1. PROJECT/PROGRAMME OVERVIEW
With the
largest intact wilderness remaining in Africa, the highest density of forest
endemic species and the longest unfragmented fringing reef in the world, the
Coastal East Africa (CEA) is a true hot spot of biodiversity. However, the
region’s extraordinary natural wealth exists alongside some of the worst human
poverty in the world. The three countries (Kenya, Tanzania and Mozambique) are
among the world’s poorest countries.
largest intact wilderness remaining in Africa, the highest density of forest
endemic species and the longest unfragmented fringing reef in the world, the
Coastal East Africa (CEA) is a true hot spot of biodiversity. However, the
region’s extraordinary natural wealth exists alongside some of the worst human
poverty in the world. The three countries (Kenya, Tanzania and Mozambique) are
among the world’s poorest countries.
The region’s
natural resource base supports the livelihood of more than 20 million people in
Kenya, Tanzania and Mozambique. However these livelihoods and the biodiversity
supporting them are under threat from unsustainable practices, poor land use
policies and poor governance in general. Moreover, local and global trade in
key natural resources products from the CEA, driven by external market forces
that fail to demand sustainability, put further pressure on biodiversity and
livelihoods of poor rural communities struggling to subsist, as well as on
national economies. This pressure is heightened by the needs of expanding
populations of mostly poor communities that are totally reliant on natural
resources base for food, water, fuel and other basic needs. Furthermore,
climate change poses a growing long-term threat to the biodiversity of the
region and the people whose hopes for a better future depend on the
preservation and sustainable use of its resource base.
natural resource base supports the livelihood of more than 20 million people in
Kenya, Tanzania and Mozambique. However these livelihoods and the biodiversity
supporting them are under threat from unsustainable practices, poor land use
policies and poor governance in general. Moreover, local and global trade in
key natural resources products from the CEA, driven by external market forces
that fail to demand sustainability, put further pressure on biodiversity and
livelihoods of poor rural communities struggling to subsist, as well as on
national economies. This pressure is heightened by the needs of expanding
populations of mostly poor communities that are totally reliant on natural
resources base for food, water, fuel and other basic needs. Furthermore,
climate change poses a growing long-term threat to the biodiversity of the
region and the people whose hopes for a better future depend on the
preservation and sustainable use of its resource base.
In 2007, WWF
decided to establish the CEA a Global Initiative (GI) -one of 13 flagship
programmes to deliver on the organization global priorities as laid out in the
Global Programme Framework. GIs are intended to be transformational
interventions implemented through concerted Network action to meaningfully
impact critical threats, opportunities, biodiversity and development targets within
priority places or on priority themes. CEA-GI Goal: BY 2025, the governments
and people of the CEA region are effectively controlling decisions over their
natural resources and exercise their responsibility for ensuring that key
ecosystems and habitats are sustainably managed.
decided to establish the CEA a Global Initiative (GI) -one of 13 flagship
programmes to deliver on the organization global priorities as laid out in the
Global Programme Framework. GIs are intended to be transformational
interventions implemented through concerted Network action to meaningfully
impact critical threats, opportunities, biodiversity and development targets within
priority places or on priority themes. CEA-GI Goal: BY 2025, the governments
and people of the CEA region are effectively controlling decisions over their
natural resources and exercise their responsibility for ensuring that key
ecosystems and habitats are sustainably managed.
To achieve
this goal, the CEA-GI strategic plan has identified four main conservation
strategies:
this goal, the CEA-GI strategic plan has identified four main conservation
strategies:
1.
Strengthening Governance and Empowerment
Strengthening Governance and Empowerment
2. Promoting
Responsible Trade
Responsible Trade
3. Securing
High Conservation Values Areas
High Conservation Values Areas
4. Low
Carbon Development
Carbon Development
For each
conservation strategy a 2025 goal and 2015 objectives and related indicators of
outcomes and results have been developed. These main strategy components are
being implemented through the delivery of work on three main thematic work areas:
Marine, Terrestrial and Governance whereby each work area is led by a dedicated
thematic leader. To enable the successful implementation of these strategies,
goals and objectives, the CEA-ÂÂâ€GI has identified four cross cutting
operational and support areas:
conservation strategy a 2025 goal and 2015 objectives and related indicators of
outcomes and results have been developed. These main strategy components are
being implemented through the delivery of work on three main thematic work areas:
Marine, Terrestrial and Governance whereby each work area is led by a dedicated
thematic leader. To enable the successful implementation of these strategies,
goals and objectives, the CEA-ÂÂâ€GI has identified four cross cutting
operational and support areas:
1) effective
communications;
communications;
2) strategic
partnerships and fundraising;
partnerships and fundraising;
3) effective
financial management and administration and
financial management and administration and
4) effective
monitoring, evaluation and reporting at sub-regional and field portfolio
levels.
monitoring, evaluation and reporting at sub-regional and field portfolio
levels.
