices in programme;Make sound contributions to knowledge networks and communities of practice. 6. Performs other tasks as may be assigned by the supervisor.D. CompetenciesImpact of ResultsThe key results have an impact on the overall CO efficiency in programme and success in implementation of programme strategies. Accurate analysis and presentation of information enhances UNDP position as a strong development partner. The information provided facilitates decision making of the management.Core CompetenciesDemonstrates commitment to UNDP’s mission, vision and values;Displays cultural, gender, religion, race, nationality and age sensitivity and adaptability. 2. Functional CompetenciesKnowledge Management and LearningShares knowledge and experience;Actively works towards continuing personal learning, acts on learning plan and applies newly acquired skills.Development and Operational EffectivenessAbility to perform a variety of specialized tasks related to Results Management, including support to design, planning and implementation of programme, managing data, reporting;Ability to provide input to business processes re-engineering, implementation of new system, including new IT based systems;Good knowledge of Results Management Guide and Toolkit.Leadership and Self-ManagementFocuses on result for the client and responds positively to feedback;Consistently approaches work with energy and a positive, constructive attitude;Remains calm, in control and good humored even under pressure;Demonstrates openness to change and ability to manage complexities.E. Qualifications of the Successful Individual ContractorEducation: Bachelor’s Degree in the Political Science, Public Administration, Economics, Law, Social Sciences or related fields. A Master’s Degree and knowledge of enterprise systems like ATLAS is an advantage.Experience: 7 years of progressively responsible programme or administrative experience is required at the national or international level for programme/project development and management particularly in Democratic Governance;Experience and involvement in special governance themes such as Environment, Poverty, Gender, Justice and Human Rights, is an advantage;Experience in the usage of computers and office software packages (MS Word, Excel, etc) and advance knowledge of spreadsheet and database packages and experience in handling of web based management systems.Language requirements:Fluency in oral and written EnglishKnowledge of another UN working language is an assetPLEASE EMAIL YOUR CV AND FINANCIAL PROPOSAL (please use attached template) to procurement.ph@undp.org. File must not exceed 4MB. Approved by:Dr. Emmanuel BuendiaTeam Leader, Democratic Governance

Terminal Evaluator (International)

UNDP Country Office - PHILIPPINES | Published February 23, 2018  -  Deadline March 25, 2018
cpvs

In accordance with UNDP and GEF M&E policies and procedures, all full and medium-sized UNDP support GEF financed projects are required to undergo a terminal evaluation upon completion of implementation. These terms of reference (TOR) sets out the expectations for a Terminal Evaluation (TE) of The Fifth Operational Phase of the GEF – Small Grants Programme in the Philippines (otherwise known as the GEF-SGP OP5) (PIMS #4517).OBJECTIVE AND SCOPEThe project was designed to: support local people’s organizations, NGOs and CBOs in designing and implementing projects to contribute to global biodiversity conservation using the landscape approach and modeling and implementation of best practices. Individual small grant projects will contribute concrete outputs to the achievement of three inter-related components and their respective outcomes: (1) Community-based actions improve the sustainability of protected areas (PAs); (2) Mainstream biodiversity conservation and sustainable use into production landscapes, seascapes and sectors (PLS); and; (3) Cross Cutting Capacity Development and Knowledge Management. The majority of individual grants funded under this project will contribute to the achievement of the main project objective and targets included in the project results framework.The goal of SGP-5 is to secure global environmental benefits through community-based initiatives and actions in selected priority sites in the Philippines.The TE will be conducted according to the guidance, rules and procedures established by UNDP and GEF as reflected in the UNDP Evaluation Guidance for GEF Financed Projects. The objectives of the evaluation are to assess the achievement of project results, and to draw lessons that can both improve the sustainability of benefits from this project, and aid in the overall enhancement of UNDP programming. EVALUATION APPROACH AND METHODAn overall approach and method for conducting project terminal evaluations of UNDP supported GEF financed projects has developed over time. The evaluation should include a mixed methodology of document review, interviews, and observations from project site visits, at minimum, and the evaluators should make an effort to triangulate information. The evaluator is expected to frame the evaluation effort using the criteria of relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, sustainability, and impact, as defined and explained in the UNDP Guidance for Conducting Terminal Evaluations of UNDP-supported, GEF-financed Projects. A set of questions covering each of these criteria have been drafted and are included with this TOR (Annex C). The evaluator is expected to amend, complete and submit this matrix as part of an evaluation inception report, and shall include it as an annex to the final report. The evaluation must provide evidence‐based information that is credible, reliable and useful. The evaluator is expected to follow a participatory and consultative approach ensuring close engagement with government counterparts, in particular the GEF operational focal point, UNDP Country Office, SGP project team, UNDP GEF Technical Adviser (Upgraded Country Programmes Global Coordinator (UCP GC) and key stakeholders and grantees. The evaluator is expected to conduct a field mission to select project sites in the aforementioned three priority sites of the Programme. The complete list of these projects, their corresponding project sites, grantees and their contact details is included in Annex B. Interviews will be held with the following organizations and individuals at a minimum:Members of the National Steering CommitteeMembers of the Project Technical Review CommitteeOfficials of the Biodiversity Management BureauGEF Operational Focal PointStaff/Consultants of SGP-5Officials and Staff of the Responsible Party (The Foundation for the Philippine Environment)Staff of UNDP Country OfficeOfficers and staff of NCIPOfficers and Staff of Site HubsOfficers and Staff of Grantee OrganizationsOfficers and Staff of Local Government Units The evaluator will review all relevant sources of information, such as the project document, project reports – including Annual APR/PIR, project budget revisions, midterm review, progress reports, GEF focal area tracking tools, project files, national strategic and legal documents, and any other materials that the evaluator considers useful for this evidence-based assessment. A list of documents that the project team will provide to the evaluator for review is included in Annex B of this Terms of Reference. EVALUATION CRITERIA AND RATINGSAn assessment of project performance will be carried out, based against expectations set out in the Project Logical Framework/Results Framework (see Annex A), which provides performance and impact indicators for project implementation along with their corresponding means of verification. The evaluation will at a minimum cover the criteria of: relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, sustainability and impact. Ratings must be provided on the following performance criteria. The completed table must be included in the evaluation executive summary. The obligatory rating scales are included in Annex D. PROJECT FINANCE / COFINANCEThe Evaluation will assess the key financial aspects of the project, including the extent of co-financing planned and realized. Project cost and funding data will be required, including annual expenditures. Variances between planned and actual expenditures will need to be assessed and explained. Results from recent financial audits, as available, should be taken into consideration. The evaluator(s) will receive assistance from the Country Office (CO) and Project Team to obtain financial data in order to complete the co-financing table below, which will be included in the terminal evaluation report. MAINSTREAMINGUNDP supported GEF financed projects are key components in UNDP country programming, as well as regional and global programmes. The evaluation will assess the extent to which the project was successfully mainstreamed with other UNDP priorities, including poverty alleviation, improved governance, the prevention and recovery from natural disasters, and gender. IMPACTThe evaluators will assess the extent to which the project is achieving impacts or progressing towards the achievement of impacts. Key findings that should be brought out in the evaluations include whether the project has demonstrated: a) verifiable improvements in ecological status, b) verifiable reductions in stress on ecological systems, and/or c) demonstrated progress towards these impact achievements CONCLUSIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS & LESSONSThe evaluation report must include a chapter providing a set of conclusions, recommendations and lessons. Conclusions should build on findings and be based in evidence. Recommendations should be prioritized, specific, relevant, and targeted, with suggested implementers of the recommendations. Lessons should have wider applicability to other initiatives across the region, the area of intervention, and for the future. IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENTSThe principal responsibility for managing this evaluation resides with the UNDP CO in the Philippines. The UNDP CO will contract the evaluators and ensure the timely provision of per diems and travel arrangements within the country for the evaluation team. The Project Team will be responsible for liaising with the Evaluators team to set up stakeholder interviews, arrange field visits, coordinate with the Government etc. EVALUATION TIMEFRAMEThe total duration of the evaluation will be 27 days according to the following plan:

National Terminal Evaluator (Filipino Nationals Only)

UNDP Country Office - PHILIPPINES | Published February 27, 2018  -  Deadline March 7, 2018
cpvs

In accordance with UNDP and GEF M&E policies and procedures, all full and medium-sized UNDP support GEF financed projects are required to undergo a terminal evaluation upon completion of implementation. These terms of reference (TOR) sets out the expectations for a Terminal Evaluation (TE) of The Fifth Operational Phase of the GEF – Small Grants Programme in the Philippines (otherwise known as the GEF-SGP OP5) (PIMS #4517).OBJECTIVE AND SCOPEThe project was designed to: support local people’s organizations, NGOs and CBOs in designing and implementing projects to contribute to global biodiversity conservation using the landscape approach and modeling and implementation of best practices. Individual small grant projects will contribute concrete outputs to the achievement of three inter-related components and their respective outcomes: (1) Community-based actions improve the sustainability of protected areas (PAs); (2) Mainstream biodiversity conservation and sustainable use into production landscapes, seascapes and sectors (PLS); and; (3) Cross Cutting Capacity Development and Knowledge Management. The majority of individual grants funded under this project will contribute to the achievement of the main project objective and targets included in the project results framework.The goal of SGP-5 is to secure global environmental benefits through community-based initiatives and actions in selected priority sites in the Philippines.The TE will be conducted according to the guidance, rules and procedures established by UNDP and GEF as reflected in the UNDP Evaluation Guidance for GEF Financed Projects. The objectives of the evaluation are to assess the achievement of project results, and to draw lessons that can both improve the sustainability of benefits from this project, and aid in the overall enhancement of UNDP programming. EVALUATION APPROACH AND METHODAn overall approach and method for conducting project terminal evaluations of UNDP supported GEF financed projects has developed over time. The evaluation should include a mixed methodology of document review, interviews, and observations from project site visits, at minimum, and the evaluators should make an effort to triangulate information. The evaluator is expected to frame the evaluation effort using the criteria of relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, sustainability, and impact, as defined and explained in the UNDP Guidance for Conducting Terminal Evaluations of UNDP-supported, GEF-financed Projects. A set of questions covering each of these criteria have been drafted and are included with this TOR (Annex C). The evaluator is expected to amend, complete and submit this matrix as part of an evaluation inception report, and shall include it as an annex to the final report. The evaluation must provide evidence‐based information that is credible, reliable and useful. The evaluator is expected to follow a participatory and consultative approach ensuring close engagement with government counterparts, in particular the GEF operational focal point, UNDP Country Office, SGP project team, UNDP GEF Technical Adviser (Upgraded Country Programmes Global Coordinator (UCP GC) and key stakeholders and grantees. The evaluator is expected to conduct a field mission to select project sites in the aforementioned three priority sites of the Programme. The complete list of these projects, their corresponding project sites, grantees and their contact details is included in Annex B. Interviews will be held with the following organizations and individuals at a minimum:Members of the National Steering CommitteeMembers of the Project Technical Review CommitteeOfficials of the Biodiversity Management BureauGEF Operational Focal PointStaff/Consultants of SGP-5Officials and Staff of the Responsible Party (The Foundation for the Philippine Environment)Staff of UNDP Country OfficeOfficers and staff of NCIPOfficers and Staff of Site HubsOfficers and Staff of Grantee OrganizationsOfficers and Staff of Local Government Units The evaluator will review all relevant sources of information, such as the project document, project reports – including Annual APR/PIR, project budget revisions, midterm review, progress reports, GEF focal area tracking tools, project files, national strategic and legal documents, and any other materials that the evaluator considers useful for this evidence-based assessment. A list of documents that the project team will provide to the evaluator for review is included in Annex B of this Terms of Reference.EVALUATION CRITERIA & RATINGSAn assessment of project performance will be carried out, based against expectations set out in the Project Logical Framework/Results Framework (see Annex A), which provides performance and impact indicators for project implementation along with their corresponding means of verification. The evaluation will at a minimum cover the criteria of: relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, sustainability and impact. Ratings must be provided on the following performance criteria. The completed table must be included in the evaluation executive summary. The obligatory rating scales are included in Annex D.PROJECT FINANCE / COFINANCEThe Evaluation will assess the key financial aspects of the project, including the extent of co-financing planned and realized. Project cost and funding data will be required, including annual expenditures. Variances between planned and actual expenditures will need to be assessed and explained. Results from recent financial audits, as available, should be taken into consideration. The evaluator(s) will receive assistance from the Country Office (CO) and Project Team to obtain financial data in order to complete the co-financing table below, which will be included in the terminal evaluation report. MAINSTREAMINGUNDP supported GEF financed projects are key components in UNDP country programming, as well as regional and global programmes. The evaluation will assess the extent to which the project was successfully mainstreamed with other UNDP priorities, including poverty alleviation, improved governance, the prevention and recovery from natural disasters, and gender. IMPACTThe evaluators will assess the extent to which the project is achieving impacts or progressing towards the achievement of impacts. Key findings that should be brought out in the evaluations include whether the project has demonstrated: a) verifiable improvements in ecological status, b) verifiable reductions in stress on ecological systems, and/or c) demonstrated progress towards these impact achievements. CONCLUSIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS & LESSONSThe evaluation report must include a chapter providing a set of conclusions, recommendations and lessons. Conclusions should build on findings and be based in evidence. Recommendations should be prioritized, specific, relevant, and targeted, with suggested implementers of the recommendations. Lessons should have wider applicability to other initiatives across the region, the area of intervention, and for the future. IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENTSThe principal responsibility for managing this evaluation resides with the UNDP CO in the Philippines. The UNDP CO will contract the evaluators and ensure the timely provision of per diems and travel arrangements within the country for the evaluation team. The Project Team will be responsible for liaising with the Evaluators team to set up stakeholder interviews, arrange field visits, coordinate with the Government etc. EVALUATION TIMEFRAMEThe total duration of the evaluation will be 27 days according to the following plan:

