Consultants for Evaluation of OCHA Emergency Response to the Pakistan Floods
Various - - Geneva (Switzerland), New York (USA), Islamabad (Pakistan)
"The United Nations does not charge a fee at any stage of the recruitment process (application, interview, meeting, processing, training or any other fees). Also, the United Nations does not concern itself with information on bank accounts"
Background
Over the course of the 2010 monsoon season, Pakistan experienced the worst floods in its history. Heavy rainfall, flash floods and riverine floods combined to create a moving body of water equal in dimension to the land mass of the United Kingdom. The floods have affected 84 districts out of a total of 121 districts in Pakistan, and more than 20 million people – one-tenth of Pakistan’s population – devastating villages from the Himalayas to the Arabian Sea. More than 1,700 men, women and children have lost their lives, and at least 1.8 million homes have been damaged or destroyed. Since heavy rainfall and flash floods claimed their first victims, flood waves continue to devastate the southern province of Sindh, where the full extent of losses and damages may not be known for several more weeks.
OCHA which had a strong presence in Pakistan ever since the 2005 earthquake has been coordinating the response to the floods with the existing humanitarian system and drawing on it’s previous experiences made during earthquakes, floods and displacement crisis.
Objectives
The evaluation will examine OCHA’s response policies, structures and processes and their overall effectiveness in execution of OCHA’s core coordination functions. The evaluation is commissioned in line with OCHA Evaluation Strategy for 2010‐2013, which calls for an evaluation of every declared corporate response. This is the second such evaluation ever conducted by the organization.
Specific objectives of the evaluation are to:
1) Examine whether meaningful results were achieved and whether OCHA successfully identified and performed its core coordination functions;
2) Examine the timeliness, relevance, effectiveness and efficiency of OCHA’s response to Pakistan earthquake and produce lessons for improving future OCHA operations;
3) Review performance of all processes and structures employed during OCHA Pakistan response;
4) Examine the extent to which the operation represents an appropriate response from OCHA in view of its mandate and priorities as laid out in the Strategic Framework; and
5) Assess adequacy and utilization of existing OCHA policies and procedures in guiding the emergency response. While the evaluation is expected to produce lessons for future emergencies, it will need to take into account the extent to which these lessons can be generalized.
In short, the evaluation will assess the performance of OCHA against the following evaluation criteria: timeliness, effectiveness, efficiency, appropriateness, coherence, and connectedness. Added to these standard criteria will be leadership effectiveness.
The key question that the evaluation will address is: How effective was OCHA in ensuring- through performing its main coordination tasks - that humanitarian assistance was delivered in a timely, cohesive and effective manner?
Focus
The evaluation will review OCHA’s response to Pakistan Floods and examine its evolution through emergency phases
1. 0 to 72 hours,
2. 72 hours‐1 week,
3. 1 week to 1 month,
4. 1 month to deactivation of corporate response, and until the evaluation team arrives
The evaluation will not focus on the results of the overall coordination effort on the affected population in Pakistan as these issues will already have been covered by the Inter‐Agency Real Time Evaluation
Methodology
The evaluation shall take into consideration results as identified through the Inter‐Agency Real Time evaluation so as to put the findings about OCHA performance into context. The evaluation will also build on various after action reviews conducted by different sections of OCHA.
The details of the methodology, including finalization of key questions, will be developed by the evaluation team and outlined in the Inception Report. Broadly, the methodology will employ participatory approaches and incorporate:
1. desk review of all relevant documentation;
2. desk review of ‘remote monitoring’ conducted by OCHA as part of the Inter‐agency Real Time Evaluation;
3. key stakeholder and focus groups interviews with:
• key informants in OCHA headquarters (Geneva and New York), and relevant field offices (Islamabad and Hubs)
• key informants who participated in the response at national and/or international level
• key informants among stakeholders (UN, (I)NGOs, government, military, donors)
4. survey of deployed/affected staff members
5. establishment of timelines to identify key events and key decision‐making points;
6. country‐level and HQ‐level workshops, including focus groups: to present initial findings, discuss emerging key issues and lessons, and formulate recommendations.
While formulating recommendations, the evaluation is expected to take into account the implications of findings and recommendations of recent real‐time evaluations of humanitarian responses and of the Cluster 2 Evaluation on OCHA.
Deliverables and Reporting Requirements
All reports listed will be written in good Standard English. If in the estimation of the EGS the reports do not meet this required standard, the evaluation team will, at their own expense, undertake the editing necessary to bring it to the required standards.
