Source document: https://docs-lawep.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/1696588282803.pdf (Vanuatu)
TERMS OF REFERENCE Ref: PN/FJ/101/20 Consultancy Title Location Application deadline Type of Contract Post Level Languages required: Duration of Initial Contract: Project Name Mid Term Review Vanuatu BRANTV Home based 9th October 2020 Individual Contractor National Consultant -Vanuatu National Only English 35 days -starting 19th October - 5th Dec 2020 Vanuatu BRANTV Consultancy Proposal (CV & Financial proposal Template ) should be sent via email etenderbox.pacific@undp.org no later than, 9th October 2020 (Fiji Time) clearly stating the title of consultancy applied for.
Any proposals received after this date/time will not be accepted.

Any request for clarification must be sent in writing, or by standard electronic communication to procurement.fj@undp.org.

UNDP will respond in writing or by standard electronic mail and will send written copies of the response, including an explanation of the query without identifying the source of inquiry, to all consultants.
Incomplete, late and joint proposals will not be considered and only offers for which there is further interest will be contacted.

Failure to submit your application as stated as per the application submission guide (Procurement Notice) on the above link will be considered incomplete and therefore application will not be considered.

NOTE: 1.

Daily rate to be inclusive of Medical insurance cost for the duration of the contract 2.
Selected Candidate will be required to submit a proof of medical insurance prior to issuance of contract 3.

If the selected/successful Candidate is over 65 years of age and required to travel outside his home country; He/She will be required provide a full medical report at their expense prior to issuance to contract.

Contract will only be issued when Proposed candidate is deemed medically fit to undertake the assignment.

1.
1.

INTRODUCTION This is the Terms of Reference (ToR) for -the Midterm Review (MTR) of the full-sized UNDP-supported GEF- financed project titled Barrier Removal for Achieving the National Energy Road Map Targets of Vanuatu (BRANTV) (PIMS 5926) implemented through the Department of Energy, Ministry of Climate Change & MTR ToR for GEF-Financed Projects - Standard Template - June 2020 1 Natural Disaster (DOE-MCCND), which is to be undertaken on 19th October 2020.
The project started on the 9th November 2018 and is in its second year of implementation.

This ToR sets out the expectations for this MTR.

The MTR process must follow the guidance outlined in the document Guidance For Conducting Projects UNDP-Supported, Midterm ((http://web.undp.org/evaluation/documents/guidance/GEF/mid- term/Guidance_Midterm%20Review%20_EN_2014.pdf).)

GEF-Financed Reviews of 2.


PROJECT BACKGROUND INFORMATION The BRANTV project was designed to achieve the following objectives through the realization of the following key outcomes: Objectives and Key Outcomes BRANTV has the objective of enabling the achievement of the energy access, sustainable energy, and green growth targets of Vanuatu, as represented in the country’s National Energy Road Map (NERM).
The objective indicators are as follows: • Cumulative tons of incremental GHG emissions reduced from business as usual.

The targets (tons • CO2) are from 0 to 6,080.9 at project mid-term, to 45,016.1 by end of project.

Incremental number of households (with at least 20% woman-headed) in rural areas whose level of energy access is increased via village-scale off-grid RE or that benefit from newly adopting EE cook stoves.

The targets are from 0 to 8,400 at project mid-term, to 14,000 by end of project.
• Total new, incremental reductions in or newly avoided amounts of annual diesel consumption achieved.

The targets (liters Diesel Fuel Oil, DFO) are from 0 to 67,238 at project mid-term and 272,212 by end of project.

Incremental fuel wood saved annually by use of energy efficient cook stoves.

The targets (million kgs) are from 0 to 3.9 at project mid-term and 15.6 by end of project.

• The overarching objective will be achieved through seven interrelated outcomes of BRANTV: • Outcome 1.
Improved capacity and awareness on sustainable energy, energy access, and low carbon development in the energy, public, private, and residential sectors.

• Outcome 2.

Improved policy, planning, and regulatory regimes in the application of sustainable energy, energy access, and low carbon development in the energy, public, private, and residential sectors • Outcome 3.
Established institutional framework enables the effective enforcement of policies and regulations, and implementation of plans, programs, and projects, on the application of sustainable energy and low carbon technologies • Outcome 4A.

Increased availability of, and access to, financing for sustainable energy, energy access, and low carbon initiatives in the energy supply and demand sectors • Outcome 4B.
Increased financing and investments from private sector on sustainable energy and low carbon projects in the energy supply and demand sectors • Outcome 5A.

Sustainable energy and low carbon (RE and EE) techniques and practices adopted and implemented with both cost and technical viability in the energy, public, private sector, and residential sectors MTR ToR for GEF-Financed Projects - Standard Template - June 2020 2 • Outcome 5B.
Enhanced confidence in the economic and technical viability and long-term sustainability of sustainable energy and low carbon technology projects.

NOTE, per the Project Implementation Review (PIR): Travel restrictions that have been imposed due to the COVID-19 pandemic has affected the implementation of project activities.

If these restrictions will still be in effect during the next PIR reporting period, more delays are expected.
In regards the MTR, this can still proceed and the best efforts to this virtually is strongly suggested.

Location and Justification Without incremental support, Vanuatu is unlikely to meet its NERMs’ 2020 and 2030 targets.

As of 2017, about 71% of the nation’s over 270,000 people lacked access to grid electricity.

Over 80% of the population cooks over open hearth fire.

Of the off-grid population, over half have no other access to power aside from a solar lantern.
While donor efforts to improve energy access in rural areas via renewable energy (RE) have been substantial and some more limited efforts to promote energy efficient (EE) cook stoves have been initiated, results have far underperformed targets.

Particularly, it is widely agreed that sustainability of off- grid RE power systems is poor.
Even when systems are installed for free, lack of funds for repairs and lack of local access to parts and services repeatedly result in broken down systems for the long-run.

For village- scale RE power systems, in-country capabilities are extremely limited, so that the few systems set up require costly international contractors and take protracted periods to complete.

Dissemination of EE cook stoves in rural areas is virtually imperceptible.
BRANTV takes a multi-pronged approach to removing the barriers that are resulting in unsustainable, unviable, or weakly disseminated RE and EE systems.

It does so in the interrelated areas of capacity, policy and planning, institutional framework, financing, and technical and economic viability.
Central to the approach is BRANTV’s implementation of Vanuatu’s Rural Off-Grid RE and EE Promotion Program, which includes demonstration sub-programs in each of hydropower, village-scale PV, household and family compound-scale PV, EE cook stoves, and productive, livelihood-enhancing uses of RE and EE.
Critical to success of these demonstrations and their replication will be the payment and management system introduced to achieve savings for repairs of the RE systems and the nationwide road show to introduce EE cook stoves to the rural population.
Training programs, design and adoption of policy and plans, institutional coordination mechanisms, financing mechanisms, and work in sourcing, best price costing, and in-country parts supply will be carried out to influence the widespread application of low carbon technologies to achieve the energy access, sustainable energy and green growth targets of the country.

Total Budget and Planned Co-financing The total cost of the project is US$20,802,170.
This is financed through a GEF grant of US$2,639,726 and US$18,162,444 in parallel co-financing.

UNDP, as the GEF Implementing Agency, is responsible for the execution of the GEF resources and the cash co-financing transferred to UNDP bank account only.

Parallel co-financing: The actual realization of project co-financing will be monitored during the mid- term review and terminal evaluation process and will be reported to the GEF.

The planned parallel co- financing will be used as follows.
The MTR should indicate also other committed co-financing that were confirmed (leveraged or voluntary) that were not identified and confirmed during the project design and MTR ToR for GEF-Financed Projects - Standard Template - June 2020 3 inception.

