Header

UNDP/GEF ADMIRE Project Mid-Term Review Consultancy GEF – Republic of the Marshall Islands- UNDP

*GEF – Republic of the Marshall Islands- UNDP*

* *

*Terms of Reference for the Mid-Term Review*

*Title: *UNDP/GEF ADMIRE Project Mid-Term Review Consultancy

*Project:* Action for the Development of Marshall Islands Renewable
Energies (ADMIRE) Project

*Duration: *20 days

*Tentative Start Date: 7th November*

*Supervisor(s): *Acting Team Leader Environment Unit, UNDP Multi Country
Office; Climate Change Mitigation Technical Adviser, UNDP Asia Pacific
Regional Centre in coordination with national executing agency

*Duty Station: * Republic of Marshall Islands (RMI)

* *

*1. **Introduction*



*1.1. **Country Context*

As a Small Island Developing State (SIDS) which has not fully exploited its
potential indigenous energy sources, RMI is currently heavily dependent on
imported fossil fuels, with petroleum accounting for more than 85% of the
country’s commercial energy consumption. Petroleum consumption is largely
responsible for GHG emissions in the RMI, mainly from the combustion of
fossil fuels for power generation and in transportation. RMI, like the other
Pacific Island Countries (PICs), has long been concerned about the serious
impacts of human-induced climate change, natural climate variability and sea
level rise in the region, particularly those impacts affecting the low-lying
atolls. While it is not obligated under the UNFCCC to lower its emissions,
the RMI accepts that its total emissions are nil, yet its emission per
capita by PICs standard is high. To mitigate GHG emissions, the country has
considered the use of renewable energy (RE) as instrumental in achieving its
sustainable socio-economic development. Although a number of small-scale
rural renewable energy (RE)-based electrification and small energy
efficiency projects have been carried out in the country over the last two
decades, their impacts have been minimal. Despite these difficult
experiences, the improved understanding of the vulnerability of RMI to the
adverse effects of climate change and the opportunities that RE can offer to
the country’s sustainable development are key reasons for the continued but
renewed effort to promote RE utilization. Furthermore, the RMI is well aware
that it is economically vulnerable to the upward trend in fossil fuel
prices.



*1.2. **Project Summary*



The Medium Sized Project (MSP) on Action for the Development of Marshall
Islands Renewable Energies (ADMIRE) Project is a Global Environment Facility
(GEF) funded project through the United Nations Development Program (UNDP).
While the Office of Environmental Planning and Policy Coordination (OEPPC)
is overall project responsible, day-to-day management rest with the Ministry
of Resources and Development (MR&D). The five year project began operation
in June 2009 and is planned to end in June 2014. The goal of the project is
the reduction of the GHG emissions from the unsustainable uses of fossil
fuel (primarily diesel fuel oil) in the RMI through the utilization of the
country's renewable energy (RE) resources. The project objective is the
removal of barriers to the utilization of available RE resources in the
country and application of renewable energy technologies (RETs). The
objectives of the projects will be achieved through: (i) Increased number of
RE hardware installations on the ground which enhances productivity and
income generation; (ii) Enhanced institutional capacity to coordinate,
finance, design, supply and maintain RE installations; (iii) Improved
accessibility of capital for RE business; (iv) Strengthened legal and
regulatory instruments to support RE dissemination, financing and marketing,
and (v) Improved awareness, skills and knowledge.



*1.3. **Project Expected Outcomes *



The main expected outcome of the project is the effective utilization, and
realization of benefits from the use, of the country’s feasible Renewable
Energy (RE) resources. The expected outcomes per project component are as
follows:



- *Outcome 1:* Improved understanding of RE potential and increased
number RE installations on the ground which enhances productivity and income
generation
- *Outcome 2:* Enhanced institutional capacity to coordinate, finance,
design, supply and maintain RE installations


- *Outcome 3: *Strengthened legal and regulatory instruments to support
RE dissemination, financing and marketing
- Outcome 4: Improved accessibility of capital for RE businesses


- Outcome 5: Improved awareness, skills and knowledge
- Outcome 6: Learning, Evaluation and Adaptive Management Increased



*2. ** Objectives of the Mid-Term Review *



The following are the overall objectives for monitoring and evaluation of
GEF projects:



a. To promote accountability for the achievement of GEF objectives
through the assessment of results, effectiveness, processes and performance
of the partners involved in GEF activities. GEF results will be monitored
and evaluated for their contribution to global environmental benefits; and,

b. To promote learning, feedback and knowledge sharing on results and
lessons learned among the GEF and its partners, as basis for decision-making
on policies, strategies, program management, and projects and to improve
knowledge and performance.