Project Assistant for the DepEd Project

Country Office - PHILIPPINES | Published September 5, 2017  -  Deadline September 12, 2017
cpvs

BackgroundThe 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, in accordance with UNDP regulations, rules, policies and procedures as required by the Approved Procurement Plan and Budget agreed between UNDP and DepEd. It is funded from the Philippine Government budget, based on the allocations of the General Appropriations Act (GAA) of 2016. The project will cover the provision of the following support services: (a) conduct of competitive selection processes for a variety of goods and services at international and national levels; (b) physical delivery of goods to public schools in various regions nationwide where DepEd beneficiaries are located, including customs clearing where required; (c) engagement of a broad range of technical assistance/expert services where they are required, including, but not limited to defining project requirements, and provision of technical specifications/scope of work/terms of reference; (d) contracting for repair, reconstruction, rehabilitation and replacement works of public school and structures damaged by any form of man-made or natural calamities/disasters; (e) selection of conference and events venues, accommodation, catering and other related logistics support; (f) recruitment of project personnel and engagement of consultants/experts or individual contractors; (g) disbursement of personnel salaries and payments to vendors of goods, services and works, based on the authorization of DepEd; and (h) monitoring and evaluation, including third party monitoring of deliveries to ensure that the goods are received only by the intended beneficiaries.Description of ResponsibilitiesThe Project Assistant will report directly to the DepEd Programme Manager. This team shall be based within the UNDP Democratic Governance Unit, headed by the Governance Team Leader.Under the overall guidance of the Programme Manager, the Project Assistant will carry out the following specific functions:Financial ManagementProvide support in the operational and financial reporting of the Project;Assist in setting-up and maintaining the financial system of the Project;Maintains proper filing of supporting documents for every financial transaction of the Project;Process compliance to procurement requests in accordance to policies & procedures;Office AdministrationPerform a variety of standard tasks related to Results Management, including screening and collectingEstablish a proper filing system and maintain files and documentation in good order;Provide support flow of information and dissemination of materials with all concerned;Follow up travel arrangements and DSA payments for the Project;Provide logistical and other support to the project teams and visiting missions, as required;Ensure the upkeep of the project office, equipment, furnishings and other paraphernalia;With the assistance of other relevant project staff, organize, coordinate and prepare activities such as trainings, workshops, and meetings as provided in the Project’s Annual Work Plan (AWP)Support and assist the Project Management Team.CompetenciesCore CompetenciesTeamwork: Works collaboratively with colleagues and partners to achieve organizational goals;Self-management: Accurately judges the amount of time and resources needed to accomplish a task;Client orientation and Continuous Learning: Focuses on results for the client and responds positively to criticism and feedback;Positive Attitude: Consistently approaches work with energy and a positive, constructive attitude.Functional CompetenciesAbility to perform work of confidential nature and to handle a large volume of work possibly under time constraints;Ability to administer and execute administrative, financial and logistical processes and transactions;Ability to manage data and validate transaction;Ability to perform a variety of repetitive and routine tasks and duties;Ability to produce accurate and well-documented records conforming to the required standard;Ability to handle web-based management systems;Ability to support a team and team building skills;Strong attention to details;Self-motivated and ability to work under pressure and to meet strict and competing deadlines;Displays analytical judgment and demonstrated ability to handle confidential and politically sensitive issues in a responsible and matured manner;Demonstrates openness to change and ability to manage complexities;Good organizational skills and ability to work effectively in teams, delivering through and with others;Computer literate with good knowledge on Microsoft Office applications; andGood oral and written communication skills.Qualifications fo Successful OfferorEducationBachelor’s degree in social work, public administration, political science, public finance or other development-related discipline.Work ExperienceAt least four (4) years of relevant experience, preferably in foreign-assisted projects;Strong finance experience, knowledge in ATLAS is desiredKnowledge of government’s (DepEd) service delivery and citizen monitoring context is desired;Experience in training, event planning and organizing;Exposure to national or local governments; Knowledge on Public Financial Management system particularly in budget execution, procurement, and accountability processes;Experience in UNDP projects and knowledge in UNDP systems is an advantage;Previous working experience with a UN agency is an assetLanguageFluency in written and spoken English; well versed in national languageScope of Price Proposal and Schedule of PaymentsThe Project Assistant shall be paid on a monthly basis upon submission of a monthly progress report for the period of three (3) months.Criteria for Selection of the Best OfferA Combined Scoring method will be used in evaluating the offers received. The qualifications and methodology will be weighted 70%, and combined with the price offer which will be weighted 30%.Recommended Presentation of Offer and Application ProcessApplicants are requested to submit 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 references; In view of the volume of applications UNDP receives, only shortlisted offerors will be notified.

On-Call Driver (For Filipino Nationals Only)

UNOCHA Cotabato Office - PHILIPPINES | Published July 5, 2018  -  Deadline July 14, 2018
cpvs

Under the overall supervision of the UNOCHA Admin and Finance Associate in Cotabato, and in close coordination with the Head of UNOCHA Cotabato Sub-Office, the Driver shall provide timely and appropriate assistance to the Sub-Office. He/ She may be required to service the operations and programme staff of OCHA Cotabato as well as other OCHA related missions.The Driver provides basic administrative and other support to the UNOCHA Sub offices in Mindanao as required. He/She needs to demonstrate a high degree of commitment, responsibility and reliability in fulfilling these functions as well as willingness to develop his/her capacities in respect of administrative and other support functions.The driver will report to OCHA Cotabato Sub-office in on-call basis only (as needs arises).SCOPE OF WORKPick and drop off the staff during all working days and drive them on official trips in and outside of Cotabato city as directed by the direct supervisor and according to the security and transportation procedures of the UN OCHA, ensuring safe and on time arrival of staff to the duty station/destinations and back as required;Remain flexible for travelling to outside of Cotabato city and working additional hours if required;Full compliance with implementation of all security measures for the passengers and the vehicle during all trips regardless of the location, destination and distance of travel. Ensures maintenance and keeping of the vehicle functionality at all times, focusing on achievement of the following results:nsure proper maintenance of the vehicle, cleanliness, and regular checking of the vehicle parts, as described on the driver’s checklist;Maintain the vehicle logbook properly filled out with fleet information as well as invoices for fuel and maintenance of the vehicle and making sure it is signed by the authorizing officer;Responsible for the day-to-day maintenance of the assigned vehicle, check oil, water, battery, brakes, tires, etc., performs minor repairs and arranges for other repairs and ensures that the vehicle is kept clean and ready for use;Report immediately to direct supervisor of any accidents, mechanical failure occurring during a trip in or outside the city;Keep records use of vehicle daily mileage trips, gas consumption, oil changes, greasing, etc.Use radio communication and carry out tasks as directed by the supervisor and shall remain vigilant and professional all the times; Ensure provision of Administrative support focusing on achievement of the following results:Pouch/mail delivery and distribution of documents and other items when needed;Follow up on regular vehicle servicing and repair/maintenance with local garagesLiaise with traffic department when required for vehicle registration etc.;Ensure that all administrative and other office support tasks are fulfilled efficiently and effectively.Perform any other relevant duty as required. COMPETENCIESDisplays cultural, gender, religion, race, nationality and age sensitivity and adaptability;Teamwork: Good Interpersonal skills, ability to work in a multi-ethnic environment with sensitivity and respect diversity;Willing to work on shifts including some nights, weekends and official holiday duty;Pleasant personality, clean and well groomed;Perform any other relevant duties as required;Demonstrates excellent knowledge of driving rules and regulations and skills in minor vehicle repair;Demonstrates excellent knowledge of security issues, confidentiality and time management;Consistently approaches work with energy and a positive, constructive attitude;Remains calm, in control and good humored even under pressure.Familiarity on Lanao Del Sur and Lanao Del Norte Province road network is an advantage but not required DURATION OF WORK3 months with possibility of extension SCHEDULE OF PAYMENTS AND DELIVERABLESOn a monthly basis based on the actual hours or days rendered. FINANCIAL PROPOSALContracts based on hourly / daily rate QUALIFICATIONSEducation:Secondary education with a Valid Driver’s license.Experience:3-4 years’ work experience as a driver; safe driving record; knowledge of driving rules and regulations and skills in minor vehicle repairExperience in UN AgenciesLanguage:Fluency in written and spoken English Criteria for selection process:The 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:Duly accomplished Letter of Confirmation of Interest and Availability (Financial Proposal Template) using the template provided by UNDP;Personal Curriculum Vitae, indicating all past experiences from similar projects, as well as the contact details (email and telephone number) of the candidate and at least three (3) professional references;Application requirements should be emailed to procurement.ph@undp.org and registry.ph@undp.org on or before 14 July 2018.Attachments in this link:- Financial Proposal Template and Terms and Conditions for Consultants. In view of the volume of applications UNDP receives, only shortlisted offerors will be notified.

On-Call Driver

UNDP Country Office - PHILIPPINES | Published August 30, 2017  -  Deadline September 6, 2017
cpvs

The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) Philippine Country Office is in search of qualified candidates for on-call Drivers to serve the transport needs of the staff of UNDP and other UN agencies. This job is not a regular duty but is available when there requested for official duty. The driver shall be under the daily supervision of the UNDP Administrative Assistant who also functions as the Transport Dispatcher, and with the overall guidance and direction of the Operations Manager.The on-call drivers shall be engaged under and Individual Contract (IC) , and remuneration will be based on the actual number of hours rendered accumulated per month, and based on the hourly rate indicated in the IC, as will be evidenced by daily trip tickets. It is important for applicants to note that this is not a regular nor continuing post and no fixed monthly salary or overtime pay can be expected. Duties and Responsibilities:Provide reliable, courteous, timely, safe and secure driving services to UNDP officials, staff, consultants and guests, on an on-call basis, within or outside of the metropolis;Ensure proper and judicious use of vehicles, with the end-in-view of maintaining the good operational quality, while prolonging the economic life of the vehicles;Good knowledge of administrative tasks, i.e., filing of transport records, computer literate for transport reports, etc.Demonstrate excellent knowledge of protocol and security matters (for drivers)Demonstrates ability to quickly shift from one task to another to meet multiple transport needs.Conduct periodic check-up of vehicles, minor repairs, emergency engine trouble-shooting and tune-up, where needed;Assist in the registration of diplomatic and official vehicles, as they come due;Ensure accurate and timely accomplishment of trip tickets on a daily basis, aimed at supporting the monthly billing/charges for the driving services to various colleagues;Perform other duties as exigency of service may require.Duration of WorkOne (1) year.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.Minimum Qualifications:At least secondary education / high school graduateHas valid driver’s license issued by the local authoritiesPassed the medical and physical examination (good hearing; clear vision; with normal blood pressure)At least 5 years work experience as driverWith safe driving recordKnowledgeable on driving and traffic rules and regulations within and outside of Metro Manila, and well-versed in the ins-and-outs of the metropolisSkilled in auto mechanics and troubleshooting minor vehicle repairKnowledgeable on the use of Windows-based systems (MS Office, etc.) definitely an advantageMust have his/her own medical/health insurance coverage All CVs and financial proposal offers should be addressed to the Procurement Unit and submitted on or before 06 September 2017. Applications may be emailed to procurement.ph@undp.org or personally delivered to 30F Yuchengco Tower RCBC Plaza 6819 Ayala Avenue cor Sen. Gil Puyat Avenue, Makati City In view of the volume of applications UNDP receives, only shortlisted offerors will be notified.