At the same time, if any of the co-financing listed in the table did not materialize, provide the reasons why and the impacts on the project.
Co- financing type Co-financing amount Planned Activities/Outputs Risks Risk Mitigation Measures Co- financing source MCCND- DOE Grant 16,348,000 -Delays in progress of baseline activities leads to delays in release of funds 400 kW mini-hydro demo, 170 kW micro- hydro demo, 5 PV mini-grids, 37 institutional PV systems, numerous household-scale PV systems, one-time training with various PV systems, solar freezers for fishermen.
MCCND- DOE In-kind 714,444 -Government diverts funds to other uses Capacity building, policy and planning, establishment and operation of DOE Northern Vanuatu RE and EE Promotion Center, operation and investment of NGEF, support for incremental demos (pico-/ micro-hydro, pico-hydro PV hybrid, village-scale community PV, village- wide PV nano-grids, EE cook stoves, and MTR ToR for GEF-Financed Projects - Standard Template - June 2020 4 -Establishment of DOE Northern Vanuatu RE and EE Promotion Office will lead to increased effectiveness in implementing projects in northern areas; -BRANTV promotion of PV and extensive PV repair training will lead to faster uptake of household-scale PV systems in the market -Demos and “seeing is believing” phenomenon will maintain enthusiasm of government for project -More effective approach to RE systems management to overcome key problem of lack of sustainability of systems will attract great interest from government Grant 1,000,000 productive uses of RE), project management Solar fridges for cooperatives Ministry of Tourism, Trade, Commerce and Ni- Vanuatu Business -Delays in progress of baseline activities leads to delays in release of funds UNDP Grant 100,000 Project management -Slow rollout of funds -Establishment of BRANTV institutional coordination mechanism between DOE and Department of Cooperatives will enhance progress, with DOE being able to provide support to Dept.
of Cooperatives on the relevant demos -Ensuring project roll-out is timely and GEF funds are spent in a timely fashion will ensure UNDP funds are also made available in a timely fashion Institutional Arrangements The project will be implemented following UNDP’s national implementation modality, per the Standard Basic Assistance Agreement between UNDP and the Government of Vanuatu, and the Country Programme.
The Implementing Partner for this project is Department of Energy, Ministry of Climate Change & Natural Disaster (DOE-MCCND).

The Implementing Partner is responsible and accountable for managing this project, including the monitoring and evaluation of project interventions, achieving project outcomes, and for the effective use of UNDP and GEF resources.

The project organization structure is shown below.
MTR ToR for GEF-Financed Projects - Standard Template - June 2020 5 Project Organization Structure Project Board Senior Beneficiary: Ministry of Internal Affairs Executive: Department of Energy, Ministry of Climate Change and Natural Disaster Senior Supplier: UNDP (Team Leader, Resilience & Sustainable Development) Project Assurance: UNDP Regional Technical Advisor, and Programme Analyst) Project Management Unit: Project Manager, Project Implementation and Monitoring Officer, Project Finance and Administrative Officer National Project Director: DOE Manager of Electrification Technical Working Group: Departments: Co-operatives, Water Resources, Agriculture, Livestock, Fisheries, Tourism, Forestry, Environment, Women, Customs and Inland Revenue; Ministries: Trades, Agriculture; Authorities: URA; Private Sector: Vanuatu Chamber of Commerce.
Local Electricians: based on 4 key islands (2-3 per island), rural electricians providing part-time service as demo installers, repairers, and trainers Experts for Off-Grid RE Power Systems: national part- time water engineer; national part- time PV installation expert; and international design experts Experts for EE Cook Stoves and Crop Driers: national part- time EE cook stove/drier designer, tester, and trainer; int’l EE stove expert; local EE cook stoves artisans The Project Board is responsible for making by consensus, management decisions when guidance is required by the Project Manager, including recommendation for UNDP/Implementing Partner approval of project plans and revisions.
To ensure UNDP’s ultimate accountability, Project Board decisions should be made in accordance with standards that shall ensure management for development results, best value money, fairness, integrity, transparency and effective international competition.

In case a consensus cannot be reached within the Board, final decision shall rest with the UNDP Programme Manager.

The terms of reference for the Project Board are contained in Annex 7.
The Project Board will be chaired by the Director General of the Ministry of Climate Change and Natural Disaster (MCCND).
Individuals from the following organizations will comprise the other members of the Project Board: Department of Energy, Department of Cooperatives, Department of Water Resources, Department of Agriculture, Department of Livestock, Department of Fisheries, Department of Tourism, Department of Forestry, Department of Environment, Department of Customs and Inland Revenue, Ministry of Trades, Ministry of Agriculture, Utility Regulatory Authority, UNELCO, VUI, National Bank of Vanuatu, Bank of South Pacific, and Vanwods.
The Project Board will meet two times a year, for an aggregate eight times in total, to review the progress of the project.

The National Project Director (NPD), will be the Director, Electrification, DOE, as delegated by the Director of DOE.

The NPD will be responsible for weekly oversight of the Project Management Unit MTR ToR for GEF-Financed Projects - Standard Template - June 2020 6 (PMU), including strategic oversight and guidance to project implementation in close collaboration with UNDP.
The NPD will not be paid from the project funds but will represent a government in-kind contribution to the project.

The NPD may sign and approve the project financial reports and the financial requests for advances, or any contracts issued under NIM component of the project.

The NPD may delegate this financial responsibility to the Project Manager.

The NPD will be responsible for provision of technical and institutional coordination of the project with other government departments.
The Project Manager will run the project on a day-to-day basis on behalf of the Implementing Partner within the constraints laid down by the Board.

The Project Manager function will end when the final project terminal evaluation report, and other documentation required by the GEF and UNDP, has been completed and submitted to UNDP (including operational closure of the project).
The project assurance role will be provided by the UNDP Pacific Office, specifically the relevant Program Manager and the relevant Program Analyst.

Additional quality assurance will be provided by the UNDP Regional Technical Advisor as needed.

Partners and Stakeholders Project partners, their current and planned activities, and how BRANTV will work with them are described below: Project Partners Project Partner 1.

DOE, MCCND Most of DOE’s work Relevant Initiatives will be relevant to the project 2.
World Bank’s VREP Project Phase 2 of VREP will establish PV mini-grids, institutional PV systems, and household PV systems 3.

ADB’s Energy Access Project Project will include 400 kW Brenwei Hydro Mini-Grid System How Project Will Work with the Partner DOE permanent staff will work closely with full-time project staff across all components of BRANTV.

The project will be based in DOE offices in Port Vila and Luganville.
As the Implementing Partner, DOE will also take a leadership role, along with the MCCND, in providing direction to the project.

BRANTV will provide technical assistance to support the success of VREP Phase 2 including: high level training in PV system design and installation, extensive training on the islands in PV repair, cost-effective sourcing of PV system parts, and management system for fee-for- service RE systems.
It will further complement the selected PV configurations of VREP Phase 2 with other configurations that fill the gaps vis-à-vis the small scale of villages and the spatial distribution of villages and households typically found in Vanuatu.

BRANTV will provide technical assistance to support the success of Brenwei Hydro particularly in developing a management system for fee-for-service RE systems.
It will further complement Brenwei with the introduction of smaller scale hydro systems (pico- and small micro- hydro) that will fill the gaps vis-à-vis the small village MTR ToR for GEF-Financed Projects - Standard Template - June 2020 7 Phase 3 of the project will complete the Talise 75 kW micro-hydro mini-grid so that it can become operational Component of project that provides solar DC freezers for fishermen This project provides solar DC fridges to cooperatives This fund, developed in cooperation with GGGI, is raising funds and developing financial mechanisms to support RE and EE projects in Vanuatu.
These organizations are cooperating on water supply projects across Vanuatu.

scale and the spatial distribution of villages found in Vanuatu, as well as the need for technologies that Vanuatu nationals can master on a short time-scale for ease of maintenance and replication.

Same as for Brenwei Hydro in above cell BRANTV will complement ASCE Project’s productive use work by demonstrating village-based freezers/ ice- makers and other productive uses, such as crop-drying.
Same as for ASCE Project in above cell BRANTV will provide direct support to NGEF in the areas of: international fund raising, connecting NGEF with local proponents of off-grid RE power projects (and assisting those proponents in applying for NGEF funds), connecting NGEF with local proponents of productive use of RE (“PURE”) initiatives (and assisting those proponents in applying for NGEF funds).
BRANTV will facilitate coordination between DOE and DWR in identifying potential combined gravity drop water supply – pico-hydro projects and developing such projects.

This project will be based on the water supply development work DWR is doing with the New Zealand High Commission and UNICEF.

These organizations are carrying out rural development projects in various areas, such as fisheries, cattle breeding, etc.
BRANTV will facilitate cooperation between DOE and departments in the productive sectors to identify high- potential productive uses of renewable energy (“PURE” applications) and to identify sites for promoting RE power generation in conjunction with such applications.

This organization carries out various BRANTV will engage Department of Forestry to cooperate with DOE in identifying priority sites for EE 4.

IUCN Talise Hydro Project 5.

EU-GIZ ASCE Project 6.

SPC Solar Fridge Project 7.


National Green Energy Fund (NGEF) and GGGI 8.

