UNLIREC TERMS OF REFERENCE

Transcription

1 TERMS OF REFERENCE -DCAF joint project Strengthening Oversight and Building Capacities for Small Arms Control in the Private Security Sector External Evaluation I. GENERAL INFORMATION Unit: Title: Duty station: Type of contract: Public Security Programme External Evaluator Home-based with travel to a maximum of two countries in Latin America. Individual Contract (IC) Duration of contract: 15 September 31 December Background The joint -DCAF project Strengthening Oversight and Building Capacities for Small Arms Control in the Private Security Sector seeks to promote good governance of the armed private security sector (LAC) through the implementation of internationally-accepted standards, norms, and good practices for small arms control and private security legislation and regulation. The national authorities, private security companies, industry associations and civil society organizations targeted in this project benefit from the delivery of tools and specialized capacity-building, and advisory and technical support. The project is an operational partnership between DCAF and which draws on expertise as well as relevant norms, standards and good practices from both the disarmament and security sector reform communities to promote shared security and development goals. The project strengthens small arms control and oversight of PSCs. It also provides forums to discuss the link between small arms and light weapons (SALW) control and the regulation of private security companies (PSC). Finally, the capacity-building component delivered at the national level leads to improved policies and procedures and a bolstered ability to implement good practices by both national authorities and PSCs. The project was launched in early 2015 in El Salvador and Peru; it expanded in 2016 to Costa Rica and in 2017 to Guatemala. In the final trimester of 2017 Jamaica and Mexico will be included as target beneficiaries. The project is financially supported by the Federal Republic of Germany.

2 2. Purpose and scope The evaluation seeks to assess the project s relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, impact and sustainability. It follows the UN Norms and Standards for Evaluation. The purpose of the evaluation is to account to the project s partners, beneficiaries and donor for results achieved and to gather lessons learnt in order to inform the planning, programming, implementation, and knowledge management of the current and follow-up project phases. 3. Methodology The evaluation will involve a mix of methods including: Desk review of project documentation (project applications; project reports) and of national and regional baseline studies drafted in the framework of the project; Joint kick-off discussion with and DCAF staff members working on the project; Interviews with project partners (SALW and private security regulators, project seminar/training participants); civil society, academic actors, and international organisations working in the field of peace and development and are knowledgeable about the challenges associated with private security in the project countries; and donor representatives (notably German Embassies). The evaluation is expected to be participatory, providing for active and meaningful involvement of a variety of stakeholders. Additional details on methodology will be proposed by the external evaluator for discussion with the evaluation management team.. Methodological rigour and quality are key elements in ensuring the evaluation s legitimacy and hence use. The evaluation process and reports must adhere to the UN Norms and Standards for Evaluation. 4. Evaluation criteria and questions Relevance Are the project interventions linked to the development and reform priorities of governments, parliaments, civil society, security and justice providers, and other key stakeholders in the partner countries? Are they planned ultimately to strengthen citizen/human security? Have efforts been made to ensure appropriateness to this context (including conflict-sensitivity)? Are the project interventions designed to address the challenges identified in the regional and national baseline studies? Are the activities and outputs of the programme consistent with the overall goal and the attainment of its objectives? Are the activities and outputs of the programme consistent with the intended impacts and effects? Are the project interventions complementary and/or synergetic with other donor-funded programmes? How innovative at the regional and international level is the project s combined approach of disarmament and Security Sector Reform expertise?

3 How do the project outcomes contribute to the implementation of international arms control instruments and good governance frameworks, norms and good practices? Effectiveness To what extent were the objectives achieved / are likely to be achieved? What were the major factors influencing the achievement or non-achievement of the objectives? Is the project implementing the right kind and amount of processes/activities to achieve the defined outputs? Is the project targeting the right stakeholders, in the right way? Are the project interventions designed in an inclusive and participatory manner and to reflect diversity? Is the project able to effectively combine disarmament and SSR approaches? To what extent is the project innovative and creative in its blending of disarmament and security sector reform approaches? To what extent does the project have a regional approach? What regional results (if any) have been achieved? Does the project dispose of a coherent lessons learnt approach to adapt the project s methodology where necessary and improve the services provided to partners? How effective is the structure and functioning of the project (adequacy of joint programming and steering; adequacy of political engagement)? Efficiency Were activities cost-efficient? Were objectives achieved on time? Was the programme or project implemented in the most efficient way compared to alternatives? Does the project s joint structure between and DCAF, reduce transaction costs for the target group, recipient and donor? Does the project contribute to increased Aid Effectiveness? Impact What has happened as a result of the programme or project? What real difference has the activity made to the beneficiaries? How many people have been affected? How does the project s impact compare to those of other actors working on the same or similar topics? Sustainability To what extent are the benefits of the project likely to continue once -DCAF support will cease? What are the major factors which influenced and will influence the achievement or nonachievement of sustainability of the programme or project? Does the project foster sustainable change and strengthen national stakeholders to carry out activities resp. processes independently?