Inception Report
Inception Report will iterate the parameters and work plans to operationalize and direct each aspect of the evaluation, including the design of any tools to be employed. The Inception Report will elaborate on these terms of reference by describing how the evaluation will be carried out; mapping the issues identified in the terms of reference; refining and specifying the expectations; outlining the methodology; clarifying roles and responsibilities; identifying potential key informants, and the timeframe. The inception report will incorporate the design of the survey to be administered to affected/deployed staff members. The Inception Report should also present an outline for the Final Report.
Analysis of survey of deployed/affected staff members
Analysis of survey of deployed/affected staff members, conducted by a team member, should be submitted to the evaluation team leader and the evaluation manager.
Draft Report
The draft report of the evaluation must be submitted to the evaluation manager first, who will distribute it to the Advisory Group set up to guide the evaluation. The Evaluation Section will share the comments received with the evaluation consultant(s), who is responsible for documenting all comments received in a tabular format (including who sent them, location in the draft report, whether they were accepted or not, and, if not, why).
Final Report
The final evaluation report should be logically structured, containing evidence‐based findings, conclusions, lessons and recommendations, and should be free of information that is not relevant to the overall analysis.
The report should be presented in a way that makes the information accessible and comprehensible. The final report of the evaluation should:
1. Present main findings and conclusions up‐front in the Executive Summary and use the rest of the report for more detailed analyses and presentation of findings;
2. Focus on readers’ expectations with regard to the object of evaluation;
3. Have clear overall structure that is easy to understand;
4. Explain the evaluation questions, and be explicit about evaluation criteria and standards of performance;
5. Present negative findings constructively;
6. Use a consistent and conventional system for footnotes and references in the text,
7. Explain abbreviations and list them in a separate glossary,
8. Use tables and figures to facilitate understanding, where appropriate.
The evaluation report should provide a clear analysis of the crisis, including key events and key decision making points (and a chronology where appropriate).
Power Point Presentation
Power Point Presentation of the findings, conclusions and recommendations
Summary Précis
The evaluation précis of approximately 4 pages, providing a concise summary of the methodology and main findings, conclusions and recommendations.
Management of the Evaluation
The evaluation will be managed by OCHA’s Evaluation and Guidance Section (EGS), Policy Development and Studies Branch (PDSB), who will assign an evaluation manager to oversee the conduct and quality of the evaluation. The external consultant team (team leader) will report to the evaluation manager.
The Advisory Board (AB) will be composed of the members of the SMT or their appointed senior level representatives, with the aim to promote ownership, transparency and learning effects of evaluations. The Evaluation AB will participate in meetings convened by the evaluation manager at critical points in time and assist in guiding the evaluation process throughout its cycle. The AB will comment on the evaluation design and review the draft evaluation reports, the recommendations, the lessons identified and related follow‐up.
Use of the Evaluation
It is expected that the evaluation will contribute to organizational thinking about emergency response in OCHA and derive lessons for improving future humanitarian response operations. The conclusions and recommendations shall be discussed by the SMT. A management response matrix shall be prepared within three months of the finalization of the report.
The evaluation report will be assessed against UNEG Quality Checklist for Evaluation Reports.
Profile of the Evaluation Team - Who should apply?
The evaluation will employ the services of a consultant company / research institute which will consist of a team of 2-3 international consultants embodying the following collective experiences:
• Proven senior‐level experience and ability to provide strategic recommendations to key stakeholders;
• Good knowledge of strategic and operational management of humanitarian operations;
• Good knowledge of humanitarian system and its reforms, including of UN agencies, IFRC, NGOs, and local government disaster response structures and systems;
• Experience in engaging in or evaluating civil/military coordination;
• Experience in organizational/systems analysis;
• Demonstrated experience in conducting evaluations of humanitarian programmes;
• Experience in participatory approaches to evaluation;
• Strong analytical skills and ability to clearly synthesize and present findings, draw practical conclusions and to prepare well‐written reports in a timely manner;
• Strong workshop facilitation skills;
• Excellent writing and presentation skills in English.
• The evaluation team will be expected to adhere to the UNEG Norms and Standards and Code of Conduct for Evaluation in the UN system.
Reference: 3101_ Evaluation of OCHA Emergency Response to the Pakistan Floods. The application should contain the following:
1. CV and UN P-11 of candidates
2. Letter expressing interest and clearly identifying how the candidate meets each of the criteria/ skills listed above
Only short listed candidates will be contacted. Contracting is subject to funding.