Department of Water Resources (DWR), New Zealand High Commission, UNICEF 9.

National government departments in the productive sectors (including Departments of Agriculture, Livestock, Fisheries, Cooperatives, and Tourism) 10.

Department of Forestry MTR ToR for GEF-Financed Projects - Standard Template - June 2020 8 11.

Department of Environment projects to protect the nation’s forests.
This organization is carrying out various projects related to environmental protection in Vanuatu.

cook stove and EE crop dryer dissemination, as well as in actual promotion of these technologies once the sites are identified.

BRANTV will engage Department of Environment in discussion regarding policy, institutional mechanism, and implementation for a plan to ensure that PV related wastes are disposed of nationwide in a way that does not endanger the health of the natural environment.
Key project stakeholders and strategies for engaging them are given below.

Each project partner is also considered an important stakeholder of the project, but to avoid repetition, is not listed again here.

• Private sector technical and equipment companies: Such firms will be invited to be involved in the project both as learners and as bidders for demo project calls for procurement.

The project will offer high level trainings in both the pico-/small micro-hydro area and the PV area.
The project will be conducting work in identifying best cost channels for sourcing quality projects and providing expected cost breakdowns for overall systems (including parts and labor).

Local suppliers will be welcome to leverage this information to improve their sourcing of products and thus can offer products in Vanuatu at a lower price.
For products not already supplied in Vanuatu, such as quality pico-hydro equipment, the project will be conducting outreach to potential suppliers about carrying inventory.

Finally, the project will work with suppliers on developing means of ensuring that PV replacement parts (especially batteries) are available on the islands and that means of collecting PV related waste are also in place.
• Commercial banks: The project will invite commercial banks to attend its capacity building program for the banks on the financing of RE and EE technologies.

The project will further reach out to the banks regarding the development of financing mechanisms for loans to RE and EE projects – either by extending existing loan funds/ loan lines of business that they have or setting up new loan funds/ lines of business.
• • Private sector equity investors: Project will reach out to private sector entities that are potential equity investors in RE and EE projects.

The project will discuss with such entities the potential of setting up an equity fund for direct investments in RE and EE projects in Vanuatu.

Local business persons on the islands and in villages: The project will reach out to such persons about forming a local “RESCO” to manage one or more village-scale RE power systems in its area.
The project will also reach out to such persons about pursuing businesses in the areas of productive use of the RE and EE.

Further, the project will later contact such persons about the potential to develop replication projects and apply to NGEF and/ or to the private sector financing mechanism facilitated by the project for funding of such initiatives.
• Engineers / high level technical persons: The project will invite such person to participate in its high- level trainings on (i) the design and installation pico-/ small micro-hydro mini-grids and pico-hydro PV hybrid mini-grids and (ii) the design and installation of village-scale community PV systems.

• Rural electricians: The project will identify two to three such rural electricians on each of four islands: Pentecost, Santo, Gaua, and Tanna.
The project will provide training for such persons both through its training programs and through special certified electrician training.

The project will further retain these persons to carry out project activities at the demo sites and teach courses on the islands on household-scale SHS and compound-scale PV nano-grid repair.

• Artisans/ potential artisans: The project will train 30 such persons in the fabrication of EE cook stoves.
Those that pass the mastery test and show strong interest in taking up this trade will be provided by the project with the necessary tools and equipment for EE cook stove fabrication.

MTR ToR for GEF-Financed Projects - Standard Template - June 2020 9 • • Operators/ potential operators: The project will select and train a few operators from each village at which there is an incremental project demo.
The operators will be paid for their part-time work, which will consist of: operating an off-grid village RE system, preparing bills, and collecting payment, transferring funds to required account, troubleshooting basic technical problems, and notifying relevant parties of more significant technical problems.

Local villagers and indigenous people: The project will put special emphasis on engagement of local villagers, many of whom are indigenous peoples.
The project has already (during the PPG phase) consulted extensively with local people in the demo villages regarding their interest in RE and EE systems, their willingness to volunteer labor and land as needed, and their ideas for productive uses and will continue to do so during full project implementation.

The project will, during its early stages, conduct limited environmental and social impact assessments at each of the 40 incremental demo sites as part of its ESMP.
The assessments will include in-depth consultation with local people.

The work will include FPIC for indigenous peoples.

• Women: The project will put special emphasis on the involvement of women in village community meetings with the project, ensuring that 50% of participants (or at least decision-making participants) at such meetings are women.
The project will also proactively seek the involvement of women in productive use initiatives, assuring that 50% of project funds for productive uses go to initiatives mainly involving women.

• Other marginalized groups in the villages: The project will put special emphasis on ensuring such groups are involved in community decision making meetings and are prioritized for opportunities with project productive use funds and, if viable, opportunities for operator roles.
Local NGOs: The project will invite various NGOs to the project inception workshop and from there determine their interest in participation in various project activities.

The project will reach out to Vanwods in association with financing-related activities to see if there is a possibility of developing a financing mechanism with Vanwods for rural RE, EE, and/or productive use.
• • Other Countries: Learnings of BRANTV will be disseminated to other countries in the South Pacific region that may benefit via UNDP offices in the region.

3.

MTR PURPOSE The MTR will assess progress towards the achievement of the project objectives and outcomes as specified in the Project Document, and assess early signs of project success or failure with the goal of identifying the necessary changes to be made in order to set the project on-track to achieve its intended results.
The MTR will also review the project’s strategy and its risks to sustainability.

NOTE, per COVID-19 survey: There are potentials for adjusting some of the project activities (e.g., RE-based power generation demos in towns/villages) to include aspects of social use of renewable energy in the operation of community/village healthcare facilities (e.g., hospitals, health centers).
The capacity building activities can also be supplemented with training on the applications of RE-based energy supply to, and energy conserving and energy efficient operation, of healthcare facilities.

The technical assistance activities on policy, regulations and standards can be supplemented with policies and standards that are supportive of the application of RE/EE technologies/techniques and practices in the health sector.
Policy assistance in the reform of existing kerosene subsidy can be included to further strengthen the project activity on EE cook stoves promotion.

Such changes can be discussed during the next Project Board meeting.

Depending on Government's request, qualified local technicians and labourers on Port Vila, Vanuatu who may have lost their jobs due to COVID-19 could be employed for the installation of demonstration activities.
Also, locals could be employed to be part of an outreach programme that will finalize the preferred model/models for implementing village community-based solar photovoltaic technology that MTR ToR for GEF-Financed Projects - Standard Template - June 2020 10 are planned as part of Outcome 3 activities.

In both instances, a series of 'virtual training workshops' would be required in the re-skilling of qualified local capacities.

4.
4.

MTR APPROACH & METHODOLOGY The MTR report must provide evidence-based information that is credible, reliable and useful.

The MTR team will review all relevant sources of information including documents prepared during the preparation phase (i.e.
PIF, UNDP Initiation Plan, UNDP Social and Environmental Screening Procedure/SESP), the Project Document, project reports including annual PIRs, project budget revisions, national strategic and legal documents, and any other materials that the team considers useful for this evidence-based review.
The MTR team will review the baseline GEF focal area Core Indicators/Tracking Tools submitted to the GEF at CEO endorsement, and the midterm GEF focal area Core Indicators/Tracking Tools that must be completed before the MTR field mission begins.
The MTR team is expected to follow a collaborative and participatory approach1 ensuring close engagement with the Project Team, government counterparts (the GEF Operational Focal Point), the UNDP Country Office(s), the Nature, Climate and Energy (NCE) Regional Technical Advisor, direct beneficiaries, and other key stakeholders.

NOTE: The delays in project activities implementation caused by COVID-19 will affect the project beneficiaries in terms of delayed results/benefits from the project activities.
For example, the beneficiaries of the demonstration activities.

The impact could be the delayed realization of the results/benefits.

The BRANTV project mid-term review is scheduled to begin in October and complete by December 2020.

If travel restrictions are still in-place, then evaluation consultations with stakeholders will be done by virtual means.

All documents will be made available online and signing will be done by document sharing.

