EVALUATION OF UNICEF NEPAL COUNTRY PROGRAMME ACTION PLAN (2013-2017)
TERMS OF REFERENCE
Duration: 3.5 months
Location: Kathmandu and home based
Expected Start Date: 1 July to 15 October 2016
Background
UNICEF Executive Board approved the Government of Nepal - UNICEF Country Programme Action Plan (CPAP) for 2013-2017 at its second regular session in 2012 with an indicative budget of US$144,112,000 to achieve results for children. The Country Programme contributes to the Government of Nepal’s in achieving fulfilment of the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), its Optional Protocols and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women as well as to achieving the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) with a strong focus on equity for children. National social development priorities have been considered as the basis for the Country Programme, including the Comprehensive Peace Accord, the Interim Constitution of Nepal (2007), the Common Minimum Programme of the Coalition Government, the NPA for Children (2004/5-2014/15), the national Three Year Plan (2011-2013), as well as sector-specific and multi-sectoral plans and policies (e.g. Multi-Sector Nutrition and Food Security Action Plan, Health and Education Sector-Wide Approaches, etc.). The Country Programme links to the Nepal Peace and Development Strategy (2010-2015) and 7 out of 11 UNDAF Outcomes described in the Results and Resources Framework.
The overall goal of the 2013-2017 Country Programme Action Plan is to directly address the three main sets of inequity factors (policy, system, societal) so that all children, adolescents and women have access to education, health care, nutrition, sanitation, hygiene, safe water, protection, information, and other services necessary to fulfill their rights to survival, development, protection and participation. The systems and society focused results prioritize at least 15 districts (and their municipalities and village development committees (VDCs)) considered to be the most vulnerable through the Child Deprivation Index (CDI). Following the earthquake in April and May 2015, another programme component result on emergency (PCR) was added on UNICEF’s response, early recovery and reconstruction in the 14 most severely affected districts. The main partner for the Country Programme is the Government of Nepal through its different line ministries. Furthermore, UNICEF also partners with NGOs and civil society organisations when there is a comparative advantage to do so. The summary results matrix which accompanies the CPAP and outlines the key results to be achieved by each of the programmes (with associated indicators) is attached to this TOR as Annex 1.
UNICEF’s country programme addresses child rights through the following programmes:
• Health
• Nutrition
• Water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH0
• Education
• Child Protection and
• Adolescent Development and Participation (ADAP).
These programmes are supported by the Programme Advocacy and Communication (PAC), Communication for Development (C4D), Child Friendly Local Governance (CFLG), Social Policy and Economic Analysis (SPEA), Emergency and Planning & Evaluation (P&E) sections. Due emphasis is given to mainstreaming cross-cutting principles and strategies, including but not limited to gender equality and social inclusion, urbanization, climate change and an equity approach to programming. In addition to the national office based in Kathmandu, Nepal Country Office (NCO) has three zonal offices in Biratnagar, Nepalgunj and Bharatpur to facilitate sub-national implementation of the CPAP. Following the earthquake in April 2015, five additional Emergency Sites were established in Gorkha, Dolakha, Nuwakot, Sindupalchowk and Kathmandu to support the emergency operations in the earthquake affected districts.
Nepal has experienced considerable change in recent years. The country has been able to achieve many of its targets for the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), including those on reducing poverty, reducing maternal and child deaths, increasing access to primary education, and increasing coverage of safe water supply and sanitation. Although Nepal has made progress towards meeting the MDGs, there are still key inequities that remain. Stunting rates in the Western Mountains and Far-Western Hills are around 20 and 17 percent respectively higher than the national average, while rates for stunting and underweight have been consistently highest (50%) amongst the Dalit, Muslims and other smaller ethnic/caste groups. Although Nepal significantly decreased their maternal mortality by 76 percent from 1990 to 2013 , only 11 percent of births among the poorest are attended by a skilled birth attendant, compared to 82 percent among the richest. Attendance of Early Childhood Education programs is low at 51 percent, while access to these programs for children from lower quintiles still remains a challenge. Children with disabilities consist of 1.3 percent of total enrolment (53,681 children). Disability and poverty are strongly interlinked, with the most disadvantaged regions of Mid- and Far Western districts with the highest Human Poverty Index, showing the highest percentages of enrolment of disabled children (3.7%). As the MDG cycle draws to a close, there are now opportunities in Nepal to push forward with an ambitious development and human rights agenda as the country sets new targets for the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).
