IC/001/18 - International Consultant for mid-term review of EU Water Project


Страна: Узбекистан
Язык: EN
Номер: 8338272
Дата публикации: 12-03-2018
Источник: United Nations Procurement Notices (UNDP)
Окончание подачи заявок через: 6 дней
Тэги: Legal advisory services Travel management services Travel services


IC/001/18 - International Consultant for mid-term review of EU Water Project
Procurement Process : Other
Office : UNDP Country Office - UZBEKISTAN
Deadline : 26-Mar-18
Posted on : 12-Mar-18
Development Area : CONSULTANTS
Reference Number : 44763
Link to Atlas Project :
00080810 - Sustainable Management of Water Resources in rural areas
Documents :
Procurement Notice
Overview :


UNDP Uzbekistan implements the Component 2 on “Technical Capacity Building” (hereinafter Project) of the “Sustainable Management of Water Resources in rural areas in Uzbekistan” Programme funded by the European Union. The Project is implemented jointly with the Ministry of Agriculture and Water resources of Uzbekistan (MAWR) and aims at strengthening institutional frameworks and technical capacities for water management at basin, water user association and farm levels while increasing awareness on efficient management and use of water resources.

The project has three interlinked components:

Component 1: National Policy Framework for Water Governance and Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM);

Component 2: Technical Capacity Building;

Component 3: Awareness Raising.

Expected project Output: Water management services, practices and techniques are strengthened and harmonized within a national framework.

For reaching the above-mentioned output change, the project aims to achieve the following activity results:

Activity result 1: Enhanced capacities of national entities in charge of training provision;

Activity result 2: Strengthened organizational set-up of the water management players and improved advisory mechanisms for improved water supply services;

Activity result 3: Development and implementation of a unified model and approach of capacity building for water management players;

Activity result 4: Enhanced links and networks with EU institutions and practitioners;

Activity result 5: Piloting community development plans with water management as a cross cutting issue.

A list of project’s pilot sites is given in the Annex B to this ToR.

The project contributes to UNDAF 2016-2020 and CPD 2016-2020 outcome: By 2020, rural population benefit from sustainable management of natural resources and resilience to disasters and climate.

As per the Description of the Action of the “Technical Capacity Building” Component of the EU Program, the Project is subject to mid-term review (MTR) at the mid-point of its implementation. The MTR will determine the progress being made toward the achievement of project outcomes and will identify course correction if needed. It will focus on the effectiveness, efficiency and timeliness of project implementation; will highlight issues requiring decisions and actions; will present initial lessons learned about the project design, implementation and management. Findings of this review will be incorporated as recommendations for enhanced implementation during the final half of the project’s term. The organization and timing of the mid-term review will be confirmed after consultation between the Sustainable Development Cluster (SDC) of UNDP CO in Uzbekistan and the Consultant.

The key product expected from the mid-term evaluation is a comprehensive analytical report written in English. The mid-term evaluation report will be a stand-alone document that substantiates its recommendations and conclusions. The report will have to provide convincing evidence to support its findings/ratings.



Duties and Responsibilities

Evaluation objectives and scope

The MTR offers the opportunity to identify potential project design problems, assess progress towards the achievement of objectives, identify and document lessons learned, and make recommendations regarding specific actions that might be taken to improve the project implementation and approach. The MTR is expected to serve as a means of validating or filling the gaps in the initial assessment of relevance, effectiveness and efficiency obtained from monitoring, and to allow course correction as necessary. To this end, the MTR will serve to:

  • Strengthen the management and monitoring functions of the project;
  • Enhance the likelihood of achievement of the project objectives through analyzing project strengths and weaknesses and suggesting measures for improvement;
  • Contribute to organizational and development learning;
  • Enable informed decision-making;
  • Assess the sustainability of the project’s interventions;
  • Create the basis for replicating successful project results achieved so far.

In addition, and of particular importance, the MTR process will create a forum for dialogue and focused consideration, among the project’s partners and stakeholders, of the progress made thus far on achieving the objectives, but also on the overall approach to project implementation.