Engagement of stakeholders is vital to a successful MTR.
Stakeholder involvement should include interviews with stakeholders who have project responsibilities, including but not limited to the list provided under partners and stakeholders; executing agencies, senior officials and task team/ component leaders, key experts and consultants in the subject area, Project Board, project stakeholders, academia, local government and CSOs, etc.
Additionally, the MTR team (comprising a local consultant) is expected to conduct field missions to the Department of Energy in Port Vila), including the following project sites: Island Demonstration Site Village Size of System, Panel Size (Watts) Installation Date Vendor Projected GHG ERs contribution by end of project (tons) West Malo Nguna Saufeli Youth Center Utalangi 2,640 1,600 12-13 March 2020 18-19 December 2019 16.4 10.0 Savvy solar Ltd BRANTV training participants 1 For ideas on innovative and participatory Monitoring and Evaluation strategies and techniques, see UNDP Discussion Paper: Innovations in Monitoring & Evaluating Results, 05 Nov 2013.
MTR ToR for GEF-Financed Projects - Standard Template - June 2020 11 Tongoa Pele Pentecost Angoro 1,320 2,460 27-28 February 2020 April 2020 Pentecost Abwatuntora 3,300 April 2020 E-Tech Vanuatu Savvy Solar Ltd Savvy Solar Ltd 8.2 15.3 20.6 The MTR should indicate also other demonstration sites (including specifications) that may have been identified and confirmed after the project design and inception.
At the same time, if any of the demonstration sites listed in the table has been changed/replaced, the MTR should provide the reasons why and the impacts on the project.

Sites that are planned for additional installations are listed below.

The MTR should clarify whether these were identified and confirmed during the project design/inception or during the course of project implementation.
The MTR should also indicate other additional demonstration sites (including specifications) that may have been identified and confirmed after the project design and inception.

At the same time, the MTR should identify if any of the demonstration sites listed in the table has been changed/replaced, and provide the reasons why and the impacts on the project.
Location Name RE Type Site Inspection & Design Capacity Vendor Planned Installation Date Lateu, Island Toga Community Scale PV Solar Lunghariki, Loh Island Community Scale PV Solar Yegavigamena, Hiu Island Community Scale PV Solar Completed 3960 W PCS Ltd Q3 Completed 4950 W Savvy Solar Q3 Completed 3960 W Savvy Solar Q3 Community Scale PV Solar Completed 4950 W Savvy Solar Q3 Community Scale PV Solar Completed 1120 W Nerengman Community House Mota Lava Island Nerengman Market House Mota Lava Island Vinmavis, Malekula Community Scale PV Solar Nepul, Ambrym Community Scale PV Solar Completed TBC TBC Q3 Completed 1040 W E-tech Q3 MTR ToR for GEF-Financed Projects - Standard Template - June 2020 12 Olal, Ambrym Community Scale PV Solar Completed 1040 W E-tech Q3 Batnapne Family PV nano-grid solar Site inspection completed TBC TBC TBC Design progress in Sara, Epi Community Scale PV Solar Site inspection completed TBC TBC Q4 Design progress in Fingione, Emae Community Scale PV System Site inspection completed TBC TBC Q4 Design progress in Vaetini, Emae Community Scale PV System Site inspection completed TBC TBC Q4 Design progress in Liro, Pamma Family Compound PV Solar Nano-Grid Site inspection completed TBC TBC Q4 Design progress in Betarara, Maewo Community-Scale PV Solar Systems Site inspection completed TBC TBC Q4 Amatbobo, Pentecost Community-Scale PV Solar Systems – Solar Water Pump Uripiv, Malekula Community-Scale PV Solar system – Water salinization Design progress in Site inspection completed and in design progress Monitor water for 12 level months Site inspection completed and design in progress TBC TBC TBC TBC TBC TBC MTR ToR for GEF-Financed Projects - Standard Template - June 2020 13 The specific design and methodology for the MTR should emerge from consultations between the MTR team and the above-mentioned parties regarding what is appropriate and feasible for meeting the MTR purpose and objectives and answering the evaluation questions, given limitations of budget, time and data.
The MTR team must use gender-responsive methodologies and tools and ensure that gender equality and women’s empowerment, as well as other cross-cutting issues and SDGs are incorporated into the MTR report.

For this reason, bidders for this MTR consultancy assignment are required to present their proposed methodology for the MTR.
The final methodological approach including interview schedule, field visits and data to be used in the MTR must be clearly outlined in the Inception Report (when there is already a selected bidder and will be prepared by him/her) and be fully discussed and agreed between UNDP, stakeholders, and the MTR team.
The final MTR report must describe the full MTR approach taken and the rationale for the approach making explicit the underlying assumptions, challenges, strengths and weaknesses about the methods and approach of the review.

As of 11 March 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared COVID-19 a global pandemic as the new coronavirus rapidly spread to all regions of the world.

Travel to the country has been restricted since late March 2020 and travel in the country is also managed.
If it is not possible to travel to or within the country for the MTR mission then the MTR team should develop a methodology that takes this into account the conduct of the MTR virtually and remotely, including the use of remote interview methods and extended desk reviews, data analysis, surveys and evaluation questionnaires.

This should be detailed in the MTR Inception Report and agreed with the Commissioning Unit.
If all or part of the MTR is to be carried out virtually then consideration should be taken for stakeholder availability, ability or willingness to be interviewed remotely.

In addition, their accessibility to the internet/computer may be an issue as many government and national counterparts may be working from home.

These limitations must be reflected in the final MTR report.
If a data collection/field mission is not possible then remote interviews may be undertaken through telephone or online (skype, zoom etc.).

International consultants can work remotely with national evaluator support in the field if it is safe for them to operate and travel.

No stakeholders, consultants or UNDP staff should be put in harm’s way and safety is the key priority.
A short validation mission may be considered if it is confirmed to be safe for staff, consultants, stakeholders and if such a mission is possible within the MTR schedule.

Equally, qualified, and independent national consultants can be hired to undertake the MTR and interviews in country as long as it is safe to do so.

5.

DETAILED SCOPE OF THE MTR The MTR team will assess the following four categories of project progress.
See the Guidance For Conducting Midterm Reviews of UNDP-Supported, GEF-Financed Projects for extended descriptions.

If a data collection/field mission is not possible then remote interviews may be undertaken through telephone or online (skype, zoom etc.).

The international consultant can work remotely with the national evaluator support in the field if it is safe for them to operate and travel.

MTR ToR for GEF-Financed Projects - Standard Template - June 2020 14 i.
Project Strategy Project design: • Review the problem addressed by the project and the underlying assumptions.

Review the effect of any incorrect assumptions or changes to the context to achieving the project results as outlined in the Project Document.

• Review the relevance of the project strategy and assess whether it provides the most effective route towards expected/intended results.

Were lessons from other relevant projects properly incorporated into the project design?
• Review how the project addresses country priorities.

Review country ownership.

Was the project concept in line with the national sector development priorities and plans of the country (or of participating countries in the case of multi-country projects)?
• Review decision-making processes: were perspectives of those who would be affected by project decisions, those who could affect the outcomes, and those who could contribute information or other resources to the process, considered during project design processes?

• Review the extent to which relevant gender issues were raised in the project design.

See Annex 9 of Guidance for Conducting Midterm Reviews of UNDP-Supported, GEF-Financed Projects for further guidelines.

o Were relevant gender issues (e.g.


the impact of the project on gender equality in the programme country, involvement of women’s groups, engaging women in project activities) raised in the Project Document?

• If there are major areas of concern, recommend areas for improvement.
Results Framework/Log frame: • Undertake a critical analysis of the project’s log frame indicators and targets, assess how “SMART” the midterm and end-of-project targets are (Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Relevant, Time-bound), and suggest specific amendments/revisions to the targets and indicators as necessary.

• Are the project’s objectives and outcomes or components clear, practical, and feasible within its time frame?
• Examine if progress so far has led to, or could in the future catalyse beneficial development effects (i.e.

income generation, gender equality and women’s empowerment, improved governance etc...) that should be included in the project results framework and monitored on an annual basis.

• Ensure broader development and gender aspects of the project are being monitored effectively.
Develop and recommend SMART ‘development’ indicators, including sex-disaggregated indicators and indicators that capture development benefits.

ii.
Progress Towards Results Progress Towards Outcomes Analysis: • Review the log frame indicators against progress made towards the end-of-project targets using the Progress Towards Results Matrix and following the Guidance For Conducting Midterm Reviews of UNDP-Supported, GEF-Financed Projects; colour code progress in a “traffic light system” based on the level of progress achieved; assign a rating on progress for each outcome; make recommendations from the areas marked as “Not on target to be achieved” (red).
MTR ToR for GEF-Financed Projects - Standard Template - June 2020 15 Table.