The CEA-GI
strategic plan for 2011-2015 was approved by Shareholders Group (SHG) in 2011.
This GI is now mid-way in the implementation of its strategic plan and
following WWF practice, intends to commission the present mid-ÂÂâ€term
review.
strategic plan for 2011-2015 was approved by Shareholders Group (SHG) in 2011.
This GI is now mid-way in the implementation of its strategic plan and
following WWF practice, intends to commission the present mid-ÂÂâ€term
review.
2. REVIEW
PURPOSE AND USE, OBJECTIVES AND SCOPE
PURPOSE AND USE, OBJECTIVES AND SCOPE
Purpose and
use
use
The review
will serve to assess to what extent the GI is progressing in the right
direction according to the strategic plan, if the GI is really transformational
as expected by WWF and how well the CEA-GI is positioned to achieve its planned
objectives for 2015. The results of the review will be used by the CEA-GI team,
both the executive team and SET/SHG1 to take the necessary actions and make the
needed adjustments to the programme’s strategies, design and operations to improve
its effectiveness, efficiency and subsequent impact as well as to share any
lessons to the wider WWF community.
will serve to assess to what extent the GI is progressing in the right
direction according to the strategic plan, if the GI is really transformational
as expected by WWF and how well the CEA-GI is positioned to achieve its planned
objectives for 2015. The results of the review will be used by the CEA-GI team,
both the executive team and SET/SHG1 to take the necessary actions and make the
needed adjustments to the programme’s strategies, design and operations to improve
its effectiveness, efficiency and subsequent impact as well as to share any
lessons to the wider WWF community.
Specifically,
to provide WWF and program stakeholders with an independent assessment of:
to provide WWF and program stakeholders with an independent assessment of:
- Progress made by the programme toward the
expected outcomes and results stated in the Strategic Plan and M&E
Plan, including the main factors enabling or hindering such,
- Whether the programme design, organisation,
and funds are appropriately aligned to effectively and efficiently deliver
on the expected results; - Whether we are achieving or likely to achieve
transformational change at regional and national level that cannot be
achieved through the more traditional country office programmes. - Which parts of our strategies are or have the
highest potential to be transformational; how can we build upon this to
achieve our objectives and goals; and - What key adjustments are needed to our
approaches, workplans and ways of working, to ensure we achieve our goals
and objectives.
Scope
The review
will cover the CEA-GI portfolio of interventions for the period of 2011-2013.
will cover the CEA-GI portfolio of interventions for the period of 2011-2013.
Geographical
scope: The CEA-GI implementation is primarily in Kenya, Tanzania and
Mozambique, with some components in Madagascar.
scope: The CEA-GI implementation is primarily in Kenya, Tanzania and
Mozambique, with some components in Madagascar.
Thematic
Scope:
Scope:
a) CEA-GI
progress and effectiveness in achieving set conservation and development
objectives and goals in major thematic components (Governance, Terrestrial and
Marine); as well as the cross-cutting ‘energy’ component.
progress and effectiveness in achieving set conservation and development
objectives and goals in major thematic components (Governance, Terrestrial and
Marine); as well as the cross-cutting ‘energy’ component.
b) Links
with and contributions towards relevant regional Eastern and Southern Africa
forums and processes, including the WWF Eastern and Southern Africa Regional
Programme Office (ESARPO).
with and contributions towards relevant regional Eastern and Southern Africa
forums and processes, including the WWF Eastern and Southern Africa Regional
Programme Office (ESARPO).
c) Links and
contributions towards relevant WWF Global Priorities.
contributions towards relevant WWF Global Priorities.