This evaluation to be done in line with the evaluation policy of UNDP (http://www.undp.org/eo/documents/Evaluation-Policy.pdf) and the UNDP Handbook on Monitoring and Evaluating for Results (http://web.undp.org/evaluation/handbook/).

Objectives of the mid-term evaluation are the following:

  • Review the project’s relevance to national priorities and provide recommendations for adjustment as needed;
  • Review the progress towards achievement of Project objective and outcomes as set out in Document, results framework and other related documents;
  • Assess potential contribution of the project to the achievement of Outcome results with joint Government of Uzbekistan and UNDP programmatic frameworks of UNDAF 2016-2020 and CPD 2016-2020;
  • Assess the degree to which the project implementation processes at all levels (community level, policy support, etc.) are being carried out through participatory approach;
  • Assess the degree to which the resources and funding for the above project directions being used effectively and efficiently;
  • Assess the extent to which a knowledge base is being established to build the capacity of key stakeholders to address the relevant development problems;
  • Assess sustainability of the project interventions;
  • Critically analyse project implementation and management arrangements including inter-agency cooperation;
  • List and document lessons concerning the project design, implementation and management.

In all above assessment points, gender equality and women empowerment has to be reflected as a crosscutting issue.

The MTR will cover several aspects of the project. These will include the following: relevance of the project, quality of project design, efficiency of implementation, effectiveness to date, partnership strategy, and potential sustainability of project interventions. It will look at the achievements of the project with respect to the relevance of its objectives and the attainability of its outputs. The MTR will consider the project design, including whether the assumptions and risks remain valid, noting external factors beyond the control of the project that have affected it negatively or positively to date.

The MTR should review the project’s conceptual design and relevance, and whether the outcomes, indicators, targets, risks and assumptions that were agreed upon are still relevant, with attention to:

  • Whether the project responds to development priorities at the regional and national level
  • Whether the project is promoting ownership and meeting the needs of stakeholders
  • Whether the project’s target groups are systematically engaged, with a priority focus on the excluded and marginalized, to ensure project remains relevant to them
  • Whether the project’s measures to address gender inequalities and women’s empowerment are relevant and producing the intended effect

The MTR should review the efficiency of project implementation, with attention to:

  • Whether the project is efficient in planning, organizing, and controlling the delivery of project interventions in a cost-effective manner
  • Whether there is efficiency in the coordination and communication processes between stakeholders and partners of the project

The MTR should review the effectiveness of the approach used to produce the project results:

The MTR should review the potential sustainability - the extent to which, based on the project’s strategy, the benefits of the project will continue after it has come to an end, including:

  • Whether the project is making an expected contribution to capacity development
  • Whether the project has the potential to be replicated based on implementation progress so far, and whether any steps are being taken by the project to do so; whether there are specific good practices that can be replicated and what has made them successful;

Given that this is a Mid-Term Review, the emphasis will be on identifying lessons learnt, with a view to adjusting the project design and implementation accordingly. The MTR will therefore make recommendations for the way forward, based on progress thus far.

Findings and lessons learned:

  • Outline, as logically and objectively as possible, findings and conclusions, with an emphasis on findings related to the project’s approach to incorporating gender issues
  • Highlight the major problems, shortcomings, and weaknesses in order of importance


  • Present recommendations for corrective actions; recommendations should be objective, realistic, practical, understandable and forward looking
  • Link the recommendations logically to the findings
  • Recommend a realistic duration for implementation of remaining project activities
  • Suggest new project activities for the remaining part of project implementation as deemed necessary

The evaluation must provide evidence-based information that is credible, reliable and useful. The Consultant is expected to follow a participatory and consultative approach ensuring close engagement with the project team and key stakeholders including government counterparts, donors and development partners, and targeted groups, with a special focus on irrigated agriculture. The Consultant is expected to conduct a field mission to pilot regions to review the project implementation progress. Interviews will be held with the following organizations and individuals at a minimum:

  • Ministry of Agriculture and Water Resources
  • Pilot Basin Irrigation System Authorities
  • Pilot Water Users Associations
  • Pilot Communities in 6 regions.
  • Government Agencies (State Committee for Ecology and Environment, Uzhydromet center and Uzhozvodnadzor Inspection, Ministry of Finance);
  • Tashkent Institute of Irrigation and Engineers of Mechanization in Agriculture and Irrigation and Water Problems Institute;
  • International and regional agencies (EUD, GIZ, UNESCO, CAREC, SDC)

The MTR may be undertaken using a combination of techniques and data sources, including:

  • Desk review of all relevant project documentation;
  • Consultations and interviews with stakeholders and partners;
  • Questionnaires;
  • Other methods as appropriate and feasible

The Consultant will review all relevant sources of information, such as the project document, annual project progress reports, project budget revisions, project board meeting minutes, project files, UNDAF 2016-2020, CPD 2016-2020, national strategic and legal documents, and any other materials that the evaluator considers useful for this evidence-based assessment. A comprehensive list of documents that the project team will provide to the evaluator will be additionally shared with evaluator after contract signing.

The Mid-Term Review will be conducted by using methodologies and techniques suitable for the evaluation purpose, objective and evaluation questions as described in this TOR. The Consultant, in consultation with UNDP and other stakeholders, will determine the specific design and methods for the exercise during the initial inception period and outline the detailed methodology in the inception report prepared. Inception report and Mid-Term Review report should clearly outline, at minimum, information on the instruments used for data collection and analysis, whether these be documents, interviews, field visits, questionnaires or participatory techniques.

The International Consultant/Evaluator as reference materials can use the following documents to be found via www.undp.org :

  • UNDP Handbook on Monitoring and Evaluation for Results
  • UNDP M&E Resource Kit
  • UNDP Evaluation Policy

Data collection and analysis:

Data for the report will be collected through various means, including the following:

Desk reviews: The evaluator will collect and review all relevant documentation, including the following:

  • Action Strategy of the Government of Uzbekistan for 2017-2021; Action-oriented Roadmap on Further Cooperation between Uzbekistan and the United Nations System for 2017-2020;
  • UNDP Strategic Plans 2014-2017, 2018-2021; UNDAF 2016-2020, including joint workplans for 2016-2017 and 2018-2020; CPD 2016-2020 and Results Oriented Annual Reports for 2016-2017;
  • Project Document, Progress Reports, Annual Work Plans and Progress Reports, Project Quality Assurance reports, minutes of the Project Board meetings, and other materials from the previous interventions in the region;
  • Analytical and knowledge products prepared within the framework of the project;

Stakeholder interviews and focus group discussions: The Consultant will conduct interviews with following organizations and individuals at a minimum:

  • Relevant departments of the Ministry of Water Resources;
  • Government Agencies (the State Committee for Ecology and Environment, Uzhydromet Center and Uzhozvodnadzor Inspection, and Ministry of Finance);
  • Tashkent Institute of Irrigation and Engineers of Mechanization in Agriculture and Irrigation;
  • Water Problems Institute;
  • International and regional agencies (EUD, GIZ, UNESCO, CAREC, SDC);
  • Pilot Basin Irrigation System Authorities
  • Pilot Water Users Associations
  • Pilot Communities in 6 regions.

In all cases, International Consultant/Evaluator is expected to analyze all relevant information sources, such as annual reports, project documents, mission reports, strategic country development documents and any other documents that may provide evidence on which to form judgements. International Consultant/Evaluator is also expected to use interviews, surveys or any other relevant quantitative and qualitative tools as means to collect data for the mid-term review. The International Consultant/Evaluator will make sure that the voices, opinions, and information of targeted citizens and participants of the project are taken into account.

The International Consultant/Evaluator must provide evidence-based information that is credible, reliable and useful. It must be easily understood by the project partners and applicable to the remaining period of the project.


1. The mid-term review strategy and content of the final report is elaborated, discussed and agreed.

Note: International Consultant shall: a) study and review the received background information on the project results and progress before the meeting at UNDP CO, b) discuss with UNDP CO the assignment and agree on evaluation strategy and content of the final report.