Progress Towards Results Matrix (Achievement of outcomes against End-of-project Targets) Midterm Target4 Baseline Level3 Indicator2 Achieveme nt Rating6 Project Strategy Level in 1st PIR (self- reported) End-of- project Target Midterm Level & Assessment 5 Justificatio n for Rating Objective: Outcome 1: Outcome 2: Etc.

Indicator (if applicable): Indicator 1: Indicator 2: Indicator 3: Indicator 4: Etc.
Indicator Assessment Key Green= Achieved Yellow= On target to be achieved Red= Not on target to be achieved In addition to the progress towards outcomes analysis: • Compare and analyse the GEF Tracking Tool/Core Indicators at the Baseline with the one completed right before the Midterm Review.

[NOTE: The MTR should check if the stated mid-term target for the Core Indicators (6 & 11) were achieved or not.

The MTR should present the reasons for over-, or under- achievement, and provide recommendations.]
• Present and explain best estimate of the degree of removal of the barriers that are targeted to be removed in each project component.

[NOTE: There should be recommendations on: (1) How to improve the rate of barrier removal if this is currently lagging - state the factors that are causing or contributing to the lag in barrier removal and recommend ways to address them.
(2) How to at least sustain the rate of barrier removal if this is currently on-track (or even ahead of schedule) – state the factors that may prevent this and recommend ways to address them.]

Identify remaining barriers to achieving the project objective in the remainder of the project.

Specify the % removal as of mid-term of each remaining barrier.

Identify other barriers that may have occurred during the 1st half of the project implementation and recommend actions to address them.
[NOTE: The additional barriers may not necessarily be those that hinder the implementation of RE/EE in Vanuatu, but barriers to the implementation of the BRANTV Project (e.g.

COVID-19).

• • • By reviewing the aspects of the project that have already been successful, identify ways in which the project can further expand these benefits.
The MTR must provide clear conclusions about the following: (a) the estimated overall percentage completion of project by mid-term; (b) the estimated percentage achievement of the project objective; (c) the percentage removal of each major barrier categories; and (d) the percent chance or probability that the project will be completed, project objective is achieved, and all barriers are removed by (i) the 2 Populate with data from the Log frame and scorecards 3 Populate with data from the Project Document 4 If available 5 Color code this column only 6 Use the 6 point Progress Towards Results Rating Scale: HS, S, MS, MU, U, HU MTR ToR for GEF-Financed Projects - Standard Template - June 2020 16 original project completion date; and, (ii) by the completion date that will be allowed in case a project implementation period extension is requested.
Considering the conclusions that will be drawn, the MTR must provide realistically achievable recommended actions to make rectification of any “not favorable” conclusions.

Make sure that the recommended actions include suggestions on how to, who will, and when to, carry them out.

iii.

Project Implementation and Adaptive Management Management Arrangements: • Review overall effectiveness of project management as outlined in the Project Document.

Have changes been made and are they effective?


Are responsibilities and reporting lines clear?

Is decision- making transparent and undertaken in a timely manner?

Recommend areas for improvement.

• Review the quality of execution of the Executing Agency/Implementing Partner(s) and recommend areas for improvement.

• Review the quality of support provided by the GEF Partner Agency (UNDP) and recommend areas for improvement.
• Do the Executing Agency/Implementing Partner and/or UNDP and other partners have the capacity to deliver benefits to or involve women?

If yes, how?

• What is the gender balance of project staff?

What steps have been taken to ensure gender balance in project staff?

• What is the gender balance of the Project Board?

What steps have been taken to ensure gender balance in the Project Board?
Work Planning: • Review any delays in project start-up and implementation, identify the causes and examine if they have been resolved.

• Are work-planning processes results-based?

If not, suggest ways to re-orientate work planning to focus on results?

• Examine the use of the project’s results framework/ log frame as a management tool and review any changes made to it since project start.
Finance and co-finance: • Consider the financial management of the project, with specific reference to the cost-effectiveness of interventions.

• Review the changes to fund allocations as a result of budget revisions and assess the appropriateness and relevance of such revisions.

• • Does the project have the appropriate financial controls, including reporting and planning, that allow management to make informed decisions regarding the budget and allow for timely flow of funds?
Informed by the co-financing monitoring table to be filled out by the Commissioning Unit and project team, provide commentary on co-financing: is co-financing being used strategically to help the objectives of the project?

Is the Project Team meeting with all co-financing partners regularly in order to align financing priorities and annual work plans?
Sources of Co- financing Name of Co- financer Type of Co- financing Co-financing amount confirmed at CEO Actual Amount Contributed at stage of Actual % of Expected Amount MTR ToR for GEF-Financed Projects - Standard Template - June 2020 17 Endorsement (US$) Midterm Review (US$) TOTAL • Include the separate GEF Co-Financing template (filled out by the Commissioning Unit and project team) which categorizes each co-financing amount as ‘investment mobilized’ or ‘recurrent expenditures’.
(This template will be annexed as a separate file.)

Project-level Monitoring and Evaluation Systems: • Review the monitoring tools currently being used: Do they provide the necessary information?

Do they involve key partners?

Are they aligned or mainstreamed with national systems?

Do they use existing information?

Are they efficient?

Are they cost-effective?

Are additional tools required?

How could they be made more participatory and inclusive?
• Examine the financial management of the project monitoring and evaluation budget.

Are sufficient resources being allocated to monitoring and evaluation?

Are these resources being allocated effectively?

• Review the extent to which relevant gender issues were incorporated in monitoring systems.

See Annex 9 of Guidance for Conducting Midterm Reviews of UNDP-Supported, GEF-Financed Projects for further guidelines.
Stakeholder Engagement: • Project management: Has the project developed and leveraged the necessary and appropriate partnerships with direct and tangential stakeholders?

• Participation and country-driven processes: Do local and national government stakeholders support the objectives of the project?

Do they continue to have an active role in project decision-making that supports efficient and effective project implementation?
• Participation and public awareness: To what extent has stakeholder involvement and public awareness contributed to the progress towards achievement of project objectives?

• How does the project engage women and girls?

Is the project likely to have the same positive and/or negative effects on women and men, girls and boys?

Identify, if possible, legal, cultural, or religious constraints on women’s participation in the project.

What can the project do to enhance its gender benefits?
Social and Environmental Standards (Safeguards) • Validate the risks identified in the project’s most current SESP, and those risks’ ratings; are any revisions needed?

Summarize and assess the revisions made since CEO Endorsement/Approval (if any) to: • o The project’s overall safeguards risk categorization.

o The identified types of risks7 (in the SESP).

o The individual risk ratings (in the SESP).
7 Risks are to be labeled with both the UNDP SES Principles and Standards, and the GEF’s “types of risks and potential impacts”: Climate Change and Disaster; Disadvantaged or Vulnerable Individuals or Groups; Disability Inclusion; Adverse Gender-Related impact, including Gender-based Violence and Sexual Exploitation; Biodiversity Conservation and the Sustainable Management of Living Natural Resources; Restrictions on Land Use and Involuntary Resettlement; Indigenous Peoples; Cultural Heritage; Resource Efficiency and Pollution Prevention; Labor and Working Conditions; Community Health, Safety and Security.
MTR ToR for GEF-Financed Projects - Standard Template - June 2020 18 • Describe and assess progress made in the implementation of the project’s social and environmental management measures as outlined in the SESP submitted at CEO Endorsement/Approval (and prepared during implementation, if any), including any revisions to those measures.
Such management measures might include Environmental and Social Management Plans (ESMPs) or other management plans, though can also include aspects of a project’s design; refer to Question 6 in the SESP template for a summary of the identified management measures.

A given project should be assessed against the version of UNDP’s safeguards policy that was in effect at the time of the project’s approval.
Reporting: • Assess how adaptive management changes have been reported by the project management and shared with the Project Board.

• Assess how well the Project Team and partners undertake and fulfil GEF reporting requirements (i.e.

how have they addressed poorly rated PIRs, if applicable?)

• Assess how lessons derived from the adaptive management process have been documented, shared with key partners and internalized by partners.
Communications & Knowledge Management: • Review internal project communication with stakeholders: Is communication regular and effective?

Are there key stakeholders left out of communication?

Are there feedback mechanisms when communication is received?

Does this communication with stakeholders contribute to their awareness of project outcomes and activities and investment in the sustainability of project results?
• • Review external project communication: Are proper means of communication established or being established to express the project progress and intended impact to the public (is there a web presence, for example?

Or did the project implement appropriate outreach and public awareness campaigns?)