As defined in the GEF Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Policy, an evaluation
is a systematic and impartial assessment of an activity, project, program,
strategy, policy, sector, focal area or other topics. It aims at determining
the relevance, impact, effectiveness, efficiency and sustainability of the
interventions and contributions of the involved partners. An evaluation
should provide evidence-based information that is credible, reliable and
useful, enabling the timely incorporation of findings, recommendations and
lessons into the decision-making processes.



The specific objective is to undertake an independent and objective mid-term
review (MTR) of the ADMIRE as per UNDP/GEF requirements and procedures.



*3 Scope of the Mid-term Review *



The scope of the mid-term review (MTR) covers the entire UNDP/GEF-funded
project and its components as well as the co-financed components of the
project.



The MTR will assess the Project implementation taking into account the
status of the project activities and outputs and the resource disbursements
made up to date.



The evaluation will involve analysis at two levels: component level and
project level. On the component level, the following shall be assessed:



· Whether there is effective relationship and communication
between/among components so that data, information, lessons learned, best
practices and outputs are shared efficiently, including cross-cutting
issues.

· Whether the performance measurement indicators and targets used in
the project monitoring system are specific, measurable, achievable,
reasonable and time-bounded to achieve desired project outcomes.

· Whether the use of consultants has been successful in achieving
component outputs.



The evaluation will include such aspects as appropriateness and relevance of
work plan, compliance with the work and financial plan with budget
allocation, timeliness of disbursements, procurement, coordination among
project team members and committees, and the UNDP country office support. Any
issue or factor that has impeded or accelerated the implementation of the
project or any of its components, including actions taken and resolutions
made should be highlighted.


Components/Activities Budget

*Planned *

*Activities*

*Actual Accomplishment*

*As per ProDoc*

*Actual Expenditures*

*% of Actual vs. Project Budget*











































On the project level, it will assess the project performance in terms of: a)
Progress towards achievement of results; b) Factors affecting successful
implementation and achievement of results; c) Project Management framework;
and d) Strategic partnerships.



*3.1 Progress towards achievement of results* (internal and within project’s
control)



- Is the Project making satisfactory progress in achieving project
outputs vis-à-vis the targets and related delivery of inputs and activities?
- Are the direct partners and project consultants able to provide
necessary inputs or achieve results?
- Given the level of achievement of outputs and related inputs and
activities to date, is the Project likely to achieve its Immediate Purpose
and Development Objectives?
- Are there critical issues relating to achievement of project results
that have been pending and need immediate attention in the next period of
implementation?



*3.2 Factors affecting successful implementation and achievement of
results*(beyond the Project’s immediate control or project-design
factors that
influence outcomes and results)



- Is the project implementation and achievement of results proceeding
well and according to plan, or are there any outstanding issues, obstacles,
bottlenecks, etc that are affecting the successful implementation and
achievement of project results?
- To what extent does the broader policy environment remain conducive to
achieving expected project results, including existing and planned
legislations, rules, regulations, policy guidelines and government
priorities?
- Is the project logical framework and design still relevant in the light
of the project experience to date?
- To what extent do critical assumptions/risks in project design make
true under present circumstances and on which the project success still
hold? Validate these assumptions as presently viewed by the project
management and determine whether there are new assumptions/risks that should
be raised
- Is the project well-placed and integrated within the national
government development strategies, such as community development, poverty
reduction, etc., and related global development programs to which the
project implementation should align?
- Do the Project’s purpose and objectives remain valid and relevant, or
are there items or components in the project design that need to be reviewed
and updated?
- Are the Project’s institutional and implementation arrangements still
relevant and helpful in the achievement of the Project’s objectives, or are
there any institutional concerns that hinder the Project’s implementation
and progress?



*3.3 Project management* (adaptive management framework)



- Are the project management arrangements adequate and appropriate?
- How effectively is the project managed at all levels? Is it
results-based and innovative?
- Do the project management systems, including progress reporting,
administrative and financial systems and monitoring and evaluation system,
operate as effective management tools, aid in effective implementation
and provide sufficient basis for evaluating performance and decision making?
- Is technical assistance and support from project partners and
stakeholders appropriate, adequate and timely?
- Validate whether the risks originally identified in the project
document and, currently in the APR/PIRs, are the most critical and the
assessments and risk ratings placed are reasonable.
- Describe additional risks identified during the review, if any, and
suggest risk ratings and possible risk management strategies to be adopted.
- Assess the use of the project logical framework and work plans as
management tools and in meeting with UNDP-GEF requirements in planning and
reporting.
- Assess the use of electronic information and communication technologies
in the implementation and management of the project.
- On the financial management side, assess the cost effectiveness of the
interventions and note any irregularities.
- How have the APR/PIR process helped in monitoring and evaluating the
project implementation and achievement of results?