2. Inception report with initial findings based on desk review, including evaluation plan and methodology (evaluation questions, indicators, data source and means of verification) is prepared and submitted.

Due date for deliverbales 1 and 2 - 13 April 2018 (20% payment instalment)

3. First draft report is submitted, presented and discussed in UNDP with engagement of key stakeholders to verify the findings.

Note: International Consultant shall conduct meetings with project stakeholders, including project sight-visits in selected regions (Fergana, Syrdarya, Samarkand, Karshi and Khorezm).

4. Final report as per agreed upon report content containing in-depth assessment of the project results’ outcome-level contribution, including the review and summary of stakeholders’ feedback, lessons learned, and recommendations on the next stage cooperation between the UNDP and the Ministry of Agriculture and Water Resources in technical capacity development finalized by the consultant and approved by UNDP.

Due date for deliverbales 3 and 4 - 15 June 2018 (80% payment instalment)




Proven track record of application of results-based management evaluation methodologies to development programs/projects in areas of water management or environmental management including gender sensitive evaluations

Good knowledge of IWRM

Experience working in Central Asia and/or CIS regions would be an asset

Project evaluation/review experiences within United Nations system will be considered an asset



Required Skills and Experience

I. Academic Qualifications:

Undergraduate or higher degree in a relevant discipline e.g. water resources management, natural resources management or environmental sciences.

II. Years of experience:

Work experience in the field of water resources management, natural resources or environmental management for at least 5 years

Experience in training, professional development and continuous education of water or environment industry professionals, and knowledge of relevant international best-practices

III. Language:

Fluent English communication and writing skills, knowledge of Russian/Uzbek would be an asset

Interested individual consultants must submit the following documents/information to demonstrate their qualifications:

  • Letter of Confirmation of Interest and Availability using the template provided by UNDP (Annex III);
  • CV with indication of the e-mail and phone contact, but successful consultant will be requested to submit filled in and signed aPersonal History Form (P11 form) before contract issuance;
  • Brief description of approach to work/technical proposal of why the individual considers him/herself as the most suitable for the assignment, and a proposed methodology on how they will approach and complete the assignment; (max 1 page).

For more detailed information about UNDP Uzbekistan please visit our website at http://www.uz.undp.org/. UNDP is an equal opportunity employer. Qualified female candidates, people with disabilities, and minorities are highly encouraged to apply. UNDP Balance in Manage Policy promotes achievement of gender balance among its staff at all levels.

Financial Proposal shall indicate the all-inclusive fixed total contract price and all other travel related costs (such as flight ticket, per diem, etc.), supported by a breakdown of costs, as per template attached to the Letter of Confirmation of Interest template. If an applicant is employed by an organization/company/institution, and he/she expects his/her employer to charge a management fee in the process of releasing him/her to UNDP under Reimbursable Loan Agreement (RLA), the applicant must indicate at this point, and ensure that all such costs are duly incorporated in the financial proposal submitted to UNDP.

Lump sum contracts

This is a lump sum contract that should include costs of consultancy and international travel costs (in-country travel cost will be covered by the project), accommodation and meal (DSA or per diems in Tashkent and provinces) and visas costs required to produce the above deliverables.

Criteria for Evaluation of Proposal: Only those applications which are responsive and compliant will be evaluated. Offers will be evaluated according to the Combined Scoring method – where the educational background and experience on similar assignments will be weighted at 70% and the price proposal will weigh as 30% of the total scoring. The applicant receiving the Highest Combined Score that has also accepted UNDP’s General Terms and Conditions will be awarded the contract.

Cumulative analysis

The award of the contract shall be made to the individual consultant whose offer has been evaluated and determined as:

a) responsive/compliant/acceptable, and

b) Having received the highest score out of a pre-determined set of weighted technical and financial criteria specific to the solicitation.

* Technical Criteria weight; [70%]

* Financial Criteria weight; [30%]

Only candidates obtaining a minimum of 49 points would be considered for the Financial Evaluation.