Politically, Nepal has continued on a path of complex transition since the signing of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement in 2006 that ended the 10-year armed conflict. Strikes and acts of violence orchestrated by politically affiliated groups have continued throughout the transition with fluctuating periods of intensity, particularly in the Terai. The term of the first Constituent Assembly expired in early 2013; thereafter, the task of finalizing a new constitution became the responsibility of the second Constituent Assembly elected in November 2013. The Constitution of Nepal was promulgated on 28 September 2015. Following the promulgation, different Terai based political parties and ethnicity based organizations started demonstrations including sit-in protests at the customs check points in border areas between Nepal and India, expressing their dissatisfaction over a number of issues in the newly adopted Constitution in Nepal. One of the contentious issues in the Constitution is the move to federalism through the formation of seven states as opposed to the 75 districts that are currently comprise decentralized governance. The move to federalism will have major implications for local governance in Nepal and will need to be carefully considered in the development of the next country program. Local elections, last due in 2002, are still also pending, leaving continued concerns about the lack of accountability of local government administration.
On 25 April 2015, a powerful earthquake of 7.8-magnitude on Richter scale (now termed the 'Gorkha Earthquake') struck Nepal, with its epicentre in the Gorkha district, 85 km northwest of the capital Kathmandu. 14 out of 75 districts of the country were severely affected with an estimated affected population of 2.8 million (40 per cent are estimated to be children). The Ministry of Home Affairs (MOHA) reported 8,898 people were killed – out of which 30 per cent or 2,661 were children – and another 22,309 injured. The earthquake has led to a massive destruction of houses, buildings and other public infrastructure such as hospitals, health centres and schools. Humanitarian needs following the earthquakes further increased due to yet another setback when the country started facing acute fuel shortage following protests by the Terai based political parties in border areas between Nepal and India, hampering supply of essential services and petroleum products, cooking gas and essential basic commodities to Nepal. Although Nepal had made significant progress towards achieving many of the millennium development goals, the earthquakes and border issues are likely to have caused a considerable shift in vulnerability status of the population. The extent to which development gains have been eroded and the long term implications of the humanitarian situation are yet to become clear. Nepal Multiple Cluster Indicator Survey (NMICS-5) that was carried out in 2013 could serve as baseline information of the situation prior to the earthquake, while the District Health Survey (DHS) that will be carried out in 2016 could provide information on the situation following the earthquakes. In time, a comparison of key indicators of these surveys could provide insight into the impact of the humanitarian situation on development in Nepal.
In 2015, UNICEF received 80 per cent of the US$ 120 million appealed for its humanitarian work in Nepal. In responding to the earthquakes, UNICEF worked very closely with the Government and other humanitarian partners. The Contingency Plan of all the clusters were activated immediately after the April 25 earthquake, which became instrumental in coordinating with partners and in organising timely response in earthquake affected areas. UNICEF co-led with the Government and partners in five clusters (WASH, Education, Nutrition and Protection including Child Protection sub cluster), while being an active partner of health cluster. UNICEF’s primary focus of the emergency response was in the 14 severely affected districts. In addition, UNICEF is supporting early recovery priorities in health, nutrition, education, child protection and WASH including the provision of enhanced cash transfers to the most marginalised groups in 19 earthquake-affected districts using a Government-led social protection mechanism, along with a monitoring system. An evaluation of UNICEF Response and Recovery Efforts to the Gorkha Earthquake will inform any future planning processes (including country programme development) related to earthquake response and disaster risk recovery.