"The United Nations does not charge a fee at any stage of the recruitment process (application, interview, meeting, processing, training or any other fees). Also, the United Nations does not concern itself with information on bank accounts"
Background
Over the course of the 2010 monsoon season, Pakistan experienced the worst floods in its history. Heavy rainfall, flash floods and riverine floods combined to create a moving body of water equal in dimension to the land mass of the United Kingdom. The floods have affected 84 districts out of a total of 121 districts in Pakistan, and more than 20 million people – one-tenth of Pakistan’s population – devastating villages from the Himalayas to the Arabian Sea. More than 1,700 men, women and children have lost their lives, and at least 1.8 million homes have been damaged or destroyed. Since heavy rainfall and flash floods claimed their first victims, flood waves continue to devastate the southern province of Sindh, where the full extent of losses and damages may not be known for several more weeks.
OCHA which had a strong presence in Pakistan ever since the 2005 earthquake has been coordinating the response to the floods with the existing humanitarian system and drawing on it’s previous experiences made during earthquakes, floods and displacement crisis.
Objectives
The evaluation will examine OCHA’s response policies, structures and processes and their overall effectiveness in execution of OCHA’s core coordination functions. The evaluation is commissioned in line with OCHA Evaluation Strategy for 2010‐2013, which calls for an evaluation of every declared corporate response. This is the second such evaluation ever conducted by the organization.
Specific objectives of the evaluation are to:
1) Examine whether meaningful results were achieved and whether OCHA successfully identified and performed its core coordination functions;
2) Examine the timeliness, relevance, effectiveness and efficiency of OCHA’s response to Pakistan earthquake and produce lessons for improving future OCHA operations;
3) Review performance of all processes and structures employed during OCHA Pakistan response;
4) Examine the extent to which the operation represents an appropriate response from OCHA in view of its mandate and priorities as laid out in the Strategic Framework; and
5) Assess adequacy and utilization of existing OCHA policies and procedures in guiding the emergency response. While the evaluation is expected to produce lessons for future emergencies, it will need to take into account the extent to which these lessons can be generalized.
In short, the evaluation will assess the performance of OCHA against the following evaluation criteria: timeliness, effectiveness, efficiency, appropriateness, coherence, and connectedness. Added to these standard criteria will be leadership effectiveness.
The key question that the evaluation will address is: How effective was OCHA in ensuring- through performing its main coordination tasks - that humanitarian assistance was delivered in a timely, cohesive and effective manner?
Focus
The evaluation will review OCHA’s response to Pakistan Floods and examine its evolution through emergency phases
1. 0 to 72 hours,
2. 72 hours‐1 week,
3. 1 week to 1 month,
4. 1 month to deactivation of corporate response, and until the evaluation team arrives
The evaluation will not focus on the results of the overall coordination effort on the affected population in Pakistan as these issues will already have been covered by the Inter‐Agency Real Time Evaluation
Methodology
The evaluation shall take into consideration results as identified through the Inter‐Agency Real Time evaluation so as to put the findings about OCHA performance into context. The evaluation will also build on various after action reviews conducted by different sections of OCHA.
The details of the methodology, including finalization of key questions, will be developed by the evaluation team and outlined in the Inception Report. Broadly, the methodology will employ participatory approaches and incorporate:
1. desk review of all relevant documentation;
2. desk review of ‘remote monitoring’ conducted by OCHA as part of the Inter‐agency Real Time Evaluation;
3. key stakeholder and focus groups interviews with:
• key informants in OCHA headquarters (Geneva and New York), and relevant field offices (Islamabad and Hubs)
• key informants who participated in the response at national and/or international level
• key informants among stakeholders (UN, (I)NGOs, government, military, donors)
4. survey of deployed/affected staff members
5. establishment of timelines to identify key events and key decision‐making points;
6. country‐level and HQ‐level workshops, including focus groups: to present initial findings, discuss emerging key issues and lessons, and formulate recommendations.
While formulating recommendations, the evaluation is expected to take into account the implications of findings and recommendations of recent real‐time evaluations of humanitarian responses and of the Cluster 2 Evaluation on OCHA.
Deliverables and Reporting Requirements
All reports listed will be written in good Standard English. If in the estimation of the EGS the reports do not meet this required standard, the evaluation team will, at their own expense, undertake the editing necessary to bring it to the required standards.
