TWENDE Project Mid-Term Review Consultacny Opportunity in Kenya

International Union for Conservation of Nature 

TWENDE Project Mid-term Review

1. About IUCN

The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), founded in 1948, is the world’s oldest and largest environmental organisation. Conserving and sustainable management of drylands biodiversity is central to the mission of IUCN. The goal of the organisation is to demonstrate how drylands biodiversity is fundamental to addressing some of the world’s greatest challenges such as climate change, sustainable development and food security. IUCN works toward its mission by developing hundreds of conservation projects all over the world from the local level to those involving several countries, all aimed at the sustainable management of biodiversity and natural resources.

The IUCN Eastern and Southern Africa Regional Office (ESARO) operates in twenty-four countries in the Horn of Africa, East Africa, Southern Africa and the Western Indian Ocean. The current ESARO programming is composed of a suite of mutually interrelated programs and projects designed to address some of the most profound challenges affecting people and nature in the region. Among the projects implemented by IUCN’s Eastern and Southern Africa Regional Office is the TWENDE Project - Towards Ending Drought Emergencies: Ecosystem Based Adaptation in Kenya’s Arid and Semi-Arid Rangelands. It is a five-year project funded by the Green Climate Fund (GCF). The objective of the TWENDE project is to reduce the cost of climate change induced drought on Kenya’s national economy by increasing resilience of the livestock and other land use sectors in restored and effectively governed rangeland ecosystems. The project contributes Kenya’s national policy of “Ending Drought Emergencies”, as outlined in “Kenya Vision 2030”. It strengthens climate change adaptation in Kenya’s arid and semi-arid lands (ASALs).

The project is implemented in two landscapes (Sabarwawa/Mid Tana and Chyulu Hills) encompassing 11 counties. These target landscapes face challenges of weak capacities for landscape planning, poor access to climate data and analysis, and low access to markets and financial services.

More specifically, the TWENDE project is aiming at achieving the following outcomes:

  • Outcome 1: Climate change adapted planning for drought resilience – The component ensures coordinated transboundary rangeland management decisions are strengthened by enhanced climate change analysis and participatory community and county planning. The component contributes to addressing the barriers of weak capabilities and inadequate governance institutions;
  • Outcome 2: Restoration of rangeland landscapes for ecosystem-based adaptation – The components main output is to ensure prioritized rangeland resources (including water), are brought under restoration, safeguarded and sustainably managed for improved climate change resilience;
  • Outcome 3: Climate change resilient ecosystem management for investments – Main focus is public, private and community investments in natural resources, addressing barriers related to insufficient investment in rangelands and poor access to markets and financial services.

TWENDE is implemented by IUCN (the Accredited Entity) and Government of Kenya through the Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock, Fisheries and Cooperatives (MoALFC); National Drought Management Authority (NDMA); and Conservation International (CI).

Among the different threats to rangeland biodiversity that IUCN intends to address include weakened institutions leading to break down in natural resource governance, degradation of resources, escalating conflicts, weak capacities for landscape planning, poor access to climate data and analysis, and low access to markets and financial services. The target landscapes are dry season grazing areas: critical resource zones that provide refuge during periods of drought. Their existence depends on availability of permanent water, which makes them hotspots for resource competition and land use change. They are used seasonally by large numbers of livestock keepers, often from multiple ethnic groups, following customary governance practices.

2. Rationale and Purpose

This mid-term review fulfils the IUCN Evaluation Policy[1] to conduct an independent midterm review (MTR) for the purpose of learning and reflection on project management and results. It also addresses Green Climate Fund (GCF) requirement for the Accredited Entity (AE) to conduct and submit an independent project interim/mid-term evaluation as per the Evaluation policy for the GCF[2].

It is expected that the findings and recommendations of this mid-term review will help to identify any needed course corrections in the project’s approach and activities to achieve the expected results and bring valuable external reflections to help strengthen the project and complement the MEL system of the project through an adaptive management modality.