As UNICEF Nepal prepares its next Country Programme (2018-2022) and given the rapidly changing country context, an evaluation will be conducted of how UNICEF has adapted to recent developments as a key national player for the achievement of results for children. The implications of the emergency in relation to regular programming and the subsequent shift in priorities and partners as well as delays due to the humanitarian situation, will need to be considered in this evaluation. This evaluation will be part of a series of knowledge products (including among other documents a revised Situation Analysis, evaluations of UNDAF and UNICEF’s response and recovery efforts to the Gorkha Earthquake as well as further analysis on recent MICS data) with the aim of informing the preparation of the upcoming country programme document (CPD). The evaluation is important especially in the context where Mid-Term Review of the country programme as proposed in the CPAP was not undertaken in 2015 due to the humanitarian situation after the earthquake.
UNICEF Outcome/Output Relevance
The evaluation will assess progress towards results of the 2013-2017 CPAP and inform the formulation of the 2018-2022 Country Programme.
PURPOSE
The findings and recommendations of this evaluation – which is intended to comprise of both summative and formative elements - are expected to provide lessons and recommendations on the progress made towards the results formulated in the 2013-2017 CPAP and inform the 2018-2022 UNICEF Country Programme preparation process.
AUDIENCE
The findings will be shared with UNICEF NCO internally, particularly the Country Management Team (CMT) who are involved in strategic discussions and who are expected to provide technical oversight and guidance to the Country Programme preparation processes. The findings and recommendations will be also shared with the UNICEF Regional Office for South Asia (ROSA) and UNICEF Headquarters to serve as a justification for the formulation of the next country programme. Government counterparts and other partners will also be informed on the findings and recommendations of the evaluation to guide them in discussions in formulating the new Country Programme.
TIMELINE
The evaluation is scheduled to provide timely feedback and recommendations to inform UNICEF NCO’s next country programme (2018-2022). The evaluation findings should ideally be available before strategic consultations take place on cross-cutting issues that are scheduled to take place from mid to late 2016.
OBJECTIVES
The evaluation has the following objectives:
• Assess the relevance, effectiveness, efficiency and sustainability of existing UNICEF programmes in achieving results of the three PCRs included in the CPAP. Synergy between the three original PCRs and the emergency PCR will also be considered;
• Reconstruct and test the underlying Theory of Change of the 2013-2017 country programme;
• Identify lessons learnt and formulate recommendations on how to strengthen UNICEF’s role as a key national player for child rights in the upcoming Country Programme, particularly in light of recent developments in the national and international context (emergency, political transition, state restructuring, SDGs, UNICEF strategic plan 2014-17, etc.).
• Assess whether and how key strategies have contributed to better position UNICEF in the national development landscape of Nepal and whether and how these key strategies can accelerate and strengthen the achievement of higher level results beyond the sum of the sectoral results by the programme sections.
Scope and Evaluation Questions
The evaluation will focus on the first three years of the current Country Programme cycle (2013-2016). It will analyse the three PCRs that were initially included in the CPAP. The evaluation will examine UNICEF programme implementation through the Kathmandu office, three Zonal Offices and five Emergency Sites. As an evaluation of the emergency PCR is currently being implemented, the focus of this evaluation should be more on the three original PCRs while the emergency PCR will be considered only in terms of its synergy with the original CPAP PCRs.
The evaluation will focus particularly on the implementation strategies mentioned in the CPAP, namely through effective and evidence-based advocacy, capacity development, strategic partnerships, strengthening knowledge management, communication for development as well as through attention for cross-cutting issues of urbanization, disaster risk reduction and climate change. Furthermore, the evaluation will also cover NCO’s approach to decentralization, while considering recent constitutional changes, and support to promoting cross-sectoral collaboration within Government.
Since addressing issues of (gender) equity is a key cross-cutting component of the CPAP, the evaluation will also examine the extent to which the commitment to reduce disparities in social development outcomes has effectively been mainstreamed in UNICEF programming.
The geographic scope of the evaluation will be UNICEF’s programmatic efforts in a sample of the 15 most disadvantaged districts. In terms of the contribution of the regular program to the emergency programming, the evaluation should also consider the 19 districts that are the primary focus of the emergency response.