3. REVIEW
GUIDING QUESTIONS
GUIDING QUESTIONS
In line with
the WWF evaluation framework, the CEA-GI review will particularly focus on the
following questions – but will not necessarily be limited to these:
the WWF evaluation framework, the CEA-GI review will particularly focus on the
following questions – but will not necessarily be limited to these:
Relevance
and Quality of Design
and Quality of Design
- How well articulated are the CEA conservation
and development goals, strategic objectives and interventions in the
context of the CEA GI 2025 goals? - Is the CEA-GI initial theory of change being
followed and is it still holding? Are there any new elements in the
context in which we work that need to be better taken into account? Have
our initial assumptions and risks proven right and how well have they been
managed? Will the existing strategic approaches and intervention portfolio
be sufficient and appropriate to achieve the expected changes? - How does the CEA-GI approach add up in a
transformational manner to what WWF wants to achieve and is doing in the
region? Does this approach really focus on the most critical, highest
leverage and highest impact issues to achieve the goals set for this
priority area? - Do the design and operation of the CEA-GI
adequately seek to mobilize the most strategic stakeholders (locally,
nationally, internationally) and thereby enhance its ability to achieve
the expected changes?
Efficiency
- How well resourced (in terms of staff,
qualifications, capacity, financial resources, shareholder Technical
Assistance support) is the CEA-GI to achieve its goals and objectives? Do
the current available resources match the ambition of the programme well? - Are there key gaps and are there strategies to
fill these (fundraising strategy, strategic partnerships)? - Are currently available resources used in the
most strategic manner to allow the CEA-GI to achieve its goals? Is the
programme delivering value for money and that costs are reasonable given
the outputs and outcomes generated? - Has the GI been provided with coherent,
sufficient, three-year or longer-term funding to implement strategies? Are
financial flows timely and efficient, without unreasonable losses to
overhead? Is fundraising for the GI well-coordinated? - Is there clear definition of
roles/responsibilities/relationships within the GI and with related WWF
operating units (ESARPO, MWIOPO, Kenya, Mozambique and Tanzania COs)? Are
there clear financial and technical support commitments as well as
concerted action being taken at all necessary levels? - Is governance of the GI efficient with clearly
defined lines of accountability and authority? Are the shareholder group
(SHG) and Shareholder Executive Team (SET) effective and efficient in
guiding and supporting the GI?
Effectiveness
- Focusing on stated objectives, desired
outcomes and intermediate results (as opposed to delivery of activities
and outputs), what has and has not been achieved? - Which strategies are proving effective and
which are not? What anticipated or unanticipated factors have helped or
impeded progress? What supporting or impeding factors might affect
successful implementation in the future? - What is the significance/strategic importance
and transformational potential of the progress made to date? How can we
build upon this and where should our focus be for the future? - What lessons can be taken and applied to
improve effectiveness in the coming years? - Are there any key lessons learned about the GI
model itself, based on the CEA-GI experience? What evidence is there that
the GI model actually improves WWF’s effectiveness by bringing innovation,
transformation and multiplication? What positive effects on WWF priorities
in the region have resulted from the CEA-GI that would likely not have
been seen in its absence? Impacts and Outcomes - Is there any evidence of change on
conservation and development targets at this stage? If yes, to what extent
can these be attributed to our work and are these solid, verifiable and in
line with the CEA-GI goals and vision?
Adaptive
Capacity
Capacity
- To what extent does the GI apply conservation
programme management best practices as embedded in the WWF
Project/Programme Management Standards? - Has the GI established a baseline status of
conservation and development targets and key success factors? - Does the choice of indicators in the GI
monitoring and evaluation plan reflect the cause-effect relationships that
build its theory of change? - Are there ongoing systematic monitoring output
delivery, outcome attainment and impact measurement, with plausible
attribution to WWF’s actions? - Is there regular reflection on efficiency,
effectiveness, impact by the GI team and its partners? Is monitoring
information being used to support regular adaptation of the strategic
approach? - Are lessons documented and shared in a manner
that is promoting learning by the GI team and the broader WWF network? - How often were the original risks and
assumptions revisited during the reviewed period? Were risks assessed
adequately and external assumptions identified realistically? Were
mitigation strategies identified and implemented by the team?
4.
METHODOLOGY CONSIDERATIONS
METHODOLOGY CONSIDERATIONS
The
evaluation methodology should include the following: A desk review of key
documents (e.g. CEA-ÂÂâ€GI strategic plan, monitoring plan, monitoring
evaluation methodology should include the following: A desk review of key
documents (e.g. CEA-ÂÂâ€GI strategic plan, monitoring plan, monitoring
framework,
progress reports, any former reviews and evaluation reports such as the
progress reports, any former reviews and evaluation reports such as the
WWF GI
Portfolio review, reports of strategic meetings, etc.). A list of reviewed
documents should be annexed to the review report.