For reporting purposes, write one half-page paragraph that summarizes the project’s progress towards results in terms of contribution to sustainable development benefits, as well as global environmental benefits.
List knowledge activities/products developed (based on knowledge management approach approved at CEO Endorsement/Approval).

• iv.

Sustainability • Validate whether the risks identified in the Project Document, Annual Project Review/PIRs and the ATLAS Risk Register are the most important and whether the risk ratings applied are appropriate and up to date.

If not, explain why.


In addition, assess the following risks to sustainability: • Financial risks to sustainability: • What is the likelihood of financial and economic resources not being available once the GEF assistance ends (consider potential resources can be from multiple sources, such as the public and private sectors, income generating activities, and other funding that will be adequate financial resources for sustaining project’s outcomes)?
Socio-economic risks to sustainability: • Are there any social or political risks that may jeopardize sustainability of project outcomes?

What is the risk that the level of stakeholder ownership (including ownership by governments and other key stakeholders) will be insufficient to allow for the project outcomes/benefits to be sustained?

Do the various key stakeholders see that it is in their interest that the project benefits continue to flow?
Is MTR ToR for GEF-Financed Projects - Standard Template - June 2020 19 there sufficient public / stakeholder awareness in support of the long-term objectives of the project?

Are lessons learned being documented by the Project Team on a continual basis and shared/ transferred to appropriate parties who could learn from the project and potentially replicate and/or scale it in the future?
Institutional Framework and Governance risks to sustainability: • Do the legal frameworks, policies, governance structures and processes pose risks that may jeopardize sustenance of project benefits?

While assessing this parameter, also consider if the required systems/ mechanisms for accountability, transparency, and technical knowledge transfer are in place.

Environmental risks to sustainability: • Are there any environmental risks that may jeopardize sustenance of project outcomes?
Conclusions & Recommendations The MTR team will include a section in the MTR report for evidence-based conclusions, in light of the findings.

Additionally, the MTR consultant/team is expected to make recommendations to the Project Team.

Recommendations should be succinct suggestions for critical intervention that are specific, measurable, achievable, and relevant.

Recommended actions to be done should include the “how” aspects of the suggested actions, i.e., how will these be carried out.
Considering the conclusions that will be drawn, the MTR must provide realistically achievable recommended actions to make rectification of any “not favorable” conclusions.

The recommended actions should also include suggestions on how to, who will, and when to, carry them out.

A recommendation table should be put in the report’s executive summary.

See the Guidance For Conducting Midterm Reviews of UNDP-Supported, GEF-Financed Projects for guidance on a recommendation table.
The MTR team should make no more than 15 recommendations total.

Ratings The MTR team will include its ratings of the project’s results and brief descriptions of the associated achievements in an MTR Ratings & Achievement Summary Table in the Executive Summary of the MTR report.

See Annex E for ratings scales.

No rating on Project Strategy and no overall project rating is required.

Table.
Table.

MTR Ratings & Achievement Summary Table for BRANTV Measure MTR Rating Project Strategy Progress Towards Results N/A Objective Achievement Achievement Description (please rate the level of achievement of the outcomes based on the set mid-term targets (see annex in project document) MTR ToR for GEF-Financed Projects - Standard Template - June 2020 20 Rating: (rate 6 pt.

scale) Outcome 1 Achievement Rating: (rate 6 pt.

scale) Outcome 2 Achievement Rating: (rate 6 pt.


scale) Outcome 3 Achievement Rating: (rate 6 pt.

scale) Etc.

(rate 6 pt.

scale) (rate 4 pt.

scale) Project Implementation & Adaptive Management Sustainability 6.

TIMEFRAME The total duration of the MTR will be approximately 35 working days over a time period of seven (7) weeks and shall not exceed five months from when the consultant(s) are hired.
The tentative MTR timeframe is as follows: ACTIVITY Document review and preparing MTR Inception Report (MTR Inception Report due no later than 2 weeks before the MTR mission) MTR mission: stakeholder meetings, interviews, field visits NUMBER OF WORKING DAYS COMPLETION DATE 3 days (recommended: 2-4 days) 15 days (recommended: 7-15 days) 19 - 21 October 2020 22 October – 11 November 2020 Presentation of initial findings- last day of the MTR mission 1 day Preparing draft report (due within 3 weeks of the MTR mission) Finalization of MTR report/ Incorporating audit trail from feedback on draft report (due within 1 week of receiving UNDP comments on the draft) 12 November 2020 12 November 2020 4 December 2020 15 days (recommended: 5-10 days) 4 days (recommended: 3-4 days) Options for site visits should be provided in the Inception Report.
MTR ToR for GEF-Financed Projects - Standard Template - June 2020 21 7.
MIDTERM REVIEW DELIVERABLES # Deliverable 1 MTR Inception Report Description MTR team clarifies objectives and methods of Midterm Review Timing No later than 2 weeks before the MTR mission Responsibilities MTR team submits to the Commissioning Unit and project management 2 Presentation Initial Findings End of MTR mission MTR Team presents to 3 Draft MTR Report 4 Final Report* Full draft report (using guidelines on content outlined in Annex B) with annexes Revised report with audit trail detailing how all received comments have (and have not) been addressed in the final MTR report Within 3 weeks of the MTR mission Within 1 week of receiving UNDP comments on draft project management and the Commissioning Unit Sent to the Commissioning Unit, reviewed by RTA, Project Coordinating Unit, GEF OFP Sent to the Commissioning Unit *The final MTR report must be in English.
If applicable, the Commissioning Unit may choose to arrange for a translation of the report into a language more widely shared by national stakeholders.

8.

MTR ARRANGEMENTS The principal responsibility for managing this MTR resides with the Commissioning Unit.

The Commissioning Unit for this project’s MTR is the UNDP Country Office in Fiji called the UNDP Pacific Office in Fiji.
The Commissioning Unit will contract the consultants and ensure the timely provision of per diems and travel arrangements within Vanuatu for the MTR team and will provide an updated stakeholder list with contact details (phone and email).

The Project Team will be responsible for liaising with the MTR team to provide all relevant documents, set up stakeholder interviews, and arrange field visits.

9.
9.

TEAM COMPOSITION A team of two independent consultants will conduct the MTR - one team leader (with experience and exposure to projects and evaluations in other regions globally) and one team expert, usually from the country of the project.

The team leader will provide overall guidance of the MTR and be responsible for the overall design and writing of the MTR report, etc.
The team expert will liaise with local partners and stakeholders, assess emerging trends with respect to regulatory frameworks, budget allocations, capacity building, work with the Project Team in developing the MTR itinerary, etc.

The consultants cannot have participated in the project preparation, formulation, and/or implementation (including the writing of the Project Document) and should not have a conflict of interest with project’s related activities.
MTR ToR for GEF-Financed Projects - Standard Template - June 2020 22 REQUIRED SKILLS AND EXPERIENCE The selection of consultants will be aimed at maximizing the overall “team” qualities in the following areas: Education A Bachelor’s degree (or relevant tertiary qualifications) in climate change mitigation and/or renewable energy, or other closely related field.

(5%).
Experience Experience Relevant experience with project and results-based management evaluation methodologies (8%); Experience convening stakeholder consultations and conducting interviews on development projects (8%); Competence in adaptive management, as applied to development projects on renewable energy and energy efficiency (8%); Experience in assisting with project evaluation (8%); Experience working in Vanuatu (8%); Experience in development work for at least 10 years (4%); Demonstrated understanding of issues related to gender and energy (8%).
Excellent communication skills (2.5%); Demonstrable stakeholder-convening skills (2.5%); Project evaluation/review experiences within Vanuatu, and in collaboration with development partners, will be considered an asset (8%).

Language Fluency in written and spoken Vanuatu language, and working level in English.

10.

Duty Station The International Consultant will work with a National Consultant and operate remotely from his/her home country.
Travel: • This section is only applicable if travel restrictions are lifted and international travel is required to Tuvalu during the MTR mission; • The BSAFE training course must be successfully completed prior to commencement of travel; Herewith is the link to access this training: https://training.dss.un.org/courses/login/index.php .

These training modules at this secure internet site is accessible to Consultants, which allows for registration with private email.
Individual Consultants are responsible for ensuring they have vaccinations/inoculations when travelling to certain countries, as designated by the UN Medical Director.