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

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

Department of Public Works and Highways | Published December 3, 2014  -  Deadline January 8, 2015
cpvs

Consultancy Services For The Assessment Of Maintenance Practices REQUESTFOR EXPRESSION OF INTEREST NAME OF COUNTRY                        :               REPUBLIC OF THEPHILIPPINES NAME OF PROJECT                          :               NATIONAL ROADS IMPROVEMENT AND MANAGEMENTPROGRAM, PHASE II (NRIMP-II) BRIEF DESCRIPTION                        :               CONSULTANCY SERVICES FOR ASSESSMENT OF MAINTENANCE PRACTICES (CS-IC-06R) UNDER THE INSTITUTIONAL CAPACITYDEVELOPMENT (ICD) COMPONENT OF THENATIONAL ROADS IMPROVEMENT AND MANAGEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE II (NRIMP-II) LOAN CREDIT NO. 7552-PH TheGovernment of the Republic of the Philippineshas received financing from the International Bank for Reconstructionand Development(IBRD) toward the cost of the National Roads Improvement and Management Program, Phase 2 (NRIMP-2), and intends to apply part ofthe proceeds of this loan to payments under the contract for theCS-IC-06R: Consultancy Services for the Assessment of MaintenancePractices.  The scope of the projectincludes assisting the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) in assessing and improving the DPWH's practices in relationto the implementation of maintenance works. The objectives of the projects are: 1.       Assessment of the DPWH and Road Board Secretariat (RBS) functions relative tothe existing RA 8794 (MVUC) and its Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR), specifically assessing overlapping functions; andrecommend improvements; 2.       Assessment of the DPWH Region and District Engineering Offices practices,staffing and skills relative to maintenance for skillsets classified by employment type. Likewise, relative to staffing, recommendan agency outsourcing policy/strategy for maintenance; 3.       Assessment of Maintenance Material Practices, including availability ofequipment for basic highway and bridges engineering in DEOs. Theassignment is expected to be completed within9 months. Within this period, it is anticipated that the consultants will render 31professional man-months, which includes 17 man-months ofinternational input. The Department of Public Works and Highways now invites eligibleconsultants, academes,foundations, research and similar entities to express their interest in providing the services.  Interested consultants and entities must provide information indicating that theyare qualified to perform the above required servicesincluding description of similar assignments, experience in similar conditions,availability of appropriate technical personnel, and capacity to complete the services in the timespecified. A consultantwill be selected through Quality andCost Based Selection (QCBS) process in accordance with the proceduresset out in the WorldBank's Guidelines: Selection and Employment of Consultants by World Bank Borrowers(May 2004, revised October 2006) which can be found at the Website: www.worldbank. org/procure. Special attention should be paid to World Bankrules on Joint Ventures and Associates. Interested consultantsmay obtain further information at the addressbelow during office hours (8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.) upon written request forappointment. B. ELIZABETH E. YAP, Ph.D.,CESOIII ICD ComponentManager InformationManagement Service (IMS) Department ofPublic Works and Highways BonifacioDrive, Port Area Manila,Philippines Tel. Nos.(632) 304-3365 yap.bess@dpwh.gov.ph One (1)original and five (5) copies of the Expressions of Interest (EOI), that includes the informationoutlined below,must bedelivered/submitted to the following address not later than 10:00 a.m. of January 8, 2015. We encourage consultants to provide theinformation requested specific to the requirements stated in this REOI. EOIinformation requirements: 1.       Total number of employees and breakdown of number of Key Technical Personnel by Professional Category. 2.       Highlights of similar assignmentsspecifically related to the scope of work outlined in the REOI. 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 speciality comparable to the project scope stated in the REOI that were completed by the Firm in the last 10 years. TheProject Profile at a minimum should include: a.        Contract Name b.       Contract Location c.        Name of Client d.       Start Date and Actual Completion date e.       Cost of Consultancy Contract and percentage participation (with conversion toPhilippine Pesos on date of contract signing) f.         Number of Professional Man-Months provided bythe Firm g.        Indicate if Primary orAssociate h.       Description of Project/Services 4.       Project Profiles for Related Projects that thePrimary Firm (or any Joint Venture Firm) have completed in the last 10 years may be also be submitted, limited to a maximum of10 for allFirms. Department of Public Works and Highways(DPWH) Special Bids and Awards Committee (BAC) forConsultancy Services, NRIMP-II Attention:             RAUL C.ASIS Undersecretary Chairman, Special BAC for Consultancy Services& Goods,NRIMP-II NRIM ? PMO Building 2nd Street, Port Area Manila, Philippines Tel. Nos. (632) 304-3779 RAUL C. ASIS Undersecretary Chairman, Special BAC forConsultancy Services &Goods,NRIMP-II

SUPPLY, DELIVERY AND IMPLEMENTATION OF A NETWORK ACCESS CONTROL (NAC) SYSTEM

Asian Development Bank | Published January 13, 2016  -  Deadline February 19, 2016
cpvs

ADB plans to procure an enterprise wide distributed deployment of a Network Access Control solution that can manage wired, wireless and even VPN network access to deliver applications and services to its global workforce with its Headquarters in Manila and 32 Field Offices and Representative Offices all over Asia, Pacific, US, Europe and Australia. ADB's wireless networking service is available to ADB staff, consultants, contractors and guests and ADB aims to improve productivity and collaboration by providing secured access to information anytime, anywhere using any device.

International Midterm Reviewer

UNDP Country Office - PHILIPPINES | Published October 4, 2017  -  Deadline October 18, 2017
cpvs