Portfolio review, reports of strategic meetings, etc.). A list of reviewed
documents should be annexed to the review report.
Interviews
with key GI team members including samples of SHG/SET, the GI leader and key
staff members at ESARPP and the Kenya, Mozambique, Tanzania Country Offices
teams. Interviews should also be conducted with WWF supporting National
Offices, and other WWF partner programmes (MWIOPO, SFI, MTI, TRAFFIC, etc.) as
well as with representatives of key partners and stakeholders at regional and
national levels. A list of interviewed partners and stakeholders should be
annexed.
with key GI team members including samples of SHG/SET, the GI leader and key
staff members at ESARPP and the Kenya, Mozambique, Tanzania Country Offices
teams. Interviews should also be conducted with WWF supporting National
Offices, and other WWF partner programmes (MWIOPO, SFI, MTI, TRAFFIC, etc.) as
well as with representatives of key partners and stakeholders at regional and
national levels. A list of interviewed partners and stakeholders should be
annexed.
Peer review
by representatives of relevant WWF offices/programmes, through a process
involving desk review of key documents, and engagement of peer reviewers with
relevant CEA-GI team members by means of physical and/or virtual meetings.
by representatives of relevant WWF offices/programmes, through a process
involving desk review of key documents, and engagement of peer reviewers with
relevant CEA-GI team members by means of physical and/or virtual meetings.
A field
visit to at least two of the GI priority landscapes and Tanzania head office to
better understand the local context in which the programme is implemented. It
is proposed that the core review team is composed of (at least) one external
consultant and one WWF staff (external to the GI):
visit to at least two of the GI priority landscapes and Tanzania head office to
better understand the local context in which the programme is implemented. It
is proposed that the core review team is composed of (at least) one external
consultant and one WWF staff (external to the GI):
External
evaluator, Team Leader
evaluator, Team Leader
WWF Team
Member
Member
In addition,
selected representatives from relevant WWF offices/programmes will be engaged
to allow for
selected representatives from relevant WWF offices/programmes will be engaged
to allow for
experience
sharing and feedback at the thematic level. The reviewers will be requested to
propose a detailed methodology to respond to the review questions in these
ToRs, based on which final decisions will be made on the scope, the timing, the
methods and costs will be made.
sharing and feedback at the thematic level. The reviewers will be requested to
propose a detailed methodology to respond to the review questions in these
ToRs, based on which final decisions will be made on the scope, the timing, the
methods and costs will be made.
5. PROFILE
OF REVIEWERS(S) AND WWF SUPPORTING RESPONSIBILITIES
OF REVIEWERS(S) AND WWF SUPPORTING RESPONSIBILITIES
Required
Qualifications, Skills & Experience
Qualifications, Skills & Experience
-ÂÂâ€
Experience in implementing large scale regional programmes and good
understanding of
Experience in implementing large scale regional programmes and good
understanding of
the
challenges and opportunities thereof;
challenges and opportunities thereof;
-ÂÂâ€
Experience in evaluating such regional programmes;
Experience in evaluating such regional programmes;
-ÂÂâ€
Technical understanding and experience within at least one of the key thematic
areas;
Technical understanding and experience within at least one of the key thematic
areas;
-ÂÂâ€
Knowledge and understanding of the region and the stakeholders; and
Knowledge and understanding of the region and the stakeholders; and
-ÂÂâ€
Knowledge of and experience with the linkages between conservation and
development
Knowledge of and experience with the linkages between conservation and
development
(i.e. nature
and people), including social development, gender and civil society aspects.
and people), including social development, gender and civil society aspects.
WWF Support
The CEA-ÂÂâ€GI
Leader and the M&E Officer of the CEA-ÂÂâ€GI will be in charge of
consolidating and providing the
Leader and the M&E Officer of the CEA-ÂÂâ€GI will be in charge of
consolidating and providing the
necessary
information to the review, as well as coordinating the technical and logistical
aspects.
information to the review, as well as coordinating the technical and logistical
aspects.
