WORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONWT/IFSC/3/Rev.1
4 February 2003
(03-0706)
Integrated Framework Steering Committee
TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR THE IF EVALUATION
Revision
I. BACKGROUND: MANDATE FOR THE IF EVALUATION
1. The functioning of the IF for the LDCs is due for an evaluation.  The mandate for the
evaluation is embedded in several decisions already taken by agencies, trade ministers, and several
requests by recipient countries and donors for a review.
(a) In the last paragraph of the Communiqué by the Heads of Agency, New York, July
2000, Agency Heads agreed to re-visit the issue of “enlargement” after two years
within the framework of determining whether improvements to the IF were working;
(b) As part of the adoption of the IF Pilot Scheme, 12 February 2001, WTO Members
agreed (following extensive consultations with core agencies) that as the Pilot
Scheme was being implemented, progress would be monitored and reviewed,
including on a country-by-country basis; 1
(c) In paragraph 43 of the Doha Ministerial Declaration, Ministers urged the six core
agencies, in coordination with development partners, to explore the enhancement of
the IF with a view to addressing the LDCs’ supply-side constraints, the extension of
the model to all LDCs, the appraisal of the Pilot Scheme in three LDCs, and to review
the IF;
(d) In paragraph 7 of the Heads of Agency Communiqué, 26 February 2002, Agency
Heads agreed to the extension of the IF to be preceded by a thorough review; and,
(e) At the 31st meeting of the IAWG, the Group agreed that an external evaluation of the
IF was desirable and necessary, and that this evaluation should be undertaken in
2003, but before the Fifth WTO Ministerial Conference.  The Group agreed that it
would develop the TORs.  To this end, agencies, donors and LDCs’ representatives
were requested to forward inputs to th e Chairman who would propose draft TORs to
the Group at its 33rd meeting.
II. OBJECTIVES OF THE EVALUATION
2. The evaluation should focus on  six clear objectives:
(a) the impact of the Integrated Framework in linking trade, development and poverty
reduction and in mainstreaming trade into PRSPs and/or development plans and its
effectiveness as a model for trade capacity building.  The lessons learned in thisregard;
                                                     
1 WT/LDC/SWG/IF/13WT/IFSC/3/Rev.1
Page 2
(b) the Impact of the Integrated Framework as a means of generating coordinated donor
support and sufficient funding to a government-owned trade capacity building
programme;
(c) reviewing the roles and responsibilities of agencies, donors and the LDCs, with a
view to further clarifying the extent to which they have implemented these roles andresponsibilities under the re-vamped Integrated Framework;
(d) addressing the urgent challenge of a systematic and predictable implementation and
follow-up process in the post-DTIS stages;
(e) effectiveness of the IF as a mechanism to deliver trade-related technical assistance,
and exploring its potential as an instrument for addressing the supply–side constraints
of the LDCs; and,
(f) recommendations on all aspects of these TORs
2.
III. TERMS OF REFERENCE
3. The two objectives of the redesigned IF are: (i) the use of the IF as a mechanism to
mainstream trade into development plans and/or poverty reduction strategies; and, (ii) the use of the
Integrated Framework as a mechanism to deliver trade-related technical assistance.  These two
consensus objectives and donor/agency coordination as prioritized by the partner country remainfundamental.
3 Initial application of the revamped IF began, on a pilot basis, in Cambodia, Mauritania
and Madagascar. Beyond the three pilots, the IF has now been extended in a non-pilot stage to 11
other LDCs.4 Eight (8) other LDCs have applied to benefit from the extension of the IF to their
countries.5
4. While the principles of the revamped IF remain sound, implementation and follow-up to the
DTIS are critical.  This issue is now at core of the IF.  Implementation and follow-up explicitly
involve two elements namely, (i) implementation of the priority TA recommendations for human,
institutional and infrastructure capacity building; and (ii) implementation of the priority policy
recommendations to enable a LDC integrate into the trading system and global economy.  On these
two elements, the process requires clarity.  The specific linkages to the development setting of PRSPs,development plans, Consultative Group meetings and Round Tables, remain very much unclear.
