Evaluation Consultant for the Terminal Evaluation of the UNEP/GEF project Global Capacity Building Initiative for Transparency (CBIT) Platform Phase II Consultancy

The Evaluation Team will submit a concise evaluation report. Actual duration of the assignment is 50 days (within a period of 6 months) to be delivered as follows: Inception Report (30%) Draft report (40%) Final Report (30%)

Home-Based

6 Months

ORGANIZATION SETTING. The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) is the United Nations systems designated entity for addressing environmental issues at the global and regional level. Its mandate is to coordinate the development of environmental policy consensus by keeping the global environment under review and bringing emerging issues to the attention of governments and the international community for action. This consultancy is located at Headquarters in the Evaluation Office which reports directly to the Executive Director. The consultant reports to the Evaluation Manager and the Director of the Evaluation Office. THE EVALUATION The Terminal Evaluation will be an in-depth evaluation using a participatory approach whereby key stakeholders are kept informed and consulted throughout the evaluation process. Both quantitative and qualitative evaluation methods will be used as appropriate to determine project achievements against the expected outputs, outcomes and impacts. It is highly recommended that the consultant(s) maintains close communication with the project team and promotes information exchange throughout the Evaluation implementation phase in order to increase their (and other stakeholder) ownership of the evaluation findings. Where applicable, the consultant(s) will provide a geo-referenced map that demarcates the area covered by the project and, where possible, provide geo-reference photographs of key intervention sites (e.g., sites of habitat rehabilitation and protection, pollution treatment infrastructure, etc.) THE PROJECT The Paris Agreement signified an important turning point in the climate change negotiations as the global community recognized the urgency in facing climate change and agreed on a goal of “holding the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels and pursuing significant efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels” (Article 2). Article 13 of the Paris Agreement is critical for implementation, as it provides the outline for an enhanced transparency framework (ETF) for countries through which they can report on the actions they take related to climate change and the support that they provide and receive. Since 2020, all Parties to the Paris Agreement, both developed and developing, are expected to begin to comply with Article 13. The advent of enhanced transparency frameworks presents an opportunity to streamline measurement, reporting, and verification (MRV) activities related to climate change by approaching the common elements of transparency activities in a holistic way. This approach can reduce the time burden and financial burden on developing countries. However, these multiple commitments represent a serious challenge to developing country Parties. While developing countries have an increasing number of methodological and informational resources at their disposal, many of them face persistent challenges in their capacity to monitor and report on climate change: a lack of data, staff shortages and turnover, a lack of individual capacity to conduct certain transparency-related activities among others. Although countries face serious barriers to effective transparency activities, the introduction of enhanced transparency frameworks presents an opportunity to streamline MRV activities by approaching the common elements of transparency activities in a holistic way. This approach can reduce the time burden and financial burden on developing country Parties. Furthermore, there is an opportunity to share experiences and good practice across Parties, avoiding the need to devote valuable time and scarce expertise and funding to elaborate unique structures and approaches for each developing country Party. The solution proposed by UNEP and partners, through GEF funding, to addressing the problem consisted of implementing two sequential projects to merge the management and delivery of capacity development for transparency: i.e.Global Capacity Building Initiative for Transparency (CBIT) Platform Phase II A: Unified Support Platform and Program for Article 13 of the Paris Agreement (GEF ID 10128) and Global Capacity Building Initiative for Transparency (CBIT) Platform Phase II B: Unified Support Platform and Program for Article 13 of the Paris Agreement. (GEF ID 10088). Originally designed as a single Phase II project, the project was divided into two parts for administrative reasons. Phase IIA focused on a single, streamlined platform for knowledge delivery, support for knowledge products, and global stocktaking and dissemination of best practices while Phase IIB would continue to support the integrated web platform after the Phase IIA project finished, but it would also provide targeted technical support and training for developing country parties and south-south sub-regional networks and learning. The overall objective of the project(s) was to provide global streamlined support, capacity building and coordination to help developing countries meet enhanced transparency requirements under Article 13 of the Paris Agreement. THE EVALUATION TEAM For this Evaluation, the Evaluation Consultant will work under the overall responsibility of the Evaluation Office represented by an Evaluation Manager, in consultation with the UNEP Task Manager, Project Manager, Fund Management Officer, the Sub-programme Coordinator for Climate action. SPECIFIC RESPONSIBILITIES In close consultation with the Evaluation Manager, the Evaluation Consultant will be responsible for the overall management of the Evaluation and timely provision of its outputs, data collection and analysis and report-writing. More specifically: Inception phase of the Evaluation, including: • preliminary desk review and introductory interviews with project staff; • draft the reconstructed Theory of Change of the project; • prepare the evaluation framework; • develop the desk review and interview protocols; • draft the survey protocols (if relevant); • develop and present criteria for country and/or site selection for the evaluation mission; • plan the evaluation schedule; • prepare the Inception Report, incorporating comments until approved by the Evaluation Manager Data collection and analysis phase of the Evaluation, including: • conduct further desk review and in-depth interviews with project implementing and executing agencies, project partners and project stakeholders; • (where appropriate and agreed) conduct an evaluation mission(s) to selected countries, visit the project locations, interview project partners and stakeholders, including a good representation of local communities. Ensure independence of the Evaluation and confidentiality of evaluation interviews. • regularly report back to the Evaluation Manager on progress and inform of any possible problems or issues encountered and; • keep the Project/Task Manager informed of the evaluation progress. Reporting phase, including: • draft the Main Evaluation Report, ensuring that the evaluation report is complete, coherent and consistent with the Evaluation Manager guidelines both in substance and style; • liaise with the Evaluation Manager on comments received and finalize the Main Evaluation Report, ensuring that comments are taken into account until approved by the Evaluation Manager • prepare a Response to Comments annex for the main report, listing those comments not accepted by the Evaluation Consultant and indicating the reason for the rejection; and • (where agreed with the Evaluation Manager) prepare an Evaluation Brief (2-page summary of the evaluand and the key evaluation findings and lessons) Managing relations, including: • maintain a positive relationship with evaluation stakeholders, ensuring that the evaluation process is as participatory as possible but at the same time maintains its independence; • communicate in a timely manner with the Evaluation Manager on any issues requiring its attention and intervention. The Evaluation Consultant shall have had no prior involvement in the formulation or implementation of the project and will be independent from the participating institutions. The consultant will sign the Evaluation Consultant Code of Conduct Agreement Form. The Evaluation Consultant will be selected and recruited by the UNEP Evaluation Office through a consultancy contract. Comprehensive terms of reference will be shared with the consultant separately.

Advanced university degree (Master’s degree or equivalent) in environmental sciences, international development or other relevant political or social sciences area is required. A first level university degree (Bachelor’s degree or equivalent) in the same areas in combination with two (2) additional years of qualifying experience may be accepted in lieu of the advanced degree. A minimum of ten (10) years of technical / evaluation experience preferably including evaluating large, regional or global programmes and using a Theory of Change approach is required. A good/broad understanding of Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs) related to climate change is desirable. Knowledge of the UN system and specifically the work of UNEP is desirable.

English and French are the working languages of the United Nations Secretariat. For this consultancy, fluency in English is required and knowledge of French is desirable.

Not available.

THE UNITED NATIONS DOES NOT CHARGE A FEE AT ANY STAGE OF THE RECRUITMENT PROCESS (APPLICATION, INTERVIEW MEETING, PROCESSING, OR TRAINING). THE UNITED NATIONS DOES NOT CONCERN ITSELF WITH INFORMATION ON APPLICANTS’ BANK ACCOUNTS.

Evaluate my profile