The evaluation will assess relevance, effectiveness, efficiency and sustainability. The evaluation will not evaluate ‘impact’ – neither in the OECD-DAC definition, nor in the sense of ‘attributable’ change. Nevertheless, where possible, the evaluation will seek to assess the effectiveness of in achieving planned results.
EVALUATION CRITERIA AND QUESTIONS :
The following evaluation questions are not exhaustive and are expected to be further refined during the inception phase.
Relevance
• To what extent are NCO’s strategies aligned with national and international development priorities and do they address related institutional, organizational and individual capacity gaps in the country? What evidence was used to inform a capacity strategy?
• What is UNICEF’s comparative advantage in relation to other stakeholders with regard to programming for child rights?
• To what extent has NCO generated and used evidence (including disaggregated information, e.g. gender, ethnicity, disability, etc.) to inform its programming and strategic approach and made adjustments when needed? To what extent do plausible Theories of Change (either implicit or explicit) form the basis of programming?
• To what extent are gender and equity concerns consistently integrated in all aspects of programming and implementation, including policy and advocacy?
Effectiveness
• To what extent did NCO meet the results, targets and indicators formulated in the CPAP 2013-2017? To what extent did each of the domains (policy, system, societal) contribute to progress towards these results?
• To what extent did interventions aimed at strengthening preparedness/DRR in the regular programme assist the delivery of the emergency response?
• How effective has UNICEF Nepal been in promoting cross-sectoral collaboration within Government?
• To what extent are programmes designed and implemented in a way to generate solid evidence from monitoring and evaluation in order to inform policy/advocacy and improved programming, including disaggregated data, e.g. in terms of gender, ethnicity, disability, etc.?
• To what extent has UNICEF’s decentralised approach to programming ensured the prioritization and implementation of children’s rights at the local level?
Efficiency
• To what extent have appropriate human, financial and technical resources been used to achieve the biggest possible positive change in a timely manner and to pursue the achievement of the objectives of Country Programme?
• To what extent meaningful partnerships or coordination mechanisms were established with other key actors, e.g. government at national and local levels, civil society, academia, etc., that avoid duplication of efforts, miscommunication and ensure clearer accountabilities?
Sustainability
• To what extent are the strategies contributing or likely to contribute to overall programme sustainability? What are the contributing or constraining factors to making a durable change?
• To what extent does UNICEF have a coherent capacity development strategy (focusing on individuals, institutions and the enabling environment) and to what extent is it implemented consistently with a view to ensuring sustainability?
• To what extent has the government integrated or scaled up programmes or interventions, including innovative approaches, initiated by UNICEF that indicate government commitment to funding or the government leveraging resources for replication?
Evaluability
Although the CPAP includes a results framework, a Theory of Change has not been developed to outline how change is expected to be achieved and the underlying assumptions. A theory of change will therefore need to be reconstructed and tested with UNICEF management. In assessing the evaluability of the CPAP, the following areas should be considered:
• Are the program goals and objectives well defined, and are they measurable?
• Are the program goals and objectives feasible, and is it realistic to assume that they can actually be attained as a result of program action?
• Is the change process presumed in the programme theory plausible?
• Are the components, activities, and functions of the program well defined and sufficient to attain the intended program goals and objectives?
• Are the resources allocated to the program and its various components and activities adequate?
Due to the limited data availability and to the broad spectrum of the evaluation, the impact criterion will not be part of this evaluation. Due to the limited timeline for the evaluation as well as its broad spectrum, the methodology will be limited to primarily desk review of existing documentation and qualitative methods.
APPROACH AND METHODS
The evaluation will go through the following interrelated processes: inception phase, consultative and analysis phase, and final report writing phase.
INCEPTION PHASE
The detailed evaluation methodology including a detailed evaluation framework scoping the work and exploration of possible approaches that will yield credible and timely evidence. The report should be in conformity with UNEG standards for inception reports and should follow the table of contents as provided in Annex 3.