UNDP-GEF Midterm Review (MTR) “Strengthening Marine Protected Areas to Conserve Marine Key Biodiversity Areas in the Philippines”This project is implemented through the Department of Environment and Natural Resources – Biodiversity Management Bureau (DENR-BMB) which started on August 2014 and currently on its third year of implementation. In line with the UNDP-GEF Guidance on MTRs, this MTR process is initiated before the submission of the second Project Implementation Report (PIR). This ToR sets out the expectations for this MTR. This MTR process follows the guidance outlined in the document Guidance For Conducting Midterm Reviews of UNDP-Supported, GEF-Financed Projects.The Philippines is located within the Coral Triangle, which is considered a global centre of marine diversity, with diverse coral reefs, sea grass beds, mangrove and beach forests, fisheries, invertebrates, seaweeds, and marine mammals.The primary government response to protect this important biodiversity has been the establishment of marine protected areas or fish sanctuaries as mandated by the National Integrated Protected Areas System (NIPAS) and Fisheries Code. At present, there are only 33 MPAs under National Integrated Protected Area System (NIPAS) and are managed by the national government, and 1,620 under Fisheries Code which are Local Government Unit (LGU)-managed. However, overfishing and illegal fishing, pollution from coastal and commercial development, domestic and industrial wastes, land conversion, extractive industries and many other adverse factors continue to pose environmental threats to the country’s fragile coastal ecosystem. The impending effects of climate change can further exacerbate the current situation.In this regard, the project directly addresses these barriers through an integrated approach aimed at strengthening the conservation, protection and management of key marine biodiversity areas in the Philippines. This will be achieved through partnerships with key national government agencies, national and local conservation NGOs and LGUs. Three major outcomes are derived from this approach:Outcome 1: Conservation effectiveness of existing and new MPAs/MPANs is enhanced through improvements in spatial coverage and representativeness (particularly coverage of under-represented KBAs), strengthening of the national system for MPA identification, designation and management under the NIPAS legislative framework, and quantifiable improvements in management of at least 10% of identified Marine KBAs nationwide, with concomitant increases in local stakeholder participation and support.Outcome 2: Financial resources available for the management of MPAs and MPANs are sufficient to meet all critical management needs and are growing in line with the expansion of the MPA system. Sources of revenue for MPA management are being progressively diversified, with the percentage of revenue being derived from Government fiscal sources declining to less than 50% by end- project.Outcome 3: A comprehensive policy framework in place and effectively implemented for the conservation, protection and management of the country’s marine ecosystems and fishery resources, that harmonizes mandates, plans and activities amongst all key MPA stakeholders including BMB, BFAR and relevant Local Government Units.The Project is being managed by the Biodiversity Management Bureau (BMB, formerly PAWB) which has established a Project Management Unit (PMU) to implement certain outputs and coordinate the work of partners in pilot sites.The MTR is expected to assess progress towards the achievement of the project objectives and outcomes as specified in the Project Document, and assess early signs of project success or failure with the goal of identifying the necessary changes to be made in order to set the project on-track to achieve its intended results. The MTR will also review the project’s strategy, its risks to sustainability.MTR APPROACH AND METHODOLOGYThe MTR must provide evidence-based information that is credible, reliable and useful. The MTR team will review all relevant sources of information including documents prepared during the preparation phase (i.e. PIF, UNDP Initiation Plan, UNDP Environmental & Social Safeguard Policy, the Project Document, project reports including Annual Project Review/PIRs, project budget revisions, lesson learned reports, national strategic and legal documents, and any other materials that the team considers useful for this evidence-based review). The MTR team will review the baseline GEF focal area Tracking Tool submitted to the GEF at CEO endorsement, and the midterm GEF focal area Tracking Tool that must be completed before the MTR field mission begins.The MTR team is expected to follow a collaborative and participatory approach, ensuring close engagement with the Project Team, government counterparts (the GEF Operational Focal Point), the UNDP Country Office(s), UNDP-GEF Regional Technical Advisers, and other key stakeholders.The MTR team will assess the following four categories of project progress. These categories are: project strategy, progress towards results, project implementation and adaptive management, and sustainability.For extended descriptions of the abovementioned categories, it can be seen in the “Guidance For Conducting Midterm Reviews of UNDP-Supported, GEF-Financed Projects”.Project design:Review the problem addressed by the project andReview the relevance of the project strategy and Were lessons from other relevant projects properly incorporated into the project design?Review how the project addresses country priorities. Review country ownership. Was the project concept in line with the national sector development priorities and plans of the country (or of participating countries in the case of multi-country projects)?Review decision-making processes: were perspectives of those who would be affected by project decisions, those who could affect the outcomes, and those who could contribute information or other resources to the process, taken into account during project design processes?Review the extent to which relevant gender issues were raised in the project design. See Annex 9 of Guidance For Conducting Midterm Reviews of UNDP-Supported, GEF-Financed Projects for further guidelines.If there are major areas of concern, recommend areas for improvement.Results Framework/Logframe:Undertake a critical analysis of the project’s theory of change as indicated in the results framework, assess how “SMART” the midterm and end-of-project targets are (Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Relevant, Time-bound), and suggest specific amendments/revisions to the targets and indicators as necessary.Are the project’s objectives and outcomes or components clear, practical, and feasible within its time frame?Examine if progress so far has led to, or could in the future catalyse beneficial development effects (i.e. income generation, gender equality and women’s empowerment, improved governance etc.) that should be included in the project results framework and monitored on an annual basis.Ensure broader development and gender aspects of the project are being monitored effectively.Develop and recommend SMART ‘development’ indicators, including sex-disaggregated indicators and indicators that capture development benefits.Progress Towards Outcomes Analysis:Review the results framework indicators against progress made towards the end-of-project targets using the Progress Towards Results Matrix and following the Guidance For Conducting Midterm Reviews of UNDP-Supported, GEF-Financed Projects; colour code progress in a “traffic light system” based on the level of progress achieved; assign a rating on progress for each outcome; make recommendations from the areas marked as “Not on target to be achieved” (red).In addition to the progress towards outcomes analysis:Compare and analyse the GEF Tracking Tool at the baseline with the one completed right before the Midterm Review.Identify remaining barriers to achieving the project objective in the remainder of the project.By reviewing the aspects of the project that have already been successful, identify ways in which the project can further expand these benefits.Management Arrangements:Review overall effectiveness of project management as outlined in the Project Document.Have changes been made and are they effective and efficient? Is the structure of the PMU responding to the demands of the Project? Are responsibilities and reporting lines clear?Is decision-making transparent and undertaken in a timely manner?Recommend areas for improvement.Review the quality of execution of the Executing Agency/Implementing Partner(s) and recommend areas for improvement.Review the quality of support provided by the GEF Partner Agency (UNDP) and recommend areas for improvement.Project-level Monitoring and Evaluation Systems:Review the monitoring tools currently being used:Do they provide the necessary information? Is the system results-based? Do they involve key partners? Are they aligned or mainstreamed with national systems?Do they use existing information? Are they efficient? Are they cost-effective? Are additional tools required? How could they be made more participatory and inclusive?Examine the financial management of the project monitoring and evaluation budget.Are sufficient resources being allocated to monitoring and evaluation? Are these resources being allocated effectively?Stakeholder Engagement:Project management: Has the project developed and leveraged the necessary and appropriate partnerships with direct and tangential stakeholders?Participation and country-driven processes: Do local and national government stakeholders support the objectives of the project? Do they continue to have an active role in project decision-making that supports efficient and effective project implementation?Participation and public awareness: To what extent has stakeholder involvement and public awareness contributed to the progress towards achievement of project objectives?Reporting:Assess how adaptive management changes have been reported by the project management and shared with the Project Board.Assess how well the Project Team and partners undertake and fulfil GEF reporting requirements (i.e. how have they addressed poorly-rated PIRs, if applicable?)Assess how lessons derived from the adaptive management process have been documented, shared with key partners and internalized by partners.Communications:Review internal project communication with stakeholders: Is communication regular and effective? Are there key stakeholders left out of communication? Are there feedback mechanisms when communication is received? Does this communication with stakeholders contribute to their awareness of project outcomes and activities and investment in the sustainability of project results?Review external project communication: Are proper means of communication established or being established to express the project progress and intended impact to the public (is there a web presence, for example? Or did the project implement appropriate outreach and public awareness campaigns?)For reporting purposes, write one half-page paragraph that summarizes the project’s progress towards results in terms of contribution to sustainable development benefits, as well as global environmental benefits.SustainabilityValidate whether the risks identified in the Project Document, Annual Project Review/PIRs and the ATLAS Risk Management Module are the most important and whether the risk ratings applied are appropriate and up to date. If not, explain why.In addition, assess the following risks to sustainability:Financial risks to sustainability:What is the likelihood of financial and economic resources not being available once the GEF assistance ends (consider potential resources can be from multiple sources, such as the public and private sectors, income generating activities, and other funding that will be adequate financial resources for sustaining project’s outcomes)?Review the relevance of the project strategy and Were lessons from other relevant projects properly incorporated into the project design?Review how the project addresses country priorities. Review country ownership. Was the project concept in line with the national sector development priorities and plans of the country (or of participating countries in the case of multi-country projects)?Review decision-making processes: were perspectives of those who would be affected by project decisions, those who could affect the outcomes, and those who could contribute information or other resources to the process, taken into account during project design processes?Review the extent to which relevant gender issues were raised in the project design. See Annex 9 of Guidance For Conducting Midterm Reviews of UNDP-Supported, GEF-Financed Projects for further guidelines.If there are major areas of concern, recommend areas for improvement.Undertake a critical analysis of the project’s theory of change as indicated in the results framework, assess how “SMART” the midterm and end-of-project targets are (Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Relevant, Time-bound), and suggest specific amendments/revisions to the targets and indicators as necessary.Are the project’s objectives and outcomes or components clear, practical, and feasible within its time frame?Examine if progress so far has led to, or could in the future catalyse beneficial development effects (i.e. income generation, gender equality and women’s empowerment, improved governance etc.) that should be included in the project results framework and monitored on an annual basis.Ensure broader development and gender aspects of the project are being monitored effectively.Develop and recommend SMART ‘development’ indicators, including sex-disaggregated indicators and indicators that capture development benefits.Progress Towards ResultsReview the results framework indicators against progress made towards the end-of-project targets using the Progress Towards Results Matrix and following the Guidance For Conducting Midterm Reviews of UNDP-Supported, GEF-Financed Projects; colour code progress in a “traffic light system” based on the level of progress achieved; assign a rating on progress for each outcome; make recommendations from the areas marked as “Not on target to be achieved” (red).Compare and analyse the GEF Tracking Tool at the baseline with the one completed right before the Midterm Review.Identify remaining barriers to achieving the project objective in the remainder of the project.By reviewing the aspects of the project that have already been successful, identify ways in which the project can further expand these benefits.Project Implementation Review overall effectiveness of project management as outlined in the Project Document.Have changes been made and are they effective and efficient? Is the structure of the PMU responding to the demands of the Project? Are responsibilities and reporting lines clear?Is decision-making transparent and undertaken in a timely manner?Recommend areas for improvement.Review the quality of execution of the Executing Agency/Implementing Partner(s) and recommend areas for improvement.Review the quality of support provided by the GEF Partner Agency (UNDP) and recommend areas for improvement. Work Planning:Review any delays in project start-up and implementation, identify the causes and examine if they have been resolved.Are work-planning processes results-based?If not, suggest ways to re-orientate work planning to focus on results?Examine the use of the project’s results framework/ logframe as a management tool and review any changes made to it since project start. Finance and co-finance:Consider the financial management of the project, with specific reference to the cost-effectiveness of interventions.Review the changes to fund allocations as a result of budget revisions and assess the appropriateness and relevance of such revisions.Does the project have the appropriate financial controls, including reporting and planning, that allow management to make informed decisions regarding the budget and allow for timely flow of funds?Informed by the co-financing monitoring table to be filled out, provide commentary on co-financing: is co-financing being used strategically to help the objectives of the project? Is the Project Team meeting with all co-financing partners regularly in order to align financing priorities and annual work plans?Review the monitoring tools currently being used:Do they provide the necessary information? Is the system results-based? Do they involve key partners? Are they aligned or mainstreamed with national systems?Do they use existing information? Are they efficient? Are they cost-effective? Are additional tools required? How could they be made more participatory and inclusive?Examine the financial management of the project monitoring and evaluation budget.Are sufficient resources being allocated to monitoring and evaluation? Are these resources being allocated effectively?Stakeholder Engagement:Project management: Has the project developed and leveraged the necessary and appropriate partnerships with direct and tangential stakeholders?Participation and country-driven processes: Do local and national government stakeholders support the objectives of the project?� Do they continue to have an active role in project decision-making that supports efficient and effective project implementation?Participation and public awareness: To what extent has stakeholder involvement and public awareness contributed to the progress towards achievement of project objectives?Reporting:Assess how adaptive management changes have been reported by the project management and shared with the Project Board.Assess how well the Project Team and partners undertake and fulfil GEF reporting requirements (i.e. how have they addressed poorly-rated PIRs, if applicable?)Assess how lessons derived from the adaptive management process have been documented, shared with key partners and internalized by partners.Communications:Review internal project communication with stakeholders: Is communication regular and effective? Are there key stakeholders left out of communication? Are there feedback mechanisms when communication is received? Does this communication with stakeholders contribute to their awareness of project outcomes and activities and investment in the sustainability of project results?Review external project communication: Are proper means of communication established or being established to express the project progress and intended impact to the public (is there a web presence, for example? Or did the project implement appropriate outreach and public awareness campaigns?)For reporting purposes, write one half-page paragraph that summarizes the project’s progress towards results in terms of contribution to sustainable development benefits, as well as global environmental benefits.Socio-economic risks to sustainability:Are there any social or political risks that may jeopardize sustainability of project outcomes? What is the risk that the level of stakeholder ownership (including ownership by governments and other key stakeholders) will be insufficient to allow for the project outcomes/benefits to be sustained? Do the various key stakeholders see that it is in their interest that the project benefits continue to flow? Is there sufficient public / stakeholder awareness in support of the long term objectives of the project? Are lessons learned being documented by the Project Team on a continual basis and shared/ transferred to appropriate parties who could learn from the project and potentially replicate and/or scale it in the future?Institutional Framework and Governance risks to sustainability:Do the legal frameworks, policies, governance structures and processes pose risks that may jeopardize sustenance of project benefits? While assessing this parameter, also consider if the required systems/ mechanisms for accountability, transparency, and technical knowledge transfer are in place.Environmental risks to sustainability:Are there any environmental risks that may jeopardize sustenance of project outcomes?Conclusions & RecommendationsThe MTR team will include a section of the report setting out the MTR’s evidence-based conclusions, in light of the findings.Recommendations should be succinct suggestions for critical intervention that are specific, measurable, achievable, and relevant. A recommendation table should be put in the report’s executive summary. See the Guidance For Conducting Midterm Reviews of UNDP-Supported, GEF-Financed Projects for guidance on a recommendation table.The MTR team should make no more than 15 recommendations total.RatingsThe MTR team will include its ratings of the project’s results and brief descriptions of the associated achievements in a MTR Ratings & Achievement Summary Table in the Executive Summary of the MTR report. See Annex E for ratings scales. No rating on Project Strategy and no overall project rating is required.TIMEFRAME The MTR consultancy will be for 40 working days over a time period of approximately 17 weeks starting 20 October 2017 and shall not exceed five months from when the consultant(s) are hired. The tentative MTR timeframe is as follows:Options for site visits should be provided in the Inception Report.MIDTERM REVIEW DELIVERABLES

Terminal Evaluator (KOICA-UNDP Project)

UNDP Country Office - PHILIPPINES | Published March 27, 2017  -  Deadline April 3, 2017
cpvs