These are the current and most immediate experiences from the on-going functioning of the IF.  They
are the basis for the evaluation.
A. 
SCOPE OF THE EVALUATION
5. The evaluation team will work with stakeholders at all levels, including the six core agencies
(IMF, ITC, UNCTAD, UNDP, World Bank, and the WTO), donors, LDCs' governments, the private
sector and civil society.  The evaluation will focus, inter alia , on
- status of implementation of recommendations in the first IF Review;
- the status of the old IF 5 Round Table Countries (Bangladesh, The Gambia,
Haiti, Tanzania, and Uganda);
                                                     
2 WT/LDC/SWG/IF/2
3 WT/LDC/SWG/IF/2
4 Burundi, Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Guinea, Le sotho, Malawi, Mali, Nepal, Senegal and Yemen.
5 Angola, Benin, Chad, Laos PDR, Maldives, Sao Tome and Principe, Togo and Zambia.WT/IFSC/3/Rev.1
Page 3
- the process of country selection in the re-vamped IF;
- the procedures for applying the Integrated Framework to selected countries;
- procedures and process for preparing the diagnostic trade integration studies;
quality of the DTIS; selection of consultants; the involvement of core
agencies, LDCs’ beneficiaries, donors;
- defined roles of agencies, donors and Least-Developed Countries;
- stable and predictable mechanisms for the follow-up of the recommendations
in the DTIS;
- linkages of the Integrated Framework to existing development architecture:
e.g. PRSPs, Country Consultative Groups, and Donor Round Tables;
- its potential in addressing supply-side capacity building; and,
- performance criteria/benchmarks for on-going evaluation.
B. IMPLEMENTATION
6. Evaluation of implementation will focus on:
(a) the development of an action plan that results from the DTIS and national workshops;
(b) roles of  Facilitating Donor, LDC recipients, and agencies in implementing the results
of the DTIS;
(c) linkages of the process and results of the DTIS into development plans such as
PRSPs6 and CGs/RTs;
(d) re-focusing of core agency programmes for trade-related technical assistance for the
specific implementation of the results of the DTISs, in programmes for regional and
country operations of the six core agencies and bilateral donors;
(e) partner country ownership and commitment, such as through the establishment of an
institutional structure for implementation, including for activities and follow-up:
national implementation arrangements;
(f) involvement and association of the main regional development banks in the
implementation and follow-up to the results of the DTIS; and, the involvement of
other specialized relevant agencies in im plementation and follow-up to the results of
the DTIS;
C. GOVERNANCE
(a) The adequacy of the IF management structure, currently incorporating overall
governance (IFSC); day-to-day management (IFWG); fund management (UNDP);
trade mainstreaming (World Bank); and the IF Secretariat (WTO);
                                                     
6 PRSPs are, inter alia, the basis for Bank/Fund policy lending.WT/IFSC/3/Rev.1
Page 4
D. FUNDING
(a) If funding, modalities, and replenishment cycles;
E. METHODOLOGY
7. The Evaluators will at all times work in close coordination with the Donor Group, the
Agencies, and the Partner Governments concerned.  Their approach will be inclusive andparticipatory.  At country level, the Evaluators will need to work with a range of senior government
officials in Trade, Finance and other Ministries/Departments, the PRSP Committees, donors, civil
society, including academia.  In the event that it is not possible to visit all the 19 LDCs to which the
Integrated Framework is currently extended, the Evaluation Team will visit a selection of countries to
be visited.  The countries to be visited will be justified and agreed in consultations between the
Evaluation Team, and the IFSC.
F. IF 
AND JITAP AND OTHER TRADE CAPACITY BUILDING INITIATIVES
(a) Relationship of the IF and JITAP and other trade capacity building initiatives for
human and institutional capacity building;
G. STRENGTHENING THE ROLE OF PARTICIPATING AGENCIES
(a) The role of participating agencies should be examined, particularly with a view to
greater involvement of all Agencies that are in the core Group. Explore theassociation with other UN Agencies, as appropriate.