4 5. Management of the evaluation An evaluation management team shall be set up between the donor, and DCAF representatives. This evaluation management team shall: select the evaluator(s) for the assessment; review and approve the inception report; review and comment on the draft evaluation report; review the final evaluation report. Additionally, and DCAF will provide a management response that lays out how the findings and recommendations of the final evaluation report shall be applied to the planning and programming of future project phases. 6. Responsibilities of and DCAF provide the external evaluator with the necessary documentation and contact details for beneficiaries and stakeholders; handle contractual matters and provide other assistance as needed for the smooth implementation of the evaluation. 7. Timeline The evaluation is expected to take place between mid-september and November Mid-September: Kick-off discussion and interviews with and DCAF staff members First half of October: desk review and submission of inception report (by 31 October) November: Interviews o One or two in-country visits to a project country (5 days incl. travel); o Around interviews via telephone or Skype for the other project countries (up to 5 days). By 10 December: submission of draft evaluation report; By 20 December: submission of final evaluation report. 8. Required outputs In coordination with the evaluation management team, the external evaluator will be the responsible for delivering the following products: Product 1 - An inception report which defines the process, methodology and timeline of the evaluation (max. 5 pages) 31 October 2017 Product 2 - A final evaluation report in English or Spanish of maximum 15 pages A4 (without annexes), including an executive summary of no more than 2 pages. 20 December 2017

5 9. Education and experience Individual applicants should not stand in direct or indirect relationship to the project s past, current or planned projects. Education Advanced degree in international development, social sciences or related discipline. Education Minimum of five years of practical experience in monitoring and evaluation of development programmes in relevant contexts. Demonstrable familiarity with the Norms and Standards for Evaluation in the UN System Proven experience in monitoring and evaluation Conceptual knowledge and experience in areas such as disarmament, small arms and light weapons (SALW) control, security sector governance, rule of law, public management and reforms would be desirable. Languages Fluency in written and oral English and Spanish, the working languages of the evaluation. 10. Competencies Professionalism Ability to engage diverse stakeholders on a range of technical, policy issues with high levels of discretion and ethical standards. Communication Ability to relay timely and useful information to internal and external evaluation stakeholders in English and Spanish, both verbally and in writing. Planning and Organizing- Ability to plan activities independently, effectively simultaneously with internal and external evaluation stakeholders. 11. Submission of application Qualified candidates should submit: a) UN Personal History Form (P11 Format) with contact details of two professional references b) Technical proposal of the external evaluation containing the following elements (maximum 5 pages): o Cover sheet (max. one page) containing: Name of the evaluator List of individuals who might support the external evaluator (incl. short bios) o Evaluation methodology, including preliminary evaluation matrix on the basis of the terms of reference o Evaluation plan, including a proposed timeframe and schedule

6 c) Sample of a previous similar evaluation conducted by the evaluator individually or as part of an evaluation team d) Economic proposal: total cost of the technical proposal including a budget breakdown Items a) - c) will constitute 70% of the evaluation of candidates and the economic proposal (item d) will constitute 30% of the evaluation. Applications should be submitted via to rrhh@unlirec.org in electronic version no later than 15 September 2017 with External Evaluation - Private Security Project in the subject line. Female candidate are particularly encouraged to apply. and DCAF will treat all information received in the context of the application confidentially and reserve the right to request additional information as needed from the applicant. Only shortlisted candidates will be contacted. 12. Terms of payment The payment will be made against delivery of the final product previously approved by the evaluation team. A submission of an invoice will be required. 13. Technical evaluation criteria for applicants The applications received will be assessed according to the following criteria: TECHNICAL CRITERIA TECHNICAL PROPOSAL % PRELIMINARY REVISION: COMPLIES/ Submission of the required documents in a timely manner: DOES NOT Economic proposal, including applicant s signature COMPLY Technical proposal, including applicant s signature Sample of previous evaluation UN Personal History Form, including applicant s signature Profesional references Education 8 Compliance with required profile Additional postgraduate studies / relevant courses or certifications Written and oral proficiency in both English and Spanish complies/ does not comply 8 complies/ does not comply Experience 20 Minimum of five years of practical experience in monitoring and evaluation of development programmes in relevant contexts. Proven experience in monitoring and evaluation. complies/ does not comply 70% SCORES OF APPLICANT

7 Between 7 and 10 years of practical experience 2 Between 10 and 15 years of practical experience 3 More than 15 years of practical experience 5 Knowledge and experience in disarmament and small arms and light weapons (SALW) control, 2 additional points. Specific experience in more than one country in the region, 1 additional point. Specific experience in more than three countries in the region, 2 additional points. Knowledge and experience in security sector governance and rule of law, 2 additional points. Specific experience in more than one country in the region, 1 additional point. Specific experience in more than three countries in the region, 2 additional points. Knowledge and experience in public management and reforms, 2 additional points. Specific experience in more than one country in the region, 1 additional point. Specific experience in more than three countries in the region, 2 additional points. Sample of previous similar evaluation 7 Quality 3,5 Relevance 3,5 Professional references 5 Public agency 2,5 Internacional Cooperation Technical proposal 60 Comprehensiveness 40 Methodology 20 Economic proposal TOTAL ,5 30% 100 %