REVIEW
PROCESS, DELIVERABLES, AND TIMELINE
PROCESS, DELIVERABLES, AND TIMELINE
The Process
and timelines
and timelines
Dates or
Deadline
Deadline
Major Review
Task/Output
Task/Output
Who is
Responsible
Responsible
Responses
from reviewers June 25, 2013 CSPU, CEA-ÂÂâ€GI, SHG/SET
from reviewers June 25, 2013 CSPU, CEA-ÂÂâ€GI, SHG/SET
Finalization
of ToR scope, methodology and July 15, 2013 CEA-ÂÂâ€GI
of ToR scope, methodology and July 15, 2013 CEA-ÂÂâ€GI
timeline and
costs based on tenders
costs based on tenders
Reviewers
contracted August 1, 2013 CEA-ÂÂâ€GI
contracted August 1, 2013 CEA-ÂÂâ€GI
Briefing by
CEA GI August 2, 2013 Evaluation Team and CEA-ÂÂâ€GI
CEA GI August 2, 2013 Evaluation Team and CEA-ÂÂâ€GI
Desk review
of key documents August 2013 (15 days) Evaluation Team
of key documents August 2013 (15 days) Evaluation Team
Interviews
August – September 2013 (15 days) Evaluation Team
August – September 2013 (15 days) Evaluation Team
Meeting with
CEA SHG/SET and team 15-ÂÂâ€16 September 2013 Evaluation Team
CEA SHG/SET and team 15-ÂÂâ€16 September 2013 Evaluation Team
Field visit
September 2013 (15 days) Evaluation Team
September 2013 (15 days) Evaluation Team
Review
report drafted and circulated to the 15 October 2013 Evaluation Team
report drafted and circulated to the 15 October 2013 Evaluation Team
relevant
team members
team members
Team
provides comments on draft report 31 October 2013 CEA-ÂÂâ€GI
provides comments on draft report 31 October 2013 CEA-ÂÂâ€GI
Final Review
report approved and presented 15 November 2013 SHG/SET
report approved and presented 15 November 2013 SHG/SET
to SHG/SET and
team
team
Deliverables
The
reviewers shall provide WWF-ÂÂâ€CEA-ÂÂâ€GI with the following:
reviewers shall provide WWF-ÂÂâ€CEA-ÂÂâ€GI with the following:
a. A
presentation of the methodology to be used for the review and an inception
report (not to
presentation of the methodology to be used for the review and an inception
report (not to
exceed 10
pages) by 15 August 2013;
pages) by 15 August 2013;
b. A draft
final review report, not to exceed 20 pages, as a digital copy in MS Word
format as per the
final review report, not to exceed 20 pages, as a digital copy in MS Word
format as per the
template
provided by WWF by 15 October 2013. The draft final report will be used for
feedback
provided by WWF by 15 October 2013. The draft final report will be used for
feedback
from CEA-ÂÂâ€GI
team, program partners and key stakeholders.
team, program partners and key stakeholders.
c. A final
review report, not to exceed 20 pages, as a digital copy in MS Word format as
per the
review report, not to exceed 20 pages, as a digital copy in MS Word format as
per the
WWF
evaluation report template by 15 November 2013. The report and key conclusions
and
evaluation report template by 15 November 2013. The report and key conclusions
and
recommendations
are to be presented to CEA-ÂÂâ€GI within one week of submitting the final
report.
are to be presented to CEA-ÂÂâ€GI within one week of submitting the final
report.
All
presentations and reports are to be submitted in English in accordance with the
deadlines specified.
presentations and reports are to be submitted in English in accordance with the
deadlines specified.
WWF retains
the sole rights with respect to all distribution, dissemination and publication
of the
the sole rights with respect to all distribution, dissemination and publication
of the
evaluation
deliverables.
deliverables.
In case appropriate,
applications by small teams of experts to a maximum of 3 will be accepted.
applications by small teams of experts to a maximum of 3 will be accepted.
The ToR for
the Team Leader of the CEA GI Mid-ÂÂâ€term Review are Annexed herewith.
Applications from
the Team Leader of the CEA GI Mid-ÂÂâ€term Review are Annexed herewith.
Applications from
candidates
should consist of:
should consist of:
• A
concise technical proposal, highlighting the experiences of the reviewer(s),
the proposed
concise technical proposal, highlighting the experiences of the reviewer(s),
the proposed
approach and
methodologies for the review process, and major steps and timings of the
process.
methodologies for the review process, and major steps and timings of the
process.
• A
financial proposal, clearly specifying time and other expenses, including unit
costs.
financial proposal, clearly specifying time and other expenses, including unit
costs.