The inception phase will include identification of data sources and desk review of key documents, including Situation Analysis, evaluations, research, surveys, etc. (see Annex 2 for overview of relevant documents). Discussion with UNICEF management and key stakeholders will further facilitate preparation of the inception report. To support assessment of the results, the evaluation team will need to develop an understanding of the CPAP logic framework and indicators as the basis for the evaluation.
The inception phase should further result in identification of key stakeholders, including but not limited to NPC and relevant Line Ministries, local government, development and NGO partners, and children.
DATA COLLECTION PHASE
Following the endorsement of the inception report by the reference group, the evaluation team will undertake the necessary data collection activities as per agreed schedule. At the conclusion of the data collection phase, the evaluation team presents preliminary findings of the evaluation to the reference group.
FINAL REPORT WRITING PHASE
The evaluation team will submit the draft final report in conformity with UNEG evaluation standards. The report should follow the outline as provided in Annex 4.
The report, the conclusions and preliminary recommendations of the evaluation will subsequently be presented to the reference group and relevant counterparts as part of the validation process. This presentation should also serve as a basis for consensus building while formulating recommendations that will inform the development of the next CPAP. The evaluation team will collect and incorporate feedback from the reference group and other relevant stakeholders. The final report will be submitted to the reference group for endorsement.
Data on the relevant indicators will be collected from various sources through a non-experimental design, including primary data collection primarily through application of qualitative techniques and analysis of secondary data sources. Methods will include the following:
• Desk review: Identification, collation and analysis of existing key programme documents, logic and results frameworks, literature and secondary data sources. A preliminary desk review should result in the development of an inception report, evaluation instruments and detailed work plan. The desk review will focus on the CPAP and accompanying results matrix, programmatic documents from the different programme sections, evidence from previous evaluations and research activities carried out within the framework of the Integrated Monitoring and Evaluation Plan since the beginning of the Country Programme as well as recent data emerging from surveys and monitoring systems, e.g. MICS, DHS, EMIS, HMIS, with a particular focus on disaggregated data, e.g. in terms of gender, ethnicity, disability, etc.;
• Primary data collection through qualitative methods of key informant interviews with relevant stakeholders could be used to respond to evaluation questions. Key informant interviews will be held with UNICEF staff in Kathmandu and selected Zone Offices as well as Government and NGO counterparts at central and decentralized levels.
Data analysis will involve triangulating findings from the document review and key informant interviews. Triangulation provides an important tool in shoring up evidence by using different data sources to inform the analysis of specific issues. The evaluation team will prepare an evaluation matrix to demonstrate the most appropriate and feasible data collection method for each of the evaluation questions.
Based on the proposed purpose and scope of the evaluation described in this TOR, bidders are expected to submit a technical proposal for the methodology and evaluation questions.
Deliverables
The total contract duration is 3.5 months. The assignment is expected to start from the beginning of July until half October 2016. An international and national consultant will be recruited for the evaluation. A national consultant will be primarily responsible for conducting stakeholder consultations, etc. An international consultant will be responsible for drafting key evaluation products, e.g. inception report, evaluation instruments, data analysis and final report. A final task division will be determined based on the background of the specific consultants. It would be the responsibility of the organisation to detail what tasks each would perform.
Key Task
1. Conduct initial consultations with key stakeholders and preliminary desk review of key programme documents
Produce inception report informed by desk review and preliminary consultation with stakeholders
Deliverables:
1. Inception report incl. methodology, scope of evaluation, evaluation instruments and field work schedule
Target delivery date :- 3 weeks
Lead Evaluator:- 15 Days
National Consultant:-10 Days
2. Conduct desk review, interviews, data analysis
Deliverables: Draft final report
Target delivery date :- 8 weeks
Lead Evaluator:- 30 Days
National Consultant:-15 Days
3. Produce final evaluation report and PPT while incorporating feedback.
Deliverables: Final evaluation report
Presentation of summary findings, recommendations, including for management response
Target delivery date :- 3 weeks
Lead Evaluator:- 10 Days
National Consultant:-1 Days
Total Days
Lead Evaluator:- 55 Days
National Consultant:-26 Days
Management and Coordination
OVERSIGHT
Nepal Country Office will manage the evaluation. An Evaluation Manager from Nepal Country Office will provide day-to-day management and facilitation of the evaluation process in-country, including day-to-day oversight of the evaluation team.