Inception Report
Inception Report will iterate the parameters and work plans to operationalize and direct each aspect of the evaluation, including the design of any tools to be employed. The Inception Report will elaborate on these terms of reference by describing how the evaluation will be carried out; mapping the issues identified in the terms of reference; refining and specifying the expectations; outlining the methodology; clarifying roles and responsibilities; identifying potential key informants, and the timeframe. The inception report will incorporate the design of the survey to be administered to affected/deployed staff members. The Inception Report should also present an outline for the Final Report.
Analysis of survey of deployed/affected staff members
Analysis of survey of deployed/affected staff members, conducted by a team member, should be submitted to the evaluation team leader and the evaluation manager.
Draft Report
The draft report of the evaluation must be submitted to the evaluation manager first, who will distribute it to the Advisory Group set up to guide the evaluation. The Evaluation Section will share the comments received with the evaluation consultant(s), who is responsible for documenting all comments received in a tabular format (including who sent them, location in the draft report, whether they were accepted or not, and, if not, why).
Final Report
The final evaluation report should be logically structured, containing evidence‐based findings, conclusions, lessons and recommendations, and should be free of information that is not relevant to the overall analysis.
The report should be presented in a way that makes the information accessible and comprehensible. The final report of the evaluation should:
1. Present main findings and conclusions up‐front in the Executive Summary and use the rest of the report for more detailed analyses and presentation of findings;
2. Focus on readers’ expectations with regard to the object of evaluation;
3. Have clear overall structure that is easy to understand;
4. Explain the evaluation questions, and be explicit about evaluation criteria and standards of performance;
5. Present negative findings constructively;
6. Use a consistent and conventional system for footnotes and references in the text,
7. Explain abbreviations and list them in a separate glossary,
8. Use tables and figures to facilitate understanding, where appropriate.
The evaluation report should provide a clear analysis of the crisis, including key events and key decision making points (and a chronology where appropriate).
Power Point Presentation
Power Point Presentation of the findings, conclusions and recommendations
Summary Précis
The evaluation précis of approximately 4 pages, providing a concise summary of the methodology and main findings, conclusions and recommendations.
Management of the Evaluation
The evaluation will be managed by OCHA’s Evaluation and Guidance Section (EGS), Policy Development and Studies Branch (PDSB), who will assign an evaluation manager to oversee the conduct and quality of the evaluation. The external consultant team (team leader) will report to the evaluation manager.
The Advisory Board (AB) will be composed of the members of the SMT or their appointed senior level representatives, with the aim to promote ownership, transparency and learning effects of evaluations. The Evaluation AB will participate in meetings convened by the evaluation manager at critical points in time and assist in guiding the evaluation process throughout its cycle. The AB will comment on the evaluation design and review the draft evaluation reports, the recommendations, the lessons identified and related follow‐up.
Use of the Evaluation
It is expected that the evaluation will contribute to organizational thinking about emergency response in OCHA and derive lessons for improving future humanitarian response operations. The conclusions and recommendations shall be discussed by the SMT. A management response matrix shall be prepared within three months of the finalization of the report.
The evaluation report will be assessed against UNEG Quality Checklist for Evaluation Reports.
Profile of the Evaluation Team - Who should apply?
The evaluation will employ the services of a consultant company / research institute which will consist of a team of 2-3 international consultants embodying the following collective experiences:
• Proven senior‐level experience and ability to provide strategic recommendations to key stakeholders;
• Good knowledge of strategic and operational management of humanitarian operations;
• Good knowledge of humanitarian system and its reforms, including of UN agencies, IFRC, NGOs, and local government disaster response structures and systems;
• Experience in engaging in or evaluating civil/military coordination;
• Experience in organizational/systems analysis;
• Demonstrated experience in conducting evaluations of humanitarian programmes;
• Experience in participatory approaches to evaluation;
• Strong analytical skills and ability to clearly synthesize and present findings, draw practical conclusions and to prepare well‐written reports in a timely manner;
• Strong workshop facilitation skills;
• Excellent writing and presentation skills in English.
• The evaluation team will be expected to adhere to the UNEG Norms and Standards and Code of Conduct for Evaluation in the UN system.
How to apply
Interested consultants should submit an expression of interest to pds@un.orgReference: 3101_ Evaluation of OCHA Emergency Response to the Pakistan Floods. The application should contain the following:
1. CV and UN P-11 of candidates
2. Letter expressing interest and clearly identifying how the candidate meets each of the criteria/ skills listed above
Only short listed candidates will be contacted. Contracting is subject to funding.
Post a Comment