BACKGROUND:Typhoon Yolanda (international name Haiyan), one of the strongest typhoons on record, hit the Visayas (Central Philippines) on 08 November 2013 with a force equivalent to that of a Category 5 hurricane. Rainfall rates reached 30 millimeters per hour, wind speeds registered beyond 315 kilometers per hour and massive storm surges reached as high as five to six meters along coastal areas. Over a 16-hour period, the “super typhoon” passed over six provinces in Central Philippines, knocking out power, telecommunications and water facilities. Along the eastern coast of Samar, Eastern Samar and Leyte, extensive damage was caused by powerful storm surges. Entire villages by the sea were swept away, claiming thousands of lives and causing heavy infrastructure damage in highly populated areas. Meanwhile, on the western coast and mainland areas of Samar and Leyte, severe winds flattened vast areas of farmlands planted with coconut and other fruit-bearing trees. Strong winds also caused damage, although to a lesser extent, along the coasts of Cebu, Panay and Coron.Hardest hit in Eastern Visayas were the islands of Leyte and Samar, particularly Tacloban City, where about 90 percent of the infrastructure was destroyed. Official government figures indicate that about 1.1 million homes were destroyed, 16.1 million people were affected and 4.1 million were displaced. At least 6,300 people were confirmed dead across all areas hit by the typhoon.In December 2014, the Korea International Cooperation Agency (KOICA) and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) signed an Arrangement that formalized a collaboration in providing assistance to the affected population, particularly in the recovery phase. The Arrangement defined the terms of the project entitled “Support to Typhoon Recovery and Resilience in the Visayas: Waste Management, Vocational Training and Cash-for-Livelihoods.” The Project has a total KOICA funding of USD 3,180,000 and implemented by the UNDP in the hard-hit municipalities of Basey (Western Samar) and Guiuan and Hernani (Eastern Samar). Refer to the signed Arrangement (Project Document as Annex 1) and Addendum for more details.The overall goal of the project is to contribute in enabling the recovery and building the resilience of selected local government units (LGUs) and communities in the Visayas affected by Typhoon Haiyan, while its objective is to strengthen the post-disaster environmental and economic resilience of its target areas. Implementation period is from December 2014 to June 2017 and is expected to lead to the following outputs:Output 1: Improved waste management systemOutput 2: Increased access to vocational training towards livelihood diversificationOutput 3: Optimized use of typhoon-damaged coconut trees to create cash-for-livelihood opportunitiesOutput 4: Improved community disaster preparedness and reduced number of families living in danger zonesThe objective and target outputs are expected to be achieved through the following:Component 1: Waste ManagementTwo (2) landfills or materials recovery facilities (MRF) constructed in Guiuan and BaseyHeavy and waste management equipment support provided to Basey, Guiuan and Hernani and one (1) Eco-Waste Management Center constructed in GuiuanCapacity building activities on waste management conducted in Hernani, Guiuan and Basey for at least 1,000 participantsComponent 2: Livelihood-Training SupportOne (1) Basey Manpower Training Center (BMTC) constructed/rehabilitated and provided with equipment and toolsAt least 1,200 beneficiaries provided with vocational trainingComponent 3: Coconut Debris-to-Lumber (cash-for-livelihood)At least 2,300 workers in Guiuan, Basey and Hernani employed in clearing and hauling coconut treesAt least 30 skilled workers in Guiuan, Basey and Hernani employed in cutting/processing coconut trees110 hectares of land cleared from typhoon-damaged coconut treesComponent 4: Disaster-Resilient InfrastructureOne (1) Community Evacuation Center constructed and provided with WASH, solar panels, and backup generatorModel disaster-resilient CEC with WASH, solar panels, and back-up generator turned over to the LGU67 permanent disaster resilient homes constructed in identified relocation areaResettlement community with 67 permanent shelters, WASH, power turned over to the 67 families who are organized as a homeowner’s association with basic organizational and estate management skillsAt least one livelihood activity ongoing for either the individual members or managed by the associationSCHEDULE OF PAYMENTS:First Tranche - 20% Upon signing of contract and submission of performance bond;Second Tranche – 20% Upon submission evaluation inception report and issuance of the certificate of acceptance;Third Tranche – 10% Upon presentation of mission evaluation highlights;Fourth Tranche – 30% Upon submission of draft evaluation report and issuance of the certificate of acceptance;Fifth Tranche – 20% Upon submission of final evaluation report, other related documents, and issuance of the certificate of acceptanceEVALUATION PURPOSE:With the operational closure of the Project in June 2017, UNDP will engage a competent service provider to carry out the Project’s terminal evaluation. The activity is a mandatory exercise for all UNDP-implemented projects and stipulated under Paragraph 4 (Reporting, Monitoring and Evaluation) Section 6 of the signed Arrangement between KOICA and UNDP.The terminal evaluation seeks to assess the overall performance of the Project vis-à-vis its identified targets and objectives. The results, expected to be released by May 2017, will be used by UNDP and KOICA to enhance programming of future interventions on recovery and resilience-building of areas/communities affected by disasters. The results can likewise be used as reference by government agencies and LGUs to guide and sustain the recovery efforts and possible replication in other localities.DESCRIPTION OF RESPONSIBILITIES:The evaluation shall be conducted to assess Project performance vis-à-vis its targets and expected outputs, and its contribution relative to its objective. The exercise will cover the implementation period December 2014 – March 2017. Geographically, it should cover all three municipalities (i.e., Basey, Guiuan and Hernani). Target respondents include key informants from the Municipal/Barangay LGUs and direct beneficiaries, NEDA, TESDA, PCA, DENR, KOICA, EU and UNDP. At the Municipal LGU level, the respondents should include the Offices of the Municipal Mayor, Administrator, Planning, Engineering, General Services, Social Welfare, Public Employment Service and Agriculture, as applicable. For sub-projects with multiple beneficiaries (e.g., housing, vocational training, livelihood inputs), the evaluator shall propose the sampling strategy and size, and indicate the same in its technical proposal and inception report (once selected). Specific objectives of the evaluation include:To assess the KOICA-UNDP Project performance relative to its objective and targets as stated in the Project Design Matrix and M&E Plan, and with reference to the project Baseline Study;To assess the appropriateness of the Project’s overall/per component implementation methodologies and strategies in achieving the set outputs, results and objective as well as in putting in place models or practices which the government, partners and communities could adopt in building and achieving physical, economic, social and institutional resilience in their future projects;To assess the effectiveness and efficiency in the use of Project resources to meet target outputs, results and objective;To analyze factors, including the Project management/operational set-up, and its degree of influence in the achievement or non-achievement of target outputs, results and objective;To assess the relevance and effectiveness of the Project’s partnership and other implementation strategies and highlight which among these methodologies and approaches could be sustained or replicated by government agencies, LGUs and communities;To determine local capacities developed and level of participation of stakeholders in the achievement of the outputs and results; and,To document and draw up lessons learned, good, replicable and/or innovative practices, cross-cutting issues (e.g. gender mainstreaming, human rights, resiliency-building, governance, beneficiary selection, stakeholder participation) and recommendations on appropriate project strategies to improve future programming on post-disaster recovery and resilience building;To put forward some policy and programme recommendations to UNDP as direct implementer of the project Considering the number of projects in Basey and the distance of Guiuan and Hernani from Tacloban, the Evaluator would have to map out and plot the sequence of projects to be covered by on-site validation and respondents to be included in key informant interviews and focus group discussions. The Evaluator would likewise have to consider weather conditions and availability of respondents (particularly government officials and remaining Project Team members) in programming field visits and interviews.EVALUATION APPROACH AND METHODOLOGYThe overall approach and methodology of the terminal evaluation shall be guided by the provisions set forth in the UNDP Handbook on Planning, Monitoring and Evaluating for Development Results and the UNEG Norms and Standards for Evaluation (refer to attached documents). It should be conducted in accordance with the principles outlined in the UNEG Ethical Guidelines for Evaluation. The Evaluator will be required to sign an Evaluation Consultant Code of Conduct Agreement Form.The Evaluator is expected to frame the evaluation effort using the core criteria of relevance, effectiveness, efficiency and sustainability and additional criteria appropriateness, coherence, connectedness and gender mainstreaming (i.e., equity, inclusiveness and participation). A rating scale for each criterion and overall Project performance will have to be defined by the Evaluator and must include a description for each rating as basis for interpretation. The list of key evaluation questions and sub-questions, which shall form part of technical proposal of the Evaluator, should be able to draw out the required information for each evaluation objective and classified according to criteria they belong to. The list will have to be finalized with the Project Team and shall be included in the Evaluator’s Inception Report.The evaluation should employ a combination of both qualitative and quantitative evaluation methods and instruments. The technical proposal of the Evaluator would have to indicate specific activities, data sources, data collection and analysis methods needed to meet the evaluation purpose and objectives. These may include, but not limited to, desk review of Project documents, on-site validation of tangible outputs, key informant interviews and focus group discussions. The Evaluator is expected to follow a participatory and consultative approach ensuring close engagement with the Project Team, implementing partners and direct beneficiaries. EVALUATION PRODUCTSThe selected Evaluator will be accountable for producing the following documents:Evaluation Inception Report. To be submitted within a week from the official start of engagement (i.e., issuance of Notice to Proceed), outlining the framework of analysis, schedule of activities/tasks/ milestones/deliverables, responsibilities of team members (if the Evaluator opts to bring in technical and administrative support), and evaluation matrix;PowerPoint Presentation. To be presented three (3) days after end of evaluation mission and will highlight actual coverage of mission, initial findings, additional requirements (if any) and next steps. Draft Evaluation Report and PowerPoint Presentation. The document will be circulated to Project stakeholders for review and comments. The draft report may be subjected to several revisions, as needed. An evaluation report audit trail will be required to document sections with comments and the corresponding response or actions taken by the Evaluator. The PowerPoint presentation shall contain the highlights of the report. The table below is an audit trail template for the Evaluator to show how the received comments on the draft terminal evaluation report have (or have not) been incorporated into the final report. This audit trail should be included as an annex in the final terminal evaluation report.Final Evaluation Report and PowerPoint Presentation. The outline of the report should be based on the guidelines provided under Annex 7 (Evaluation Report Template and Quality Standards) of the UNDP PME Handbook. The PowerPoint presentation shall contain the highlights of the report. The Evaluator is also expected to turn over to UNDP all materials related to the evaluation exercise (i.e., raw and processed data, pictures, list of respondents and written/signed consents). IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENTSThe principal responsibility for managing this evaluation resides with the Project Team through the Project Manager (PM) and the Monitoring and Evaluation Officer (MEO). Both will be responsible for liaising with the IC pertaining to required technical and financial documents, coordinating with implementing partners and direct beneficiaries, setting up stakeholder interviews, arranging field visits, and looking after the evaluation budget and schedule. The Team will likewise assist in distribution of draft reports to stakeholders for their review, consolidation of comments, and in organizing key stakeholders’ meetings for presentation of the salient points of the draft/final reports.At the UNDP Country Office, the Resilience and Peace Building Unit (RPBU) and Management Support Unit (MSU) will provide assistance in the procurement process for the selection of an IC (i.e., publication of the TOR and assessment of proposals), briefing the IC on UNDP evaluation norms and standards, reviewing and quality assuring the inception/draft/final reports, and in publishing findings and management responses at the UNDP Evaluation Resource Center.The IC will be responsible for implementing all evaluation-related activities and in producing the evaluation products listed in Section E. While the Project Team will provide the information required and support in coordinating with stakeholders, the IC will have to manage its own schedule and logistical arrangements in the conduct of interviews and site visits. The IC must take into consideration changes in weather condition and the availability of target respondents in its work plan. 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. QUALIFICATIONS:Education:Advanced degree in Development/Environmental Management, Public Administration, Economics, Social Sciences, or equivalent work experienceExperience:At least ten (10) years of progressively responsible experience in development research, evaluation of development projects, or project management, in areas related to comprehensive early recovery and rehabilitation assistance, waste management, infrastructure development, livelihood, resettlement and governanceDemonstrated strong knowledge and experience in the application of monitoring and evaluation methods for development projects; experience in conducting terminal evaluation, specially UNDP-managed projects, an advantage Language:Fluency in the English language and proven ability to write high-quality technical reports (Evaluator will be required to provide work samples)Familiarity with the Project areas and ability to speak the local languages (i.e., Waray and Visayan) an advantageCriteria for selection process:The offer will evaluated based on the Combined Scoring method – where the qualifications will be weighted a max. of 30%, Methodology will be weighted a max. of 40% and combined with the financial offer which will be weighted a max of 30%.Application requirements:Duly accomplished Letter of Confirmation of Interest and Availability using the template provided by 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.Application requirements should be emailed to procurement.ph@undp.org and registry.ph@undp.org on or before 03 April 2017.

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

Technical Adviser - Private Sector Resource Mobilization for Disaster Recovery

Country Office - PHILIPPINES | Published July 24, 2017  -  Deadline August 1, 2017
cpvs