3. Audience, key stakeholders and use

This evaluation is being commission by IUCN as the Accredited Entity (AE) to the GCF for the TWENDE project. The primary audiences for the review are the Green Climate Fund (GCF), TWENDE Project Executing Entities and Service Providers, other project stakeholders and the Project Management Unit at IUCN Kenya Country office coordinating the project. The review report will be submitted to GCF. More specifically, the intended users and uses of the review are:

  • The TWENDE project partners that include the Executing Entities and Service Providers for the purposes of assessing their mid-term performance.
  • IUCN as an Accredited Entity (AE) of project, specifically the Project Management Unit for the purpose of managing the project, and in particular, for adjustments to improve delivery of outcomes.
  • The TWENDE Project Steering Committee (PSC) for the purpose of providing strategic direction of the project.
  • The IUCN ESARO Monitoring and Learning team, for the purpose of improving the monitoring and learning approach.
  • The IUCN Forest and Land Use programme for the purpose of gathering lessons to inform future project design and implementation of other projects.
  • GCF Secretariat to demonstrate accountability for the funding received from the GCF and provide recommendations for future GCF programming as well document key lessons for replication in other projects/countries.

A management response and action plan to address recommendations from interim evaluation will be prepared by IUCN as the AE and shared with the GCF Secretariat.

4. Objectives and evaluation questions

The mid-term review will explore TWENDE’s work and achievements with the aim of assessing progress so far and providing guidance on how to maximize the potential for achieving the intended results and improve learning in its remaining timeframe (2023-2025).

Through the assessment of the performance, achievements and lessons learnt to date, the review will contribute to both learning and accountability. The specific objectives of the mid-term review are:

  • To assess the relevance of TWENDE project to address the cost of climate change induced drought in Kenya’s Arid and Semi-Arid areas across the 3 landscapes of Chyulu, Sabwarwa and Mid-tana. It will also assess the relevance of the stakeholders targeted by the intervention and the methodologies and approaches to do so.
  • To assess the effectiveness of the TWENDE project at achieving its objectives and provide clear insights about what has and has not worked so far and why.
  • To assess the efficiency in terms of value for money of the delivery of the TWENDE outputs.
  • To assess the sustainability and potential impacts of the TWENDE project and provide some indication about how the project is progressing towards delivering on its objectives.
  • To identify lessons and provide set of actionable recommendations on how the project and the project coordination/management could be adjusted for further improvement and to strengthen delivery of results.
  • To assess the progress made on compliance of the environmental and social safeguards (ESS), fiduciary standards, and gender and youth action plan.

The key evaluation criteria for the mid-term review, in line with both New IUCN evaluation Policy and the Evaluation Policy for the GCF are;

1. Relevance:

To what extent does the work of the TWENDE project address its objectives and the priority issues?

1.1. To what extent have Executing Entities (EEs) and Service Providers (SPs) been fit-for purpose?

1.2. How relevant is the TWENDE project, and in particular its outputs and impact achieved so far to the target ASAL counties in Kenya?

1.3 Is the project theory of change (TOC) and intervention logic coherent and realistic?

Does the TOC and intervention logic hold, or does it need to be adjusted?

2. Effectiveness:

To what extent is the project achieving its set targets and objectives?

  1. How effective is the TWENDE project’s modus operandi? Are the EEs adequately supported from IUCN to deliver on their outputs? How have the problems encountered been resolved?

  2. How effective are the strategies in place in reaching out and influencing the TWENDE project’s target audiences? What factors have contributed to accelerate or hinder the uptake of the project’s recommendations by its target audience(s)?

    1. To what extent is the Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning (MEL) strategy and tools set up helping to (a) answer key guiding questions, (b) detect any needed programme implementation adjustments for better progress towards results, and (c) collect the right kind of data in view of conducting an impact evaluation by the end of the project? What adjustments to the MEL system are recommended to help understand impact of the TWENDE project?
    2. Is the project achieving its set targets and expected objectives? What and how much progress has been made towards achieving the overall impacts such as adaptation beneficiaries and improved ecosystem services?

3. Efficiency:

To what extent are the TWENDE project’s outputs in balance with the level of effort, time and resources spent?

3.1 Have spending and project delivery progressed according to the planned schedule?

3.2 Are there less costly ways of achieving the same outputs?

4. Learning:

What can we learn from the way the TWENDE project is designed and implemented?