*3.4 Strategic partnerships* (project positioning and leveraging)



- Are the project partners and their other similar engagements in the
ADMIRE project, strategically and optimally positioned and effectively
leveraged to achieve maximum effect of the RE program objectives for the
country?
- Asses how project partners, stakeholders and co-financing institutions
are involved in the Project’s adaptive management framework.
- Identify opportunities for stronger collaboration and substantive
partnerships to enhance the project’s achievement of results and outcomes.
- Are the project information and progress of activities disseminated to
project partners and stakeholders? Are there areas to improve in the
collaboration and partnership mechanisms?







*4 Evaluation Methodology*



The successful MTR consultant is expected to become well versed as to the
project objectives, historical developments, institutional and management
mechanisms, activities and status of accomplishments. Information will be
gathered through document review, group and individual interviews and site
visits



At the beginning of the mission in RMI, the successful MTR consultant will
conduct an inception meeting with key stakeholders including OEPPC, MR&D,
Marshall Energy Company (MEC), and the RMI Country Development Manager
(UNDP/UNICEF/UNFPA) be followed by a de-briefing meeting to discuss the
preliminary findings and recommendations (prior to the submission of the
draft Final Report).



Prior to the mission to RMI, the successful MTR consultant shall review
relevant documents including:

· UNDP ADMIRE Project Document and GEF MSP Brief

· ADMIRE Inception Workshop Report

· Annual Work Plans/Budgets

· Annual Project Report/Project Implementation Review (API/PIR) for
2009-2010 and 2010-2011respectively

· Quarterly progress reports (QPRs)

· Financial reports (FRs)

· Combined Delivery Reports (CDRs)

· Minutes from ADMIRE Project Steering Committee meetings

· Internal monitoring results including UNDP mission reports

· MoU – ADMIRE/North REP



The successful MTR consultant should at least interview the following people
and organisations:



· OEPPC, Director

· Acting Project Manager, ADMIRE, OEPPC

· MR&D, Secretary

· Energy Advisor, MR&D

· Energy Specialist, North REP

· RMI Country Development Manager (CDM), UNDP/UNICEF/UNFPA

· UNDP Fiji Multi-country Office (MCO) in Suva

· UNDP/GEF UNDP Regional Technical Advisor for Climate Change
Mitigation in the Pacific (based in Suva)



With the aim of having an objective and independent review, the MTR
consultant is expected to conduct the project review according to
international criteria and professional norms and standards as adopted by
the UN Evaluation Group (
http://www.unevaluation.org/documentdownload?doc_id=21&file_id=562 ).

* *

*5 Qualifications and Experience *



The successful Individual consultant is expected to have the following
qualifications and experience:



a) Professional and academic qualifications in the areas of energy and
environment or other relevant fields;



b) Proven track record of very extensive experience in project and
program monitoring and evaluation (M&E) preferably in the context of GEF, in
general, and UNDP/GEF, in particular;



c) Knowledge of renewable energy and climate change projects and
national context of renewable energy project and program implementation in
Pacific Island Countries (PICs) including RMI (or alternatively familiarity
in similar country or regional situations relevant to that of RMI);



d) Experience in RMI or other PICs is considered an asset; and,



e) Excellent working knowledge of English both spoken and written.





*6. Evaluation Schedule and Deliverables *



The MTR mission to RMI is tentatively planned to commence on 7th November,
2011. A review report will be produced, highlighting important observations,
analysis of information and key conclusions including its recommendations.
The Mid-term Review Report will include, among others:



· Findings on the project implementation achievements, challenges,
and difficulties to date;

· Assessments of the progress made towards the attainment of
outcomes;

· Recommendations for modifications and the future course of action;
and,

· Lessons learned from the project structure, coordination between
different agencies, experience of the implementation, and output/outcome.



The draft report will be initially shared with the ADMIRE PMO to solicit
comments or clarifications and will be presented to the UNDP Country Office
(CO) in Suva, Fiji for further deliberations. Consequently, the final MTR
Report will be made and submitted to the UNDP CO with a copy to the ADMIRE
PMO.