• • Consultants are required to comply with the UN security directives set forth under https://dss.un.org/dssweb/.
• All related travel expenses will be covered and will be reimbursed as per UNDP rules and regulations upon submission of an F-10 claim form and supporting documents MTR ToR for GEF-Financed Projects - Standard Template - June 2020 23 11.

ETHICS The MTR team will be held to the highest ethical standards and is required to sign a code of conduct upon acceptance of the assignment.

This MTR will be conducted in accordance with the principles outlined in the UNEG ‘Ethical Guidelines for Evaluation’.
The MTR team must safeguard the rights and confidentiality of information providers, interviewees and stakeholders through measures to ensure compliance with legal and other relevant codes governing collection of data and reporting on data.

The MTR team must also ensure security of collected information before and after the MTR and protocols to ensure anonymity and confidentiality of sources of information where that is expected.
The information, knowledge and data gathered in the MTR process must also be solely used for the MTR and not for other uses without the express authorization of UNDP and partners.

12.
PAYMENT SCHEDULE • 20% payment upon satisfactory delivery of the final MTR Inception Report and approval by the Commissioning Unit • 40% payment upon satisfactory delivery of the draft MTR report to the Commissioning Unit • 40% payment upon satisfactory delivery of the final MTR report and approval by the Commissioning Unit and RTA (via signatures on the TE Report Clearance Form) and delivery of completed TE Audit Trail Criteria for issuing the final payment of 40%8: • The final MTR report includes all requirements outlined in the MTR TOR and is in accordance with the MTR guidance.
• The final MTR report is clearly written, logically organized, and is specific for this project (i.e.

text has not been cut & pasted from other MTR reports).

• The Audit Trail includes responses to and justification for each comment listed.
In line with the UNDP’s financial regulations, when determined by the Commissioning Unit and/or the consultant that a deliverable or service cannot be satisfactorily completed due to the impact of COVID-19 and limitations to the MTR, that deliverable or service will not be paid.

Due to the current COVID-19 situation and its implications, a partial payment may be considered if the consultant invested time towards the deliverable but was unable to complete to circumstances beyond his/her control.

13.
13.

APPLICATION PROCESS9 8 The Commissioning Unit is obligated to issue payments to the MTR team as soon as the terms under the ToR are fulfilled.

If there is an ongoing discussion regarding the quality and completeness of the final deliverables that cannot be resolved between the Commissioning Unit and the MTR team, the Regional M&E Advisor and Vertical Fund Directorate will be consulted.
If needed, the Commissioning Unit’s senior management, Procurement Services Unit and Legal Support Office will be notified as well so that a decision can be made about whether or not to withhold payment of any amounts that may be due to the evaluator(s), suspend or terminate the contract and/or remove the individual contractor from any applicable rosters.
See the UNDP Individual Contract Policy for further details: https://popp.undp.org/_layouts/15/WopiFrame.aspx?sourcedoc=/UNDP_POPP_DOCUMENT_LIBRARY/Public/PSU_In dividual%20Contract_Individual%20Contract%20Policy.docx&action=default 9 Engagement of the consultants should be done https://popp.undp.org/SitePages/POPPRoot.aspx line with guidelines for hiring consultants in the POPP: in MTR ToR for GEF-Financed Projects - Standard Template - June 2020 24 Proposal Submission Offerors must send the following documents: ▪ CV including names/contacts of at least 3 referees; ▪ A cover letter indicating why the candidate considers himself/herself suitable for the required consultancy.
▪ Completed template for confirmation of Interest and Submission of Financial Proposal.

Note: Successful individual will be required to provide proof of medical insurance coverage before commencement of contract for the duration of the assignment.

Incomplete and joint proposals may not be considered.

Consultants with whom there is further interest will be contacted.

Individuals applying for this consultancy will be reviewed based on their own individual capacity.
The successful individual may sign an Individual Contract with UNDP or request his/her employer to sign a Reimbursable Loan Agreement (RLA) on their behalf by indicating this in the Offerors letter to Confirming Interest and Availability.

Consultant must send a financial proposal based on a Lump Sum Amount.
The total amount quoted shall be all-inclusive and include all costs components required to perform the deliverables identified in the TOR, including professional fee(Daily fees to include IC’s medical insurance costs), travel costs, living allowance (if any work is to be done outside the IC´s duty station) and any other applicable cost to be incurred by the IC in completing the assignment.

The contract price will be fixed output-based price regardless of extension of the herein specified duration.
Payments will be done upon completion of the deliverables/outputs.

In general, UNDP shall not accept travel costs exceeding those of an economy class ticket.
Should the IC wish to travel on a higher class he/she should do so using their own resources In the event of unforeseeable travel not anticipated in this TOR, payment of travel costs including tickets, lodging and terminal expenses should be agreed upon, between the respective business unit and the Individual Consultant, prior to travel and will be reimbursed.

For any clarification regarding this assignment please write to procurement.fj@undp.org.
MTR ToR for GEF-Financed Projects - Standard Template - June 2020 25 Women candidates are encouraged to apply.

The Fiji Office covers Fiji, Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Nauru, Palau, Solomon Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu and Vanuatu ToR ANNEX A: List of Documents to be reviewed by the MTR Team 1.

PIF 2.

UNDP Initiation Plan 3.

UNDP Project Document 4.

UNDP Social and Environmental Screening Procedure (SESP) 5.

Project Inception Report 6.

All Project Implementation Reports (PIR’s) 7.


Quarterly progress reports and work plans of the various implementation task teams 8.

Audit reports 9.

Finalized GEF focal area Tracking Tools/Core Indicators at CEO endorsement and midterm 10.

Oversight mission reports 11.

All monitoring reports prepared by the project 12.

Financial and Administration guidelines used by Project Team The following documents will also be available: 13.

Project operational guidelines, manuals and systems 14.
UNDP Sub-Regional Programme Document 15.

Minutes of the Vanuatu BRANTV Project Board Meetings and other meetings (i.e.

Project Appraisal Committee meetings) 16.

Project site location maps 17.

Any additional documents, as relevant.

ToR ANNEX B: Guidelines on Contents for the Midterm Review Report10 i.
Basic Report Information (for opening page or title page) • Title of UNDP supported GEF financed project • UNDP PIMS# and GEF project ID# • MTR time frame and date of MTR report • Region and countries included in the project • GEF Operational Focal Area/Strategic Program • Executing Agency/Implementing Partner and other project partners • MTR team members • Acknowledgements Table of Contents ii.

iii.

Acronyms and Abbreviations 1.


Executive Summary (3-5 pages) • Project Information Table • Project Description (brief) 10 The Report length should not exceed 40 pages in total (not including annexes).

MTR ToR for GEF-Financed Projects - Standard Template - June 2020 26 • Project Progress Summary (between 200-500 words) • MTR Ratings & Achievement Summary Table • Concise summary of conclusions • Recommendation Summary Table 2.
Introduction (2-3 pages) • Purpose of the MTR and objectives • Scope & Methodology: principles of design and execution of the MTR, MTR approach and data collection methods, limitations to the MTR Structure of the MTR report • 3.
Project Description and Background Context (3-5 pages) • Development context: environmental, socio-economic, institutional, and policy factors relevant to the project objective and scope • Problems that the project sought to address: threats and barriers targeted • Project Description and Strategy: objective, outcomes and expected results, description of field sites (if any) • Project Implementation Arrangements: short description of the Project Board, key implementing partner arrangements, etc.
• Project timing and milestones • Main stakeholders: summary list 4.
Findings (12-14 pages) Project Strategy 4.1 • Project Design • Results Framework/Log frame 4.2 Progress Towards Results • Progress towards outcomes analysis • Remaining barriers to achieving the project objective 4.3 Project Implementation and Adaptive Management Finance and co-finance • Management Arrangements • Work planning • • Project-level monitoring and evaluation systems • • • Reporting • Communications & Knowledge Management Stakeholder engagement Social and Environmental Standards (Safeguards) 4.4 Sustainability • • • • Environmental risks to sustainability Financial risks to sustainability Socio-economic to sustainability Institutional framework and governance risks to sustainability 5.
Conclusions and Recommendations (4-6 pages) 5.1 Conclusions • Comprehensive and balanced statements (that are evidence-based and connected to the MTR’s findings) which highlight the strengths, weaknesses and results of the project 5.2 Recommendations • Corrective actions for the design, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of the project • Actions to follow up or reinforce initial benefits from the project MTR ToR for GEF-Financed Projects - Standard Template - June 2020 27 • Proposals for future directions underlining main objectives 6.
Annexes • MTR ToR (excluding ToR annexes) • MTR evaluative matrix (evaluation criteria with key questions, indicators, sources of data, and methodology) List of persons interviewed List of documents reviewed • Example Questionnaire or Interview Guide used for data collection • Ratings Scales • MTR mission itinerary • • • Co-financing table (if not previously included in the body of the report) • • • Annexed in a separate file: Audit trail from received comments on draft MTR report • Annexed in a separate file: Relevant midterm tracking tools (METT, FSC, Capacity scorecard, Signed UNEG Code of Conduct form Signed MTR final report clearance form etc.)
or Core Indicators • Annexed in a separate file: GEF Co-financing template (categorizing co-financing amounts by source as ‘investment mobilized’ or ‘recurrent expenditure’) ToR ANNEX C: Midterm Review Evaluative Matrix Template This Midterm Review Evaluative Matrix must be fully completed/amended by the consultant and included in the MTR inception report and as an Annex to the MTR report.
Indicators Methodology Evaluative Questions Project Strategy: To what extent is the project strategy relevant to country priorities, country ownership, and the best route towards expected results?