4.1 What has and what hasn’t worked well so far and what needs to be improved or done differently?

4.2 Are there lessons or best practices that can be up-scaled or replicated in similar environments?

5. Sustainability:

Are the project interventions and benefits likely to continue after the end of GCF funding?

5.1 What sustainability measures are in place?

5.2 What exit strategy does the project have?

6. Impact Orientation:

Is the project oriented towards a positive impact on people and nature?

6.1 Indications of project positive impact on nature?

6.2 Indications of positive impacts on people’s lives and livelihoods?

7. One Programme Approach:

Is the project leveraging the Union to achieve its objectives?

7.1 To what extent is TWENDE project implemented in accordance with IUCN’s One Programme Approach?

7.2 To what extent has it engage with other constituents of the Union to achieve, disseminate, strengthen, scale up or embed its outputs or outcomes?

8. Gender, indigenous peoples and youth:

8.1 To what extent has the TWENDE project’s objectives and design promoted and advanced gender equality, gender responsiveness, and/or the needs and priorities of Indigenous peoples and youth?

8.2 To what extent has the project monitored its progress with appropriately disaggregated monitoring data and with the participation of women, Indigenous peoples and/or youth?

8.3 To what extent is the project compliant to environmental and social safeguards (ESS)?

9**. Science/policy/action interface:**

9.1 How has the knowledge produced or disseminated by TWENDE relevant? Has it been effective in influencing policy or actions?

10. Country ownership of projects and programmes:

10.1 How is the project contributing to other projects/programmes within the country? are there further commitments, e.g. more co-financing towards the project?

10.2 To what extent is the project aligned with national development plans, national plans of action on climate change, or sub-national policy as well as projects and priorities of national partners?

11. Innovativeness in result areas:

11.1 To what extent may the project interventions lead to paradigm shift towards low-emission and climate-resilient development pathways?

12. Replication and scalability:

12.1 Can the project activities be scaled up in other locations within the country or replicated in other countries?

13. Unexpected results, both positive and negative

13.1 Has the project foreseen any unexpected results, both positive and negative?

  1. Methods and sources
  2. Methods, sources and analysis

This evaluation will be carried out in conformity with both GCF and IUCN Evaluation Policies. IUCN policy sets out IUCN’s institutional commitment to evaluation, and the criteria and standards for the evaluation and evaluation of its projects and programmes. IUCN’s evaluation standards and criteria are based on the widely accepted Evaluation criteria of relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, impact and sustainability, and are also in line with GCF evaluation criteria.

The evaluator(s) is expected to develop an evaluation framework based on the suggested key evaluation criteria above but may suggest additional questions or modifications. The inception report will be prepared as the first deliverable of the evaluation and will include an evaluation matrix for presenting how the key issues will be addressed, the data sources and the data collection methods that will be used for the evaluation and a set of criteria to rate the strength of the evidence collected.

The evaluation will seek the views of the stakeholders who have been engaged in the process to date to conclude whether the project is on track and expected to realise its set objectives.

The evaluator(s) is expected to use mixed methods, including:

  • Review of relevant documentation from the TWENDE project
  • Interviews of key stakeholders across all 3 landscapes (list to be provided at inception);
  • Other methods may be proposed as needed and as project resources allow, e.g. KIIs and focus group discussions.

Conclusion and recommendations should be underpinned by a strong set of evidences.

  1. Stakeholders to be consulted

Key stakeholders to be consulted are TWENDE project partners and the coordination unit (Project Management Unit), Executing Entities, Service Providers and the target groups/project beneficiaries.