Project TitleUNDP Programme on Upscaling Integrated Climate Change Adaptation, Disaster Response, Recovery and Risk ManagementProject DescriptionThe Philippines is consistently among the top five most disaster-prone countries in the world. Located along the Pacific Ring of Fire, it is often subject to geological hazards such as volcanic eruptions and earthquakes. According to the Philippine Institute for Volcanology and Seismology (Phivolcs), the Philippines experiences numerous seismic events ranging from 200 to 250 quakes a day. While most of these are small unfelt tremors, the country has not been spared from high intensity earthquakes such as the 7.7 magnitude Luzon earthquake in July 1990, the 7.2 magnitude earthquake which struck the province of Bohol in 2013, and the 6.7 magnitude in Surigao in February 2017.But, by far, the most devastating hazards are hydro-meteorological in nature such as typhoons, floods, landslides and storm surges. Annually, an average of 22 typhoons enter the country’s area of responsibility, with at least seven to nine making landfall and causing millions of damages to property and even loss of lives. Scientists have also warned that the intensity of these typhoons have also been increasing due to climate change. The 330kph winds brought on by Category 5 Typhoon Haiyan (locally known as Super Typhoon Yolanda), which destroyed 1.2 million homes and 6,300 lives in 2013, is looming as the new normal. In 2014, Typhoon Hagupit (locally known as Tropical Storm Ruby) brought 287 km/hour winds causing USD 114 Milllion in damages. Typhoon Haima, (known in the Philippines as Super Typhoon Lawin), was the second most intense tropical cyclone worldwide in 2016, which caused USD 1.93 billion in damages. In the aftermath of Typhoon Nock-ten (known in the Philippines as Typhoon Nina), UNDP received requests for assistance for the victims of the typhoon. This made UNDP realize that there is a need to put in place its own mechanism to enable the organization to provide immediate early recovery assistance to those affected by extreme events who require or requests the organization’s support. In the same vein, it is essential that there are adequate capacities at all levels to prepare for impending disasters; and/or minimize the risks of exposure of vulnerable communities.While the ability to respond through recovery efforts is important, it is equally essential to support ongoing efforts to strengthen capacities for disaster response by working with partners in the private sector, other development agencies, civil society organizations, and government to ensure a seamless and coordinated response as soon as disaster occurs. Addressing institutional and coordination issues that have beset past response and recovery efforts is crucial to make sure the country is better positioned to provide efficient support to affected communities, thereby minimizing damage to lives and properties. In effect, the aim is to shorten the period from immediate response to full recovery, with the greatest impact and low cost.Thus, UNDP is now developing a programme that aims to strengthen capacities of UNDP and agencies involved in the interrelated aspects of: (i) disaster response and early recovery to provide immediate response thereby enabling seamless transition to full recovery for communities affected by disasters; and (ii) disaster risk management to enable partners to adopt a risk based approach to planning and development, and handle residual risks, particularly those associated with climate change impacts.The intent is to make sure that under normal scenario, the UNDP is able to set up efficient systems and assist the government to strengthen its coordination mechanisms through the National and Local Disaster Risk Management Councils, the Office of Civil Defense, and other agencies. It will also solidify links with the private sector and humanitarian/development partners such that at any time there is disaster, the UNDP can count on these partnerships to effectively deliver. Adopting a risk based culture will also contribute to risk avoidance/minimization; thereby improving overall resilience from the impacts of disasters.The potential of the private sector in response and recovery work still need to be fully harnessed. There have been indications that the sector is deeply interested to be more meaningfully involved, but this has to be in the context of overall response and recovery efforts. The programme will facilitate such linkaging by fully scanning and mapping of private sector and other entities that UNDP can partner with, formalizing partnerships, and developing protocols and cooperation agreements for various types of disasters. This will help emplace a full response plan and resources in case disaster hits.This work will be closely coordinated with the SDG team to ensure complementarity, particularly in their private sector mapping activity in support of the SDG.Towards this end, UNDP requires the support of a specialist who could facilitate in establishing partnerships with the private sector and in mobilizing resources for Early Recovery and longer-term recovery interventions.Scope of WorkUnder the overall guidance of the Deputy Country Director and the direct supervision of the Team Leader of the Inclusive and Sustainable Development Team, the Technical Advisor will assist UNDP in developing a range of engagement offerings between UNDP and prospective corporate targets. Specifically, he/she will be working on designing an engagement strategy for corporate partners (within the context of pre-financing for Disaster Recovery). In particular, the Technical Advisor will be responsible for carrying our the following tasks:Develop a comprehensive mapping of potential private sector partners, reaching out to charitable trusts, philanthropic foundations, high-net worth individuals and local and international companiesScreen all prospective target companies and select at least 10 organisations/entities with which UNDP could advance in a closer dialogue with potential for resources mobilization for disaster recovery.Conduct due diligence assessment for these 10 organizations following the UNDP Guidelines.In close cooperation with relevant UNDP units, actively reach out to selected partners and formalize their support and engagement, through strategic advocacy, development of a value proposition and relationship building, with the view to provide adequate resources to UNDP for its disaster recovery activities.Pro-actively monitor and follow up on the established partnerships with a view to secure their success and future scale-up, including by linking with and supporting relevant UNDP teams for the proper implementation of the agreed partnerships.Develop a case for support, corporate outreach strategy, tools and/or platforms for engaging partners in disaster recovery; including preparation of pitch documents and other relevant materials needed to secure new corporate alliancesSupport the development of template agreements and modalities for these engagement.Support ongoing corporate partnerships and the initiation of new forms of mutually beneficial collaborations between UNDP and prospective corporate targets in disaster recoveryAssist in identifying and developing large new alliances with specific target companiesCreate a prioritization system that effectively allocates funds, expertise and resource to priority recovery needsEnsure follow through on all related matters needed to secure new large corporate alliances or manage existing onesAssist in the drafting of funding proposalsParticipate as required in donor meetings to facilitate the development of new and management of ongoing partnerships.Coordinate and or manage new/existing accounts and ensure implementation of agreed activities, seamless transfer of funds/expertise, reporting and othersIn collaboration with UNDP’s Communication focal point, create a content driven and unified communication/outreach plan for one-dimensional and multi-dimensional engagement opportunities: Develop a more streamlined system for preparing donor materials and media/communication content for distribution to interested corporate partners; Assemble and draft newsletters, partnership tool kits, website info, and other necessary engagement tools; Develop a recognition plan for different levels of corporate partnershipsProvide functional design inputs into the development of a Corporate Relationship Management (CRM) database and corporate websiteDevelop a fund sourcing platform for early recovery, working with the Management Support Unit of the Country Office.Provide day-to-day support and guidance to UNDP Programme Units and corporate partners by responding to specific needs and queries related to proposals, reports, and contribution managementMonitor and evaluate partnerships, as well as document the lessons learned with corporate targetsInstitutional ArrangementThe Technical Advisor will perform the above tasks under the supervision of the ISD Programme Manager. He/She shall coordinate with other members of the UNDP Country Office Management Team, and make presentations as requested. He/She shall also prepare presentations to various stakeholders and also meet with government counterparts, particularly the Office of Civil Defense, Climate Change Commission, the legislative and other important groups. The ISD National Officer for CC/DRR shall provide day to day coordination and will serve as the Advisor’s technical counterpart. Payment Tranche/ DeliverablesThe Consultant will be paid in a monthly basis upon submission of monthly progress reports. Duration of WorkThe total duration of the contract is 12 months (August 2017 - July 2018).Duty StationManila, PhilippinesQualificationsEducation:Advanced degree in in one of the following fields: technology, communications, social sciences communication, marketing, public relations, business administration and managementExperienceAt least five (5) years of progressively responsible work experience in corporate fundraising, marketing, and/or in a corporate managerial role with engaging with partnersA track record of working on developing innovative solutions/partnerships and initiativesStrong leadership skills; capacity to prioritize and manage a diverse range of partners, projects and activitiesUnderstanding of UNDP corporate engagement dimensions an assetFamiliarity with UNDP’s Disaster Recovery work an assetPrior experience in working on crisis response and recovery projects an assetDemonstrated research, planning, communication and writing skillsLanguageExcellent written and verbal communications skills in EnglishCompetenciesExperience in fund-raising and resource mobilization, pitching, negotiating and closing corporate partnerships;Strong relationship management and communication skills, with demonstrated ability to influence behavioral/attitudinal change;Ability to map, analyze, prioritize and follow-up;Ability to work well with others in a multicultural team environment;Strong results orientationCriteria 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 RequirementsApplicants 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 references; In view of the volume of applications UNDP receives, only shortlisted offerors will be notified.

Terminal Evaluator for the Project ReBUILD

UNDP Country Office - PHILIPPINES | Published November 21, 2017  -  Deadline November 28, 2017
cpvs

BackgroundIn the Global Assessment Report of 2011, the International Strategy for Disaster Reduction placed the Philippines third among the most disaster prone countries in the world by virtue of its exposure to natural hazards and the vulnerability of its exposed population. This situation is aggravated by new external threats like climate change, which has induced more intense meteorological and meteorologically triggered hazard events within the last decade, resulting in increased deaths and economic devastation, especially in areas unprepared for such phenomena. From recent past hazard events, meteorological and meteorologically induced hazards are becoming more dominant, particularly in Region 2, Cordillera Administrative Region (CAR) and Region 6, resulting in significant losses.Although the Philippines has a long history of disaster management and adaptation to weather extremes, the current capacities of its concerned national institutions, local government units and impacted communities are insufficient, and quickly outstripped to cope with the growing adverse impacts of natural hazards because of a rapidly changing climate. Capacities of both national and local duty bearers and local claim holders to estimate when and how big the impacts are going to be, as well as, to draw up the appropriate coping/adaptation responses need to be developed quickly to ensure the survival of the most vulnerable.Therefore, Project ReBUILD seeks to improve the governance framework in Region 2, CAR and Region 6, by putting in place the necessary enabling policy environment, mechanisms, systems and tools. It also aims to improve the competencies of the concerned personnel to address disaster risks from natural hazards and climate change, which set back development gains and make the vulnerable poor population poorer.Specifically, Project ReBUILD aims to assess the disaster vulnerabilities of the cities and municipalities surrounding the Cagayan River Basin (Region 2 and CAR) and the Jalaur River basin (Region 6), to geological, meteorological and meteorologically-induced hazards due to climate change. The result will provide the basis for priority mitigation and actions like community based and managed early warning systems and integrated contingency planning and mobilization. The Project will also enhance the competencies of the concerned local government units on mainstreaming climate/disaster risk management into local land use and development planning and regulatory processes. To increase the resilience of vulnerable communities, the Project will support the development of climate resilience livelihoods and risk sharing/transfer models. The Project will also help cull and organize knowledge on climate/disaster management for vulnerable communities. The projects expected outputs are the following:Climate/disaster risk vulnerabilities of the Cagayan River Basin (Region 2 and CAR) and the Jalaur River Basin (Region 6), including cities and municipalities around these river basins assessedPriority climate/disaster mitigation actions for priority cities and municipalities around the Cagayan and Jalaur River Basins developedClimate/disaster risk management mainstreamed into the planning and regulatory processes of cities/municipalities within and around the Cagayan and Jalaur River BasinsSocio-economic resilience of the poor and most vulnerable in Cagayan and Jalaur River Basins Developed andLocal knowledge management (KM) systems for communities around the Cagayan and Jalaur River Basins established. Project ReBUILD was approved in 2012 and commenced operations in 2013. It is administered by the United Nations Development Programme. The New Zealand Aid Programme (NZAP) provided fund amounting to UD$ 1,749,735.40. This consists of the original fund of US$1,227,272.00 and an additional fund of US$522,463.40 in late 2015. While the 2014 Annual Progress Report (APR) stated that majority of the expected outputs were delivered constraints were reported. In the February 2015 Project Board Meeting, it was reported that the funds could only cover a limited number of localities. Moreover, it also put forward issues that have implications in replicating the model at a national scale. These included: (i) inadequate data available to facilitate conduct of climate vulnerability and disaster risk assessment (CVDRA) and that probabilistic hazard maps are needed for the conduct of CVDRA; (ii) delays experienced in drawing up hazard maps since available maps provided came in 1:50 scale that is not very useful for planning at the municipal/city and barangay level; (ii) problems in generating exposure data, particularly lack of funds as an issue for those areas with large number of households.Noting the constraints, a calibration was done. An Exit Strategy and Sustainability Plan (ESSP) commenced in 2017, with the goal of ensuring that gains of the Project can be sustained and scaled up by the CCC. Observing the gaps in terms of in delivering critical support to the localities the E2S2 seeks to provide practical tools in a systematic manner in the journey of the locality from conducting climate vulnerability and disaster risk assessment; planning, programming and budgeting for appropriate interventions; and implementing appropriate interventions. Support services needed, at the point of view of the localities, are being determined in order to transform from a state of climate-vulnerability into one that is climate-smart locality (refer to Figure 1). The CCC can use this to further strengthen convergence for seamless delivery of support services to LGUs to increase resilience to natural hazards and climate changeEvaluation PurposeWith the operational closure of Project ReBUILD in December 2017, UNDP will engage a competent service provider to carry out the Project’s terminal evaluation. The activity is a mandatory exercise for all UNDP-implemented projects and is one of the general conditions stipulated in the Contribution Agreement between the NZAP and UNDP.The terminal evaluation seeks to assess the overall performance of the Project vis-à-vis its identified targets and objectives. The results will be used by UNDP and NZAP to enhance programming of future interventions on building resilience to natural hazard and climate change. The results can likewise be used as reference by the national/regional agencies, civil society, private sector, academe and LGUs to help them improve disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation efforts.Evaluation Scope and ObjectivesThe evaluation shall be conducted to assess Project performance vis-à-vis its targets and expected results, and its contribution relative to its overall objective. The exercise will cover the implementation period October 2012 – December 2017. The evaluation team will cover the Project’s pilot cities and municipalities as well as partners and stakeholders. It shall take into consideration the different municipality/city characteristics and implementation contexts (e.g. socio-economic conditions, class of municipalities, extent of damage in the coverage areas), and the total value and variety of projects per area. The sampling strategy shall form part of the evaluation team’s inception report.Target respondents include key informants from the covered pilot localities and partners, including government, particularly at the local level or regional offices of the HLURB, NEDA, DENR, RBCO, NAMRIA, OCD, DILG, Provincial governments of Cagayan and Iloilo, academic partners, and civil society partners. At the city/municipality level, the respondents should include the Mayor’s Office, Planning Office, Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Office, Environment and Natural Resources Office, Engineering Office, Social Welfare Office, and Agriculture Office among others.Specific objectives of the evaluation include:To assess Project ReBUILD performance relative to its objectives and targets as stated in its results framework, Exit Strategy and Sustainability Plan (ESSP) and M&E Plan documentsTo assess the appropriateness of the Project’s overall/per component implementation framework, methodologies and strategies in achieving the set objectives, outputs and results as well as in putting in place models or practices which the government, partners and the communities could adopt in building and achieving physical, economic, social and institutional resilience in their future projects;To assess the effectiveness and efficiency in the use of Project resources to meet target outputs and resultsTo analyze factors, including the Project management/operational set-up, and its degree of influence in the achievement or non-achievement of target outputs and resultsTo assess the relevance and effectiveness of the Project’s partnership and other implementation strategies and highlight which among these methodologies and approaches could be sustained or replicated by government agencies, LGUs and communitiesTo determine national and local capacities developed and the level of participation of stakeholders in the achievement of the outputs and results andTo document and draw up lessons learned, good, replicable and/or innovative practices, cross-cutting issues (e.g. gender mainstreaming, human rights, DRRM, resiliency-building, beneficiary selection, stakeholder participation) and recommendations on appropriate project strategies to improve future programming on post-disaster rehabilitation and resilience buildingTo put forward some policy and programme recommendations to UNDP as direct implementer of the projectThe Evaluator will have to conduct on-site validation and interface with respondents to be included in key informant interviews and focus group discussions. The Evaluator would likewise have to consider weather conditions and availability of respondents (particularly government officials and remaining Project Team members) in programming field visits and interviews.Evaluation Approach and MethodologyThe overall approach and methodology of the terminal evaluation shall be guided by the provisions set forth in the UNDP Handbook on Planning, Monitoring and Evaluating for Development Results and the UNEG Norms and Standards for Evaluation. It should be conducted in accordance with the principles outlined in the UNEG Ethical Guidelines for Evaluation. The Evaluator will be required to sign an Evaluation Consultant Code of Conduct Agreement Form.The Evaluator is expected to frame the evaluation effort using the core criteria of relevance, effectiveness, efficiency and sustainability and additional criteria appropriateness, coherence, connectedness and gender mainstreaming (i.e., equity, inclusiveness and participation). A rating scale for each criterion and overall Project performance will have to be defined by the Evaluator and must include a description for each rating as basis for interpretation. The list of key evaluation questions and sub-questions, which shall form part of technical proposal of the Evaluator, should be able to draw out the required information for each evaluation objective and classified according to criteria they belong to. The list will have to be finalized with the Project Team and shall be included in the Evaluator’s Inception Report.The evaluation should employ a combination of both qualitative and quantitative evaluation methods and instruments. The technical proposal of the Evaluator would have to indicate specific activities, data sources, data collection and analysis methods needed to meet the evaluation purpose and objectives. These may include, but not limited to, desk review of Project documents[1], on-site validation of tangible outputs, key informant interviews and focus group discussions. The Evaluator is expected to follow a participatory and consultative approach ensuring close engagement with the Project Team, implementing partners and direct beneficiaries.DeliverablesThe selected Evaluator will be accountable for producing the following documents:Evaluation Inception Report. To be submitted within a week from the official start of engagement (i.e., issuance of Notice to Proceed), outlining the framework of analysis, schedule of activities/tasks/ milestones/deliverables, responsibilities of team members (in the case of an Institutional Contractor), and evaluation matrix using the format below:

Policy, Institutional and Stakeholder Engagement Specialist (for Filipino Nationals Only)

UNDP Country Office - PHILIPPINES | Published March 2, 2018  -  Deadline March 11, 2018
cpvs

In October 2017, the project concept entitled “ Integrated Approach in the Management of Major Biodiversity Corridors in the Philippines” with a budget proposal of USD12M was cleared by GEF CEO. The project aims to establish and operationalize a comprehensive planning and management framework to manage biological corridors in an integrated manner which will generate multiple benefits including effective conservation of globally significant biodiversity, reduced deforestation and degradation and enhanced livelihoods. Specifically, the project is envisioned to address the following barriers: Barrier 1: Policies, regulations, and approaches that breed disjointed goverance, planning, management, and financing of activities within the landscape/corridor. Currently relevant agencies in PA management and those that have remit over lands identified as biodiversity corridors are guided by their respective mandates and deliver on stated outcomes. The interplay of various policies and programs in the same landscape oftentimes result in unintended results due to the absence of a commonly agreed planning and management framework for all sectors to follow; Barrier 2: Fragmented implementation of key programs that fails to effectively address threats to BD corridor connectivity and natural resources decline: The absence of an integrated planning framework within the landscape that considers connectivity within the corridor is manifested by programs being implemented with no focus on addressing threats to habitat loss, maintaining ecosystem flows, fragmentation, conversion of high conservation value forests to agriculture. Thus, existing corridors remain a mosaic of disjointed land management units with incompatible objectives;Barrier 3: Weak community level mechanisms to incentivize conservation of biodiversity, promote sustainable natural resource utilization, and monitor compliance: The BD corridors consist of areas that are managed under various tenure regimes including communally and privately-owned lands. A system of incentives is essential to encourage private or land tenure holders in critical spaces within the landscape to contribute to providing stepping stones, or expand the pathways of target species while ensuring improvement in ecosystem services and resilience.To detail out the project concept into a full blown project proposal, the GEF has also granted an amount of USD273,000 as project preparation grant. This PPG aims to prepare and develop the following documents for final submission and approval by the GEF: UNDP-GEF Project Document (ProDoc), using the 2017 standard template.Mandatory annexes to the ProDoc, including gender analysis and action plan, and stakeholder engagement plan, among others, and project specific annexes (e.g. landscape profile, institutional and legal analysis, feasibility studies etc).GEF CEO Endorsement Request.Validation Workshop report (as appropriate for projects with a moderate and high SESP risk rating).The project preparation grant (PPG) has an allocation for the hiring of project development team including a Policy, Institutional and Stakeholder Engagement Specialist who will assist and support the team in the development and completion of the required above-cited documents/PPG deliverables.SCOPE OF WORKThe Policy, Institutional and Stakeholder Engagement Specialist will work closely with the PPG team leader and other local consultants and will perform tasks below.Conduct in-depth assessment of the policy framework and systemic and institutional review related to establishing integrated ecosystem planning systems and the cross-sectoral planning for forest, land and PA management (including ecological connectivity), and natural resource concession planning, decision making and management in the context of decentralisation process, for ensuring integration of KBA, HCVF approaches in land use and sector planning and mainstreaming conservation outcomes in sectoral plans, provincial physical plans, municipal LGUs, regional development investment plansBased on the above assessment, make recommendations for integration of the biodiversity corridors concept into spatial and sectoral planning systems, in particular in production landscapes, in forestry, agriculture and mining and socio-economic developmentProvide recommendations based on existing or proposed new coordination mechanisms for cross-sectoral planning and management within the proposed corridor systems, including identification of key agencies and sector representation, functions and responsibilities of coordination mechanism in providing oversight and coordination for corridors managementProvide specific recommendations for mainstreaming biodiversity outcomes within key sector programs/plans (forestry, logging, agriculture, mining, etc.) and monitoring protocols to ensure compliance and enforcementAssess the capacity of various agencies and stakeholder groups, in respect of:their roles, functions and/or responsibilities in the land use planning, sea use planning and protected area management and sector management and operation, and identify the capacity development needs of the different stakeholder groups to ensure the sustainability of project investments beyond the term of the projectDefine financial and institutional considerations to ensure sustainability, scaling up and replicationContribute towards baseline/situational analysis for the full-size project (FSP). This will be based primarily on an analysis of threats, institutions, investments and needs related to effective PA management, biodiversity conservation and sustainability. In order to generate this analysis, the following should be considered (i) policy, social, regulatory, socio economic, institutional, technical and knowledge barriers to implemented integrated land/seascape/BD corridor management; (ii) the developmental context (key business sectors, socio-economic development, political environment) and its current and future impacts on the biodiversity conservation in the land/seascapes/BD corridor; (iii) the spatial distribution, and conservation status of forest reserves and protected areas; (iv) conservation and economic development plans, projects, programmes and initiatives affecting or impacting on the proposed project activities; (vi) a review and establishment of baseline information for each of the priority landscapes etc.Support the stakeholder analysis and consultations and ensure that they are complete and comprehensive;Support action points, including risk assessments, from the UNDP Social and Environmental Screening Procedure (SESP); andSupport completion of any additional studies that are determined to be needed for the preparation of the ProDoc and all other final outputs.Support the identification of the project sites, with documentation of selection criteria;Prepare inputs and support the development of final PPG deliverables, as agreed with the PPG Team Leader.Participate and contribute in the validation Workshop (Component C):Support all necessary revisions that arise during the workshop, as appropriate. INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTFor the duration of the contract, the consultant will report to and coordinate with UNDP and key focal agencies such as DENR-BMB, DENR-FMB and DA-BSWM. All activities supported by this engagement should be approved by UNDP.All outputs should be cleared by the PPG Team Leader and endorsed by the key focal agencies before UNDP issues the certificate of acceptance for the processing of payments.DURATION OF WORKThe contract will cover a period of 10 weeks spread over 15 March to 30 November 2018.EXPECTED OUTPUTSPolicy framework and systemic and institutional gap analysis report and recommendationsReport on recommendations for multi-sectoral coordination platform for corridor planning and managementCapacity needs assessment report for integrated ecosystem managementRecommendation/proposals for replication and scaling up of IEMReport on Component 1 proposals and activities, including budgetsDetailed report on the baseline for PA, land/seascape management including the following: (i) baseline of current situation (threats, challenges, investments) and development needs (capacity, finance, others);Accomplished METT and Capacity Scorecard for PAs within the Project Sites;Detailed Stakeholder Engagement PlanAppropriate inputs to the relevant sections of the UNDP-GEF Project Document (ProDoc), using the 2017 standard template as maybe assigned/requested by the PPG Team LeaderAppropriate inputs to the relevant sections of the GEF-CEO Endorsement as maybe assigned/requested by the PPG Team Leader PAYMENT MODALITIES AND SPECIFICATIONSThe financial proposals from possible candidates should be expressed in lump sum amount inclusive of all financial costs related to this engagement (i.e. professional fees, transportation/travel to and from residence-Manila, reproduction, communications including internet). Domestic airfare, food and accommodation of the team outside Manila will be shouldered by UNDP separately and only 20% of the DSA following the NIM rates will be provided.First Tranche 10% - Upon submission and acceptance of the inputs to Inception Work Plan;Second Tranche 20% - Upon submission and acceptance of detailed report on the baseline for PA, land/seascape management including the following: (i) baseline of current situation (threats, challenges, investments) and development needs (capacity, finance, others);Third Tranche 20% - Upon submission and acceptance of the Policy framework and systemic and institutional gap analysis report and recommendations; Report on recommendations for multi-sectoral coordination platform for corridor planning and management; Fourth Tranche 20% - Upon submission and acceptance of the accomplished METT and Capacity Scorecard for PAs within the Project Sites; Capacity Needs Assessment Report; Recommendation/proposals for replication and scaling up of IEM; Report on Component 1 proposals and activities, including budgets;Fifth Tranche 10% - Upon submission and acceptance of the detailed stakeholder engagement plan;Sixth Tranche 20% - Upon submission and acceptance of appropriate inputs to the 1st draft and 2nd draft of the UNDP-GEF Project Document with the mandatory annexes and 1st draft of the CEO Endorsement Document (in report format). CORPORATE COMPETENCIESCommitment to UNDP’s mission, vision, values and ethical standardsSensitivity to cultural, gender, religion, race, nationality and age differencesTreat all stakeholders fairly and without prejudiceMaintains objectivity and impartiality in handling evaluation processesFUNCTIONAL COMPETENCIESExperience in project development, implementation and evaluation--particularly in directly managing results-based monitoring and evaluation methodologiesDemonstrated experience in conducting evaluation of multi-year and multi-component programmes and projectsFamiliarity with the norms and issues in early recovery and rehabilitation work in disaster-affected areasAbility to process large amounts and diverse set of data and documents related to infrastructure development, livelihood, resettlement, disaster risk reduction and management, and governanceDemonstrated strong coordination and facilitation skillsStrong interpersonal skills and the ability to initiate discussions with national/local governmental officials, peoples organizations and communitiesDemonstrated ability to function in a team environment and to deal with complex multi-stakeholder environmentDemonstrated ability to prepare and present comprehensive reportsQUALIFICATIONSEducation:Bachelor’s degree or higher in a relevant field, such as environmental law, social science, community development, sociology, environment and natural resource management, or any related fields;Experience:Minimum 10 years of demonstrable experience in the technical area of Protected Area and/or land/seascape or integrated ecosystem management and biodiversity conservation;Experience in Stakeholder engagement using participatory processesLanguage:Fluency in the English language and excellent oral and written communication skills requiredSkillsDemonstrated understanding of political, institutional context for PA and natural resource governance in the Philippines Criteria for selection process:The 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:Duly accomplished Letter of Confirmation of Interest and Availability using the template provided by 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.Application requirements should be emailed to procurement.ph@undp.org and registry.ph@undp.org on or before 11 March 2018.Attachments in this link:- Terms of Reference, Financial Proposal Template, P11 Personal Histiory Template and Terms and Conditions for Consultants. In view of the volume of applications UNDP receives, only shortlisted offerors will be notified.