IV. TIMING AND PROCESS FOR ADOPTING REVIEW RESULTS
8. The review will take place over a period of five months.  However, the Evaluation Team is
required to provide interim reports to meetings of the IFSC, as its work progresses.  These front-
loaded reports will enable the Integrated Fram ework Working Group (IFWG) to undertake immediate
corrections and adjustments as necessary.  The initial interim report is expected by  April of 2003.
Reports will be addressed to the Integrated Framework Steering Committee (IFSC) through its
Chairman.  (The IFSC is a tripartite body of the 6 agencies, bilateral donors, and 6 representatives of
the LDCs, participating on the basis of equality).
9. The following calendar will apply:
Action Date
Selection of Evaluation Team by Selection
BoardEnd February 2003
Preparation of a draft review by Evaluation TeamMarch – July  2003
Country visits by Evaluation Team/organization
stakeholders consultations selected LDCsEnd April  2003
Interim Report to the IFSC  April 2003
Comments by agencies, donors and LDCs to the
Evaluation Team15 May 2003
Feedback – The Evaluation Team will ensure a
feedback from LDCs to the draft report, throughMay/JuneWT/IFSC/3/Rev.1
Page 5
the medium of the LDCs' Reps. in the IFWG
Revised final evaluation report by Evaluation
Team to IFWG15  June 2003
IFWG finalises and adopts the report for
presentation to IFSC30  June 2003
Consideration of evaluation results by IFWG
Heads of Agency3rd Meeting of the IF Heads of Agency meeting,
(July) 2003
Circulation of Report to WTO 5th Ministerial
Meeting and Governing Boards/Councils of CoreAgenciesSeptember – December 2003
V. FRONT-LOADED REPORT/INTERIM RECOMMENDATIONS
10. Within the scope of these TORs, by end April 2003, the Evaluation Team will present an
Interim Report identifying the most immediate challenges to the Integrated Framework, with
recommendations on how to address them.  Recommendations on a systematic and predictable
follow-up process to the post-DTIS stage, will  be one such urgent and priority challenge.
11. In consultation with the LDCs' Representatives in the IFWG, the evaluators will be
responsible for ensuring a feedback from the Least-Developed Countries on the draft report beforefinal submission.  This procedure will contribute to ownership by the LDCs' partners and to building
consensus on the outcome of the review and hence support to any follow-up actions that the
evaluation may recommend.
VI. FUNDING
12. Funding for the evaluation will be provided fr om the Integrated Framework Trust Fund.  The
budget for the review will be prepared by the IF S ecretariat, in consultation with the leader of the
Evaluation Team that will be selected.  At the conclusion of the evaluation, a detailed financial report
will be circulated to the IFWG.
VII. EVALUATORS
13. The Evaluation Team for the IF Review will be composed of a team of 4 trade and
development experts, including an expert with LDC experience. The team will function
independently. It will be composed of a lead evaluator, who will have final responsibility for the
report to be submitted to the IFSC. The evaluation team will operate on the basis of these agreed
Terms of Reference.
Evaluator Name
Lead Evaluator
Evaluator – private sector
Evaluator – donor community
Evaluator – LDC community
14. The process of selecting the Evaluators, including the lead evaluator will be based on a
selected tendering process to be managed by a selection board.  The Selection Board will beWT/IFSC/3/Rev.1
Page 6
composed of three members namely, the Chairman of the IFWG, who will chair the board; a
representative of the donor community and a representa tive of the LDCs to be selected by the LDCs.
The selection process will be completed by the end of February 2003. The selection of the evaluators
by the Selection Board will be based on criteria to be pre-agreed with the IFWG including an LDC
Member to be selected by the LDCs and circulated in advance of the tendering process.
__________