  1. Sampling requirements [as needed]
  2. Outputs and deliverables

The evaluation will run from end of September to end of October 2023. The expected outputs are:

  1. An inception report including refined key evaluation questions, completed evaluation matrix;
  2. Approach to sampling stakeholders and field activities, work plan and schedule.
  3. A draft evaluation report.
  4. A final evaluation report, plus annexes (Appendices must include: Evaluation terms of reference; Data collection instruments; Evaluation schedule/timetable (including field visits); List of people met/interviewed; Documents consulted)
  5. A two-page summary of key findings, lessons, recommendations and messages from the MTR report, that can be disseminated to the wider public for general information on the project’s results and performance to date.
  6. Indicative Schedule

Outputs and deliverables

Indicative Completion date

Recruitment of consultant

30th September, 2023

Inception report

6th October, 2023

Preliminary findings presentation

15th October, 2023

Draft report

30th October, 2023

IUCN Comments on the draft report

5th November,2023

Final report

10th November, 2023

2-page summary report (actionable recommendations)

15th November, 2023

  1. Roles and responsibilities

This evaluation is being commission by IUCN-ESARO as an accredited entity to the GCF. The evaluation will be managed by the Project Management Unit (PMU) that is in charge of the TWENDE project coordination.

  1. Qualifications of the Evaluators

IUCN requires an evaluator or a team of evaluators with experience in assessing change in complex systems and with extensive expertise and knowledge in the field of climate change adaptation and resilience, land-use and restoration, ecosystem management, private sector investment, experience in value chains and markets, Incentive payment schemes assessments.

The evaluator or lead consultant shall have:

  1. At least 10 years’ experience as an evaluator and project reviews with demonstrated quantitative and qualitative data collection and analysis skills, with proven record of conducting formative, process and impact evaluation;
  2. Proven experience in evaluating similar projects, preferably drylands projects;
  3. Possess at a minimum, a Master’s degree;
  4. Complete independence from IUCN, the Executing Entities (EEs), and Government agencies;
  5. Proven experience in evaluating similar projects; Prior experience in conducting evaluation and reviews in GEF/GCF or other climate change donor funded projects would be an asset;
  6. Demonstrated experience in making realistic and actionable recommendations to improve project implementations,
  7. Experience of synthesising lessons and evidence of disseminating findings of project reviews/evaluations to donors, project partners, communities, and governments
  8. Fluency in English
  9. IUCN is an equal opportunity employer, and the successful candidate will be selected based on merit
  10. Technical Evaluation Criteria

The evaluation criteria shall consist of a technical and financial component. A weighting will be assigned to each component as follows: Technical Weighting Factor 70%, Financial Weighting Factor 30%, with the total score being a combination of these two percentages.

The evaluation of proposals shall be carried out exclusively with regards to the evaluation criteria and their relative weights specified in the table below:

Consultants Competencies

3.1

Education: Master’s in relevant field); Work experience: at least 10 years in mid-term reviews, end term reviews, demonstrated experience in making realistic recommendations to improve project implementation, experience of synthesising lessons, experience disseminating findings of project reviews/evaluations, M&E, Impact assessments, socio-economic and biophysical assessments; Program/Project M&E experience; Donor (GCF or GEF or other climate change donors) experience.

30

  1. Cost

Applicants are expected to submit a broken-down budget when submitting a proposal to IUCN. The budget is inclusive of professional/consultant fees, data collection and analysis, travel and accommodation, reporting and validation costs.

  1. Appendices

The indicative lists of documents to be shared include;

  1. IUCN Evaluation policy
  2. Evaluation policy for the GCF
  3. TWENDE Project Baseline Report
  4. TWENDE Proposal and relevant reports
  5. Gender and Youth Action Plan
  6. Environmental and Social Management Framework
  7. Annual Performance Reports (2021 and 2022)
  8. Others (as necessary)

How to apply

Interested consultants should email Technical and Financial proposal detailing the proposed approach, methodology and workplan for the assignment. The proposal should be accompanied by (i) detailed CVs outlining the consultant’s academic qualifications, previous relevant experience, contact information etc.; (ii) documented evidence e.g. (iii) and conflict of interest statement.

IMPORTANT: Submitted financial proposal must be password-protected. After the deadline has passed and within 12 hours, please send the password to the IUCN Contact.

Applications should be sent electronically (email) to Pauline.Mungo@iucn.org copying, Collins.cheruiyot@iucn.org later than 11.59p.m 25th September 2023. Late proposals will not be considered.

https://hrms.iucn.org/iresy/index.cfm?event=vac.offline.download&offline_vacancy_id=6511

 

Updated:
Related Opportunities