(include evaluative question(s)) Sources (i.e.

relationships established, level of coherence between project design and implementation approach, specific activities conducted, quality of risk mitigation strategies, etc.)

(i.e.
(i.e.

project documents, national policies or strategies, websites, project staff, project partners, data collected throughout the MTR mission, etc.)

(i.e.

document analysis, data analysis, interviews with project staff, interviews with stakeholders, etc.)

Progress Towards Results: To what extent have the expected outcomes and objectives of the project been achieved thus far?
Project Implementation and Adaptive Management: Has the project been implemented efficiently, cost-effectively, and been able to adapt to any changing conditions thus far?

To what extent are project-level monitoring and evaluation systems, reporting, and project communications supporting the project’s implementation?

To what extent has progress been made in the implementation of social MTR ToR for GEF-Financed Projects - Standard Template - June 2020 28 and environmental management measures?
Have there been changes to the overall project risk rating and/or the identified types of risks as outlined at the CEO Endorsement stage?

Sustainability: To what extent are there financial, institutional, socio-economic, and/or environmental risks to sustaining long-term project results?

MTR ToR for GEF-Financed Projects - Standard Template - June 2020 29 ToR ANNEX D: UNEG Code of Conduct for Evaluators/Midterm Review Consultants11 Evaluators/Consultants: 1.
Must present information that is complete and fair in its assessment of strengths and weaknesses so that decisions or actions taken are well founded.

2.

Must disclose the full set of evaluation findings along with information on their limitations and have this accessible to all affected by the evaluation with expressed legal rights to receive results.

3.

Should protect the anonymity and confidentiality of individual informants.
They should provide maximum notice, minimize demands on time, and respect people’s right not to engage.

Evaluators must respect people’s right to provide information in confidence, and must ensure that sensitive information cannot be traced to its source.

Evaluators are not expected to evaluate individuals, and must balance an evaluation of management functions with this general principle.

4.

Sometimes uncover evidence of wrongdoing while conducting evaluations.
Such cases must be reported discreetly to the appropriate investigative body.

Evaluators should consult with other relevant oversight entities when there is any doubt about if and how issues should be reported.

5.

Should be sensitive to beliefs, manners and customs and act with integrity and honesty in their relations with all stakeholders.

In line with the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights, evaluators must be sensitive to and address issues of discrimination and gender equality.
They should avoid offending the dignity and self-respect of those persons with whom they come in contact in the course of the evaluation.

Knowing that evaluation might negatively affect the interests of some stakeholders, evaluators should conduct the evaluation and communicate its purpose and results in a way that clearly respects the stakeholders’ dignity and self-worth.

6.

Are responsible for their performance and their product(s).
They are responsible for the clear, accurate and fair written and/or oral presentation of study limitations, findings and recommendations.

7.

Should reflect sound accounting procedures and be prudent in using the resources of the evaluation.

8.

Must ensure that independence of judgement is maintained and that evaluation findings and recommendations are independently presented.

9.

Must confirm that they have not been involved in designing, executing or advising on the project being evaluated.
MTR Consultant Agreement Form Agreement to abide by the Code of Conduct for Evaluation in the UN System: Name of Consultant: __________________________________________________________________ Name of Consultancy Organization (where relevant): __________________________________________ I confirm that I have received and understood and will abide by the United Nations Code of Conduct for Evaluation.
Signed at _____________________________________ (Place) on ____________________________ (Date) Signature: ___________________________________ 11 http://www.unevaluation.org/document/detail/100 MTR ToR for GEF-Financed Projects during COVID - Standard Template for UNDP Procurement Website – June 2020 30 ToR ANNEX E: MTR Ratings Ratings for Progress Towards Results: (one rating for each outcome and for the objective) 6 Highly Satisfactory (HS) 5 Satisfactory (S) 4 3 Moderately Satisfactory (MS) Moderately Unsatisfactory (HU) 2 Unsatisfactory (U) 1 Highly Unsatisfactory (HU) The objective/outcome is expected to achieve or exceed all its end-of-project targets, without major shortcomings.
The progress towards the objective/outcome can be presented as “good practice”.

The objective/outcome is expected to achieve most of its end-of-project targets, with only minor shortcomings.

The objective/outcome is expected to achieve most of its end-of-project targets but with significant shortcomings.

The objective/outcome is expected to achieve its end-of-project targets with major shortcomings.

The objective/outcome is expected not to achieve most of its end-of-project targets.
The objective/outcome has failed to achieve its midterm targets and is not expected to achieve any of its end-of-project targets.
Ratings for Project Implementation & Adaptive Management: (one overall rating) 6 Highly Satisfactory (HS) 5 Satisfactory (S) 4 3 Moderately Satisfactory (MS) Moderately Unsatisfactory (MU) 2 Unsatisfactory (U) 1 Highly Unsatisfactory (HU) Implementation of all seven components – management arrangements, work planning, finance and co-finance, project-level monitoring and evaluation systems, stakeholder engagement, reporting, and communications – is leading to efficient and effective project implementation and adaptive management.
The project can be presented as “good practice”.

Implementation of most of the seven components is leading to efficient and effective project implementation and adaptive management except for only few that are subject to remedial action.

Implementation of some of the seven components is leading to efficient and effective project implementation and adaptive management, with some components requiring remedial action.
Implementation of some of the seven components is not leading to efficient and effective project implementation and adaptive, with most components requiring remedial action.

Implementation of most of the seven components is not leading to efficient and effective project implementation and adaptive management.

Implementation of none of the seven components is leading to efficient and effective project implementation and adaptive management.
Ratings for Sustainability: (one overall rating) 4 Likely (L) 3 Moderately Likely (ML) Negligible risks to sustainability, with key outcomes on track to be achieved by the project’s closure and expected to continue into the foreseeable future Moderate risks, but expectations that at least some outcomes will be sustained due to the progress towards results on outcomes at the Midterm Review MTR ToR for GEF-Financed Projects during COVID - Standard Template for UNDP Procurement Website – June 2020 31 2 Moderately Unlikely (MU) 1 Unlikely (U) Significant risk that key outcomes will not carry on after project closure, although some outputs and activities should carry on Severe risks that project outcomes as well as key outputs will not be sustained ToR ANNEX F: MTR Report Clearance Form (to be completed and signed by the Commissioning Unit and RTA and included in the final document) Midterm Review Report Reviewed and Cleared By: Commissioning Unit (M&E Focal Point) Name: _____________________________________________ Signature: __________________________________________ Date: _______________________________ Regional Technical Advisor (Nature, Climate and Energy) Name: _____________________________________________ Signature: __________________________________________ Date: _______________________________ MTR ToR for GEF-Financed Projects during COVID - Standard Template for UNDP Procurement Website – June 2020 32 ToR ANNEX G: Audit Trail Template Note: The following is a template for the MTR Team to show how the received comments on the draft MTR report have (or have not) been incorporated into the final MTR report.
This audit trail should be included as an annex in the final MTR report.
To the comments received on (date) from the Midterm Review of (project name) (UNDP Project ID-PIMS #) The following comments were provided in track changes to the draft Midterm Review report; they are referenced by institution (“Author” column) and not by the person’s name, and track change comment number (“#” column): Author # Para No./ comment location Comment/Feedback on the draft MTR report MTR team response and actions taken MTR ToR for GEF-Financed Projects during COVID - Standard Template for UNDP Procurement Website – June 2020 33