*There will be two main deliverables:*



· *A de-brief power-point presentation with preliminary findings and
recommendations of the MTE; and, ***

· *Mid-Term Review report, including an executive summary, fulfilling
the requirements set out in this Terms of Reference (TOR). The final report
is to be cleared and accepted by UNDP MCO in Suva, Fiji before final
payment. The final report (including executive summary, but excluding
annexes) should not exceed 50 pages.***

* *

*Proposed Methodology and Timelines*



The successful consultant shall be engaged to undertake the review
working according
to a planned schedule to be completed before end of November 2011. The
successful contractor will have the responsibility of organizing and
completing the review, submitting the final report.

* *

The successful consultant is expected to propose a detailed work plan to
achieve the expected outputs within time.

* *

* *

* *

* *

*Proposal Submission*

Proposals should contain the following information

i) *Technical proposal* including a P11 form (available on the UNDP
website < www.undp.org.fj>), an updated
current CV, contact details of at least three referees and a cover letter
setting out:

- How the applicant meets the selection criteria
- Evaluation approach and methodology



*ii) **Financial Proposal*

The consultant is requested to provide a proposal or quotation of the
fees/cost for the services which will be rendered using the following format
and *should be separate from the technical proposal*.

* *

- Daily Consultancy rate

- Air Ticket (To & fro home country/duty station

- Living Allowance (based on the number of days spent at the
respective duty station)

- Other miscellaneous expenses (please state)

**

*Payment Schedule*

a) Twenty per cent (20%) of the maximum payable Consultancy Fee
[Professional Service] will be paid upon acceptance of a consultation
report.



b) Thirty per cent (40%) will be paid within seven (7) working days of
receipt and acceptance by the United Nations Development Program of a draft
Mid-term Review report and draft cabinet paper highlighting major findings
of the evaluation.



c) The remaining forty (40%) will be paid within seven (7) working days
of the acceptance by the United Nations Development Program of the final
Mid-term Review Report and final cabinet paper highlighting major findings
of the evaluation;

* *

*Evaluation Method*

Individual consultants will be evaluated using the UNDP cumulative analysis
method. – Combination of the weighted technical and financial score to
obtain the total score.



The award of the contract will be made to the individual consultant whose
offer has been evaluated and determined as:
a) responsive/compliant/acceptable, and
b) Having received the highest score out of a pre-determined set of weighted
technical and financial criteria specific to the solicitation.



Only technically qualified proposals will be further considered for
financial evaluation.

The designated weights for the technical and financial criteria are 70% and
30% respectively.



A

*Technical*

*(70%)*

i)

Professional and academic qualifications in the areas of energy and
environment or other relevant fields;

15%

ii)

Extensive experience in project and program monitoring and evaluation (M&E)
preferably in the context of GEF, in general, and UNDP/GEF, in particular

20%

iii)

Knowledge of renewable energy and climate change projects and national
context of renewable energy project and program implementation in Pacific
Island Countries (PICs) including RMI (or alternatively familiarity in
similar country or regional situations relevant to that of RMI);

20%

vi)

Experience in RMI or other PICs Pacific Island Countries

10%

vii)

Excellent working knowledge of English both spoken and written**

5%

B

*Financial *

*(30%)*



*Total*

*(100%)*



*APPLICATIONS SUBMISSION*



All applications must include a Results-Oriented Curriculum Vitae with full
contact details of three referees and P-11 form to be submitted by* Tuesday,
25th October, 5:30PM Fiji Time *either electronically to
ronald.kumar@undp.org or addressed under confidential cover to:

* *

Attention: Mr. Ronald Kumar

Mid Term Evaluation of Action for the Development of Marshall Islands
Renewable Energies (ADMIRE) Project

C/-- The Resident Representative

United Nations Development Programme Multi Country Office

Private Mail Bag or Level 8, Kadavu House (414 Victoria Parade)

Suva

Fiji.

* *

Incomplete & joint proposals will not be considered and only candidates for
whom there is further interest will be contacted.



Additional information including Results-Oriented Curriculum vitae format is
available from the UNDP website: www.undp.org.fj or the UNDP Office.



*Women candidates are encouraged to apply.*

**The Fiji Office covers Fiji, Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Micronesia,
Nauru, Palau, Solomon Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu and Vanuatu*

* *

*Further Information***

For further information concerning this Terms of Reference, Ms. Emma Mario,
Acting Environment Team Leader, UNDP-MCO, Suva, on email
emma.mario@undp.org/ telephone (679) 3312500