Procurement Specialist (International)

UNDP Country Office - PHILIPPINES | Published March 12, 2018  -  Deadline March 21, 2018
cpvs

Project Description:Under the direct supervision of the Deputy Country Director and the overall guidance of Country Director, the Procurement Specialist is responsible for mentoring the CO Procurement Team to effectively deliver various procurement and travel services while ensuring that best value for money in Country Office is attained. The Procurement Specialist will provide guidance and solutions to a wide spectrum of complex issues related to the procurement team. The Procurement Specialist promotes a collaborative, client-focused, quality and results-oriented approach in the team.The Procurement Specialist works in close collaboration with the Management Support and Business Development, Operations, Programme and project teams in the CO, UNDP HQs staff and Government officials to successfully deliver procurement services. While the change management exercise is still ongoing, in the interim, a temporary Procurement Specialist shall be engaged to oversee the major procurement cases specifically those under the GCS-funded projects.Scope of Work: Provide strategic advice and guidance for the implementation and management of procurement processes for CO, NIM/DIM projects, specifically the Govt-financed projects, focusing on achievement of the following results:Timely and proper preparation of procurement plans for the office and projects, establishment of the deadlines, uploading them into the PROMPT (online procurement planning platform of the Regional Bureau) and monitoring of their implementation.Establishment and implementation of proper monitoring system and control of procurement processes including organization of RFQ, ITB or RFP, receipt and evaluation of quotations, bids or proposals, negotiation of certain conditions of contracts in full compliance with UNDP rules and regulations.Certification of case submissions to the Contract, Asset and Procurement Committee (CAP), the Regional Advisory Committee on Procurement (RACP), and the ACP in Headquarters, as may be required by procurement cases.Elaboration and implementation of the internal control system which ensures that Purchase Orders (PO) are duly prepared and dispatched. Timely corrective actions on POs with budget check errors and other problems.Management of the implementation of the procurement processes monitoring system and mechanisms, and coordination with other teams whose work impact the procurement process, to eliminate deficiencies in procurement.Implementation of the recommendations coming out of the independent management review of the BUB project.Tracking of the timely progress of the DepED project implementation aimed at avoiding or minimizing additional costs that the Contractor may charge UNDP as overruns.Ensures elaboration and implementation of operational strategies focusing on achievement of the following results:Full compliance of procurement activities with UN/UNDP rules, regulations, policies and strategies; elaboration of the effective internal control, proper design and functioning of a client-oriented procurement management system.Elaboration and implementation of cost saving and reduction strategies including, but not limited to, accessing/creation of Long-Term Agreements (LTAs) as well as drawing on existing rosters.Conceptualization, elaboration and implementation of contract strategy in the CO including tendering processes and evaluation, contractor appraisal, evaluation and negotiation of offers, tracking of cumulative contract amounts, management of the contract and contractor, legal considerations and payment conditions, risk assessment.Conceptualization, elaboration and implementation of strategic procurement in the CO including sourcing strategy, supplier selection and evaluation, quality management, customer relationship management, e-procurement introduction and promotion, performance measurement.Conduct of meetings with the Procurement staff to provide solutions to procurement bottlenecks.Performs other functions and duties as the supervisor may assign.Expected Outputs and Deliverables With the period of the IC, the Procurement Specialist is expected to submit a monthly report on the Team’s progress.Institutional ArrangementUnder the direct supervision of the Deputy Country Director and the overall guidance of Country Director, the Procurement Specialist is responsible for mentoring the CO Procurement Team to effectively deliver various procurement and travel services while ensuring that best value for money in Country Office is attained. The Procurement Specialist will provide guidance and solutions to a wide spectrum of complex issues related to the procurement team. The Procurement Specialist promotes a collaborative, client-focused, quality and results-oriented approach in the team.Duration of the WorkThe IC duration shall be for a period of 3 months, which may be extended, as and when project circumstances necessitates. This duration includes travel period of the consultant to and from the Country Office, for purposes of insurance coverage.Duty StationThe Procurement Specailist shall be based in the UNDP Philippine Country Office which is located in Manila. Qualifications of the Successful Individual ContractorEducation: Master’s Degree or equivalent in Business Administration, Public Administration, Finance, Economics or related field;Experience:At least seven (7) years of relevant experience at the national or international level in procurement management;Experience in the usage of computers and office software packages (MS Word, Excel, etc) and advance knowledge of web based management systems;Language:Fluency in the English language, written and spoken. Scope of Price Proposal and Schedule of PaymentsThe temporary Procurement Specialist is expected to be compensated through an all-inclusive fixed monthly fee. The Procurement Specialist shall be paid every last working day of the month, based on the submission of accomplishment report for the month.The one-time airfare for a round-trip ticket to and from the duty station shall be provided by UNDP Philippines, using its own travel agency. As a matter of policy, Individual Contractors are only entitled to economy class tickets. Any preferred arrangement in excess of the cost of the most direct, most economical ticket, the Procurement Specialist shall cover out of his/her own account.In lieu of living allowance, the CO shall make arrangements for the accommodation of the Procurement Specialist which shall be duly covered by the CO. This cost must therefore be excluded from the Procurement Specialists’ financial proposal.Criteria 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%.Recommended Presentation of OfferApplicants are requested to submit 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 references;

Comprehensive Land Use Plan Specialist (For Filipino Nationals Only)

UNDP Country Office - PHILIPPINES | Published May 16, 2018  -  Deadline May 23, 2018
cpvs

The Resilience and Preparedness toward Inclusive Development (RAPID) Program is a capacity development program in support of the long-term recovery of local governments units and communities in Yolanda-affected areas. It is implemented by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) - Philippines and the Australian Government. It is a component of Project Climate Twin Phoenix.RAPID aims to strengthen approaches and actions on Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) and Climate Change Adaptation (CCA) at the local level by capacitating its target Local Government Units (LGUs) and communities on disaster risk assessment and mainstreaming risk assessment results in development planning and preparedness planning. It targets LGUs located along the coastline of San Pedro Bay and Leyte Gulf, namely: City of Tacloban and municipalities of Palo, Tanauan, Dulag, Tolosa, Mayorga, Mac Arthur and Abuyog in Leyte, Basey and Marabut in Western Samar, and Lawaan and Balangiga in Eastern Samar. The RAPID Program has seven project outputs, namely:Output 1: Climate/Disaster Risk and Vulnerability AssessmentOutput 2: Priority Preparedness and Mitigation ActionsOutput 3: Awareness Raising and Capacity BuildingOutput 4: Mainstreaming Climate/Disaster Risk in Land Use and Development PlansOutput 5: Building Resilience of the Poor and VulnerableOutput 6: Knowledge and Information SharingOutput 8: Community-Based Development Risk Reduction ManagementUnder Output 4 of the program, RAPID will enhance the ecological (environment, social, economic, infrastructure, institutional) profiles at the local level as basis for the preparation/enhancement of the Land Use Plan and consequently the Zoning Ordinance.The project will need Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP) Specialist in the completion of the Comprehensive Land Use Plans including Zoning Ordinances (ZO) of the target LGUs. Scope of WorkThe CLUP Specialist is expected to perform the following:Work under the supervision of the Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board – Central Visayas Region (HLURB-CVR) and United Nations Development Programme – Resilience and Preparedness toward Inclusive Development (UNDP-RAPID) to provide technical assistance through coaching and mentoring;Assist HLURB-CVR and UNDP-RAPID in providing technical assistance to the 12 target LGUs in the application of the HLURB Supplemental Guidelines on Mainstreaming Disaster Risk Reduction and Climate Change Adaptation in the CLUP preparation/formulation/enhancement;Assist HLURB-CVR and UNDP-RAPID in supervising the 12 target LGUs to prepare/formulate/enhance their CLUPs in order to mainstream in climate/disaster risks;Assist HLURB-CVR and UNDP-RAPID in conducting training, workshops, consultations, mentoring, and other activities relevant to the preparation/formulation/enhancement of the CLUPs;Assist HLURB-CVR and UNDP-RAPID in providing the status and assessment of the CLUP preparation/formulation/enhancement of the 12 target LGUs;Participate in meeting or consultations organized by UNDP-RAPID/HLURB-CVR related to CLUP preparation/formulation/enhancement of the 12 target LGUs;Submit the required outputs to UNDP-RAPID and HLURB-CVR as listed in D. Expected Outputs and Deliverables, with due diligence and efficiency, and warrant that the technical quality of the work performed is in accordance with professional and technical standard acceptable to RAPID and HLURB-CVR;Serve as resource person on CLUP and provide additional information as may be needed;Consult with UNDP-RAPID and HLURB-CVR on any issues/difficulties related to the project functions;Be available to answer any queries or update information throughout the duration of the project and provide other relevant inputs and advice that are related to the project;Advice UNDP-RAPID and HLURB-CVR on other activities and other technical inputs towards completion of the CLUP and ZO of the target LGUs. Institutional ArrangementFor the duration of the contract, the CLUP Specialist shall report to the Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board – Central Visayas Region (HLURB-CVR) and United Nations Development Programme – Resilience and Preparedness toward Inclusive Development (UNDP-RAPID), in the delivery of the terms of reference. The consultant is required to report to the office regularly, subject to the necessity of his services as determined by the HLURB-CVR and UNDP-RAPID, and status reports on the outputs shall be expected from time to time. All reports must be submitted to HLURB-CVR and UNDP-RAPID for review. Final outputs should be formally accepted by the HLURB-CVR and UNDP-RAPID before any payment will be made. Duration of the WorkTo undertake the tasks, procedures and expected outputs, the CLUP Specialist shall be engaged by for a period of four (4) months commencing upon signing and will be valid until all outputs deliverables/outputs has been delivered and accepted. The target date for the start of work is on June 1, 2018 and the expected completion date is on September 30, 2018. Duty StationThe CLUP Specialist must be available to do field works in the provinces of Leyte, Samar and Eastern Samar. Also, he/she must be available to report to HLURB-CVR and UNDP-RAPID in Tacloban City.The CLUP Specialist will be required to report to the office and attend modular trainings for LGUs, and status/assessment reports on the outputs shall be expected from time to time. Scope of Price Proposal and Schedule of PaymentsThe proposed contract price should include taxes.Travel and related costs (i.e. transportation, accommodation, daily subsistence allowance etc.) for the engagement shall be borne by the CLUP Specialist.Payment will be made in installments based on satisfactory completion of agreed outputs: First Tranche 10% - Upon signing of contract and submission and acceptance of work plan;Second Tranche 30% - Upon submission and acceptance of report on review and assessment of the outputs produced under HLURB-CVR Module 5;Third Tranche 30% - Upon submission and acceptance of report on review and assessment of the outputs produced under HLURB-CVR Module 6;Fourth Tranche 30% - Upon submission and acceptance of report on review and assessment of the outputs produced under HLURB-CVR Modules 1 to 6 CORPORATE COMPETENCIESCommitment to UNDP’s mission, vision, values and ethical standardsSensitivity to cultural, gender, religion, race, nationality and age differencesTreat all stakeholders fairly and without prejudiceMaintains objectivity and impartiality in handling evaluation processesFUNCTIONAL COMPETENCIESExperience in project development, implementation and evaluation--particularly in directly managing results-based monitoring and evaluation methodologiesDemonstrated experience in conducting evaluation of multi-year and multi-component programmes and projectsFamiliarity with the norms and issues in early recovery and rehabilitation work in disaster-affected areasAbility to process large amounts and diverse set of data and documents related to infrastructure development, livelihood, resettlement, disaster risk reduction and management, and governanceDemonstrated strong coordination and facilitation skillsStrong interpersonal skills and the ability to initiate discussions with national/local governmental officials, peoples organizations and communitiesDemonstrated ability to function in a team environment and to deal with complex multi-stakeholder environmentDemonstrated ability to prepare and present comprehensive reports QUALIFICATIONSEducation:Master’s degree on any Social Science courseExperience:Minimum of 10 years of relevant work experience related to CLUP;Registered social worker;Prior substantive and sustained work experience in achieving results on the ground working with HLURB or local government unitsLanguage:Fluency in written and spoken EnglishSkills:Good communication skills, including demonstrated written, presentation and training facilitation skills;Demonstrated ability to work well both independently and as part of multidisciplinary teams and manage multiple tasks.Criteria for selection process:The 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:Duly accomplished Letter of Confirmation of Interest and Availability (Financial Proposal Template) using the template provided by UNDP;Personal Curriculum Vitae, indicating all past experiences from similar projects, as well as the contact details (email and telephone number) of the candidate and at least three (3) professional references;Application requirements should be emailed to procurement.ph@undp.org and registry.ph@undp.org on or before 23 May 2018.Attachments in this link:- Financial Proposal Template and P11 Personal History Template. In view of the volume of applications UNDP receives, only shortlisted offerors will be notified.