Mid Term
Review of the Coastal East Africa Global Initiative
Review of the Coastal East Africa Global Initiative
(2010-ÂÂâ€2012)
Annex 1:
TERMS OF REFERENCE OF THE TEAM LEADER
TERMS OF REFERENCE OF THE TEAM LEADER
1.
Background Information
Background Information
The Coastal
East Africa Global Initiative (CEA GI) is a WWF initiative established in 2007
World Wide Fund
East Africa Global Initiative (CEA GI) is a WWF initiative established in 2007
World Wide Fund
for Nature
(WWF) in order to deliver on the organization global priorities as laid out in
the Global
(WWF) in order to deliver on the organization global priorities as laid out in
the Global
Programme
Framework. The CEA GI is a five years program (2010-ÂÂâ€2015) implemented in
three CEA
Framework. The CEA GI is a five years program (2010-ÂÂâ€2015) implemented in
three CEA
countries,
namely Tanzania, Kenya and Mozambique. The program is funded by WWF DENMARK,
WWF
namely Tanzania, Kenya and Mozambique. The program is funded by WWF DENMARK,
WWF
SWEDEN, WWF
UK, WWF NORWAY, WWF Switzerland, WWF Germany and WWF US. The implementing
UK, WWF NORWAY, WWF Switzerland, WWF Germany and WWF US. The implementing
partners
include WWF Country Offices in Tanzania, Mozambique, and Kenya.
include WWF Country Offices in Tanzania, Mozambique, and Kenya.
CEA-ÂÂâ€GI
Goal: BY 2025, the governments and people of the CEA region are effectively
controlling decisions
Goal: BY 2025, the governments and people of the CEA region are effectively
controlling decisions
over their
natural resources and exercise their responsibility for ensuring that key
ecosystems and
natural resources and exercise their responsibility for ensuring that key
ecosystems and
habitats are
sustainably managed.
sustainably managed.
To achieve
this goal, the CEA-ÂÂâ€GI strategic plan has identified four main
conservation strategies:
this goal, the CEA-ÂÂâ€GI strategic plan has identified four main
conservation strategies:
5.
Strengthening Governance and Empowerment
Strengthening Governance and Empowerment
6. Promoting
Responsible Trade
Responsible Trade
7. Securing
High Conservation Values Areas
High Conservation Values Areas
For each
conservation strategy a 2025 goal and 2015 objectives and related indicators of
outcomes and
conservation strategy a 2025 goal and 2015 objectives and related indicators of
outcomes and
results have
been developed. These main strategy components are being implemented through
the
been developed. These main strategy components are being implemented through
the
delivery of
work on three main thematic work areas: Marine, Terrestrial and Governance
whereby each
work on three main thematic work areas: Marine, Terrestrial and Governance
whereby each
work area is
led by a dedicated thematic leader. To enable the successful implementation of
these
led by a dedicated thematic leader. To enable the successful implementation of
these
strategies,
goals and objectives, the CEA-ÂÂâ€GI has identified four cross cutting
operational and support
goals and objectives, the CEA-ÂÂâ€GI has identified four cross cutting
operational and support
areas: 1)
effective communications; 2) strategic partnerships and fundraising; 3)
effective financial
effective communications; 2) strategic partnerships and fundraising; 3)
effective financial
management
and administration and 4) effective monitoring, evaluation and reporting at
sub-ÂÂâ€regional
and administration and 4) effective monitoring, evaluation and reporting at
sub-ÂÂâ€regional
and field
portfolio levels.
portfolio levels.
This GI is
now mid-ÂÂâ€way in the implementation of its strategic plan and following
WWF practice, intends to
now mid-ÂÂâ€way in the implementation of its strategic plan and following
WWF practice, intends to
commission
the present mid-ÂÂâ€term review. The Terms of Reference (ToR) of this review
has been
the present mid-ÂÂâ€term review. The Terms of Reference (ToR) of this review
has been
developed.
The core review team will include both external consultant (s) and one WWF
staff as an
The core review team will include both external consultant (s) and one WWF
staff as an
internal
reviewer (external to the GI). The external evaluator will be the Team Leader
of the proposed
reviewer (external to the GI). The external evaluator will be the Team Leader
of the proposed
review. This
ToR of the Team Leader forms an Annex of the main ToR for the review.
ToR of the Team Leader forms an Annex of the main ToR for the review.
2.