MANAGEMENT
The evaluation team will be answerable to the UNICEF Evaluation Manager. The team will decide on identification of key informants in consultation with the Evaluation Manager and relevant Country Office staff and stakeholders. It will inform the Evaluation Manager of any problems arising. The team will also immediately inform the Evaluation Manager of any issues regarding the integrity or effectiveness of UNICEF’s response encountered during the evaluation research.
QUALITY ASSURANCE
A Reference Committee of immediate stakeholders at the country level to ensure quality assurance. The Reference Group will include the Ministry of Finance (MoF) and NPC, other Programme Section Chiefs, UNICEF’s partners and beneficiary representative groups, such as government and non-governmental partners. The Reference Group will assess the quality of key evaluation products, including methodology and evaluation instruments, inception and final reports, particularly aimed at assessing these in the national context of post-disaster Nepal. All evaluation products will also be submitted for external quality review.
PARTICIPATION
UNICEF partners will be kept informed of the evaluation progress on a regular basis. They will be invited to the workshops and consulted on the evaluation outputs.
Ethical Considerations
The evaluation team should adhere to UN and UNICEF ethical and evaluation norms and standards:
• United Nations Evaluation Group (UNEG) Standards for Evaluation in the UN System, 2005
• United Nations Evaluation Group (UNEG) Norms for Evaluation in the UN System, 2005 (including impartiality, independence, quality, transparency, consultative process)
• Ethical Guidelines for UN Evaluations and the UNICEF procedure for ethical standards in research, evaluation, data collection and analysis will guide the overall process.
• UNICEF adapted evaluation report standards
• The evaluation should incorporate the human rights-based and gender perspective and be based on Results Based Management principles and logical framework analysis.
Profile of Evaluation Team
Given the complexity of the assignment, it is anticipated that this evaluation is conducted by a reputable agency with experience in conducting similar evaluations on institutional strengthening, strategy development and organizational development for organisations operating in the international development sector. The agency expected to have at least five years of experience in undertaking development evaluations including country programme evaluation of UN agencies. The evaluation team should comprise of at least a Lead Evaluator (international consultant) and one National Consultant.
The Lead Evaluator will play a lead role during all phases of the evaluation and coordinate/supervise the work of the National Consultant. She/he will ensure the quality of the evaluation process, outputs, methodology and timely delivery of all products. The team leader, in close collaboration with the National Consultant, will lead the inception phase including the conceptualization and design of the evaluation, guide the data collection phase, lead the drafting of the final report and lead the consultation process with stakeholders (workshop).
The key qualifications of the Lead Evaluator include:
• At least ten years of professional experience in evaluations with strong evidence of understanding global standards, theories, models and methods related to evaluation;
• Proven experience in designing, leading and conducting evaluations of similar scope, which involve critical analysis of organizational strategies and strategic positioning;
• Knowledge of current trends and issues in programming for child rights in Nepal or South Asia and of policies of the Government related to UNICEF’s work;
• Strong background in human rights-based programming approaches, including interventions addressing gender and other disparities;
• Good understanding of UNICEF programme policies, strategies and approaches an asset;
• Knowledge of current programme monitoring and evaluation theory, methodology, technology and tools;
• Demonstrated ability to deliver high-quality written work in the English language and to engage effectively with stakeholders at all levels, including at senior levels of Government and development partners.
The proposed Lead Evaluator of the bidding agencies should submit the report of the two most recent evaluations for which s/he served as a team leader.
The National Consultant will contribute to designing the evaluation, will provide inputs to the inception report and will be responsible for the collection of relevant data in the field. This consultant will work closely with the Team Leader and contribute substantively to the work of the team leader, providing advice regarding the context of Nepal. He/she will, under the overall supervision of the Team Leader, contribute to the preparation of the final report as necessary.