Experience and Qualifications of the Team Leader
Experience and Qualifications of the Team Leader
The review
team will be an interdisciplinary team comprising of experts with knowledge and
experience
team will be an interdisciplinary team comprising of experts with knowledge and
experience
in capacity
development and project management of sustainable natural resources management
in a
development and project management of sustainable natural resources management
in a
developing
country context. The review team will work with the CEA GI team, shareholders
and partners.
country context. The review team will work with the CEA GI team, shareholders
and partners.
The key
qualifications and experience of the Team Leader should be as follows:
qualifications and experience of the Team Leader should be as follows:
•
The External
Consultant should be a person external to WWF and the CEA GI
Consultant should be a person external to WWF and the CEA GI
shareholders/stakeholders
•
Demonstrated experience in conducting evaluations, as well as analyzing and
writing documents
Demonstrated experience in conducting evaluations, as well as analyzing and
writing documents
and
evaluation reports.
evaluation reports.
•
Specialist in M&E with relevant academic background and in-ÂÂâ€depth
theoretical and practical
Specialist in M&E with relevant academic background and in-ÂÂâ€depth
theoretical and practical
knowledge of
reviews and evaluations of aspects of programming of natural resources projects
reviews and evaluations of aspects of programming of natural resources projects
and
programs. Technical understanding and experience within at least one of the key
thematic
programs. Technical understanding and experience within at least one of the key
thematic
areas is
vital.
vital.
•
Experience and demonstrated capabilities in leading similar reviews or
evaluations of a similar
Experience and demonstrated capabilities in leading similar reviews or
evaluations of a similar
scale and
nature, with knowledge of relevant methodologies, value for money analysis and
nature, with knowledge of relevant methodologies, value for money analysis and
impact
assessment.
assessment.
•
Excellent writing and communication (English) skills. Knowledge in Swahili and
Portuguese will be
Excellent writing and communication (English) skills. Knowledge in Swahili and
Portuguese will be
an added
advantage.
advantage.
The roles
and responsibilities of the Team Leader will be not limited to the following:
and responsibilities of the Team Leader will be not limited to the following:
• S/He
will be the main contact person between CEA GI and the review team.
will be the main contact person between CEA GI and the review team.
• S/He
will be responsible for full implementation of the review including guiding WWF
on practical
will be responsible for full implementation of the review including guiding WWF
on practical
arrangements
such as organizing appointments and other logistics.
such as organizing appointments and other logistics.
•
Ensure timely submission of planned deliverables including timely submission of
review reports
Ensure timely submission of planned deliverables including timely submission of
review reports
(technical
and financial).
and financial).
• Lead
development and implementation of review methods, data and information
collection and
development and implementation of review methods, data and information
collection and
analysis
(qualitative and quantitative, secondary and primary).
(qualitative and quantitative, secondary and primary).
•
Interpret, assess and verification of the findings.
Interpret, assess and verification of the findings.
• In
collaboration with the CEA GI, agree on the format and prepare a draft report
of findings. The
collaboration with the CEA GI, agree on the format and prepare a draft report
of findings. The
final report
will incorporate findings from secondary data reviews, field work and peer
reviews.
will incorporate findings from secondary data reviews, field work and peer
reviews.
•
Present findings to CEA GI team, partners and shareholders, and validate
analysis and decisions.
Present findings to CEA GI team, partners and shareholders, and validate
analysis and decisions.
•
Incorporate feedback from CEA GI team, partners and shareholders into the draft
report.
Incorporate feedback from CEA GI team, partners and shareholders into the draft
report.
• Lead
the preparation of the final report (both technical and financial) and present
this to
the preparation of the final report (both technical and financial) and present
this to
WWF/CEA GI
shareholders.
shareholders.
The deadline
for receipt of proposals is 25 June 2013.
for receipt of proposals is 25 June 2013.
ALL
PROPOSALS SHOULD BE SENT TO:
PROPOSALS SHOULD BE SENT TO:
Elizabeth A.
Ngoye
Ngoye
Monitoring
and Evaluation Officer, CEA GI
and Evaluation Officer, CEA GI
engoye@wwfesarpo.org
Copying:
Nanie
Ratsifandrihamanana
Ratsifandrihamanana
Design &
Impact Advisor (Evaluations), WWF International
Impact Advisor (Evaluations), WWF International
nratsifandrihamanana@wwf.mg
Lucason
Maiga
Maiga
Operations
Manager, WWF Tanzania
Manager, WWF Tanzania
lmaiga@wwftz.org