The key qualifications of the National Consultant include:
• At least five years’ experience in conducting research and analysis on issues relating to programmes relevant to UNICEF’s work (i.e. Health, Nutrition, Water/Sanitation, Education, Child Protection, etc.);
• Proven understanding of evaluation principles, methods, norms and standards – especially those of the United Nations Evaluation Group;
• Prior experience in evaluation and in supporting the conduct of evaluations;
• Ability to communicate with counterparts and stakeholders in Nepali;
• Proven ability to deliver high-quality written work in the English language and to engage effectively with stakeholders at all levels.
Structure and Evaluation Process
Each proposal will be assessed first on its technical merits and subsequently on its price. In making the final decision, UNICEF considers both technical and financial aspects. The Evaluation Team first reviews the technical aspects of the offer, followed by review of the financial offers of the technically compliant vendors. The proposal obtaining the highest overall score after adding the scores for the technical and financial proposals together, that offers the best value for money and will be recommended for award of the contract.
The Technical Proposal should include but not be limited to the following:
a) Detailed Methodology / approach to requirement detailing how to meet or exceed UNICEF requirements for this assignment
b) Company Profile
Detail any specific requirements
c) Details of similar assignments undertaken in last 5 years including the following information:
• Name of Client
• Title of Project
• Year and duration of project
• Scope of Project
• Outcome of Project
• Reference / Contact persons
d) Title and role of each team member
e) Proposed work plan showing detailed sequence and timeline for each activity and man days of each proposed team member
f) CV of each team member (including qualifications and experience)
g) Any project dependencies or assumptions
The Financial Proposal should include but not be limited to the following:
Bidders are expected to submit an all-inclusive financial proposal based on the terms of reference. The budget should be broken down (itemized) to show the following details:-
a) Resource costs: Daily rate multiplied by number of days
b) Estimate of travel costs (air-tickets, VISA fees, etc.)
Bidders are required to estimate travel costs in the Financial Proposal.
Please NOTE that: i) travel costs shall be calculated based on economy class fare regardless of the length of travel and ii) costs for accommodation, meals and incidentals shall not exceed the applicable daily subsistence allowance (DSA) rates, as propagated by the International Civil Service Commission (ICSC). Details can be found at http://icsc.un.org
PROPOSED PAYMENT SCHEDULE
• First installment: 30% upon submission of inception report, incl. methodology, scope of evaluation, evaluation instruments and field work schedule;
• Second Installment: 20% upon submission of draft final report;
• Final installment – 50% upon submission of final technically edited report and satisfactory completion of all deliverables.
WORKING CONDITIONS
The consultancy work will be based in Kathmandu with travel to Bharatpur (for Eastern, Central and Western regions) and Nepalgunj Zonal Offices (for Mid- and Far Western regions) where stakeholders’ workshops will be held drawing participants from representative districts. The Zonal Offices will provide necessary logistical and coordination support in organizing the workshops. A total of seven days of field travel including travel days will be required for national consultant. For International Consultant, seven days during the inception phase and three days during the finalization of the final report will be necessary. The travel cost will be reimbursed on actual basis.
UNICEF will provide a desk for the consultant. The consultants are expected to have their own laptops and mobile phones.
Technical Criteria and Relative Points (Please refer to annex for detailed information.)
Technical Criteria
1. Overall response-10 points
· Completeness of response- 5 Points
· Overall concord between RFP requirements and proposal- 5 points
·
2. Company and Key Personnel-20 Points
· Range and depth of experience with similar projects (supported by two most recent evaluations from a team leader; references from previous clients where similar work has been undertaken)- 8 Points
· Number of customers, size of projects, number of staff per project- 4 Points
· Key personnel: relevant experience and qualifications (CVs of team)- 8 Points
3. Proposed methodology and approach-40 Points
· Project and resource plan and methods – rigor and validity-20 Points
· Timeline and schedule – doable and realistic- 5 Points
· Project management, monitoring and quality assurance process- 15 Points
(Please find the Annex Attached for your reference)