Evaluation Consultant

The UN Secretary-General (UNSG) appointed the Independent Accountability Panel for Every Woman, Every Child, Every Adolescent (IAP) in 2016 to provide an independent and transparent review of progress and challenges on the implementation of the 2016-30 Every Woman Every Child Global Strategy for Women’s, Children’s and Adolescent’s Health (Global Strategy) to strengthen the response from the international health community and member states. 

To date, the IAP has delivered and disseminated three annual reports, the goal of which was to make recommendations to potentially shape dramatic stakeholder action to implement the Global Strategy for Women’s, Children’s and Adolescents’ health. The consultant will conduct an evaluation of the IAP to present to an External Reference Group (ERG), with the goal of assessing the extent to which the IAP engagement, advocacy, reports and recommendations have impacted stakeholders’ actions and lead to better results for women, children and adolescents to achieve the goals set forth in the Global Strategy and broader 2030 Agenda.

The IAP is an independent panel of experts, whose secretariat is hosted by the Partnership for Maternal, Newborn and Child Health (PMNCH). The Evaluation will be managed by the Every Woman Every Child (EWEC) Secretariat, hosted by the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), according to that agency’s policies and procedures for external evaluations.

Scope of Work

Specific Objectives 

The Evaluation will examine:

1.  Whether the IAP is functioning as a meaningful accountability mechanism, engaging all relevant stakeholders, including the H6 agencies at country-level, for the implementation of the Global Strategy and ensuring that:

• It is known who is being left behind, why and by whom?

• It is known what the critical accountability gaps that need to be redressed are, and where intensified policy attention and investments are required.

• It is known what course can be taken to improve institutional and collective accountabilities.

2. Based on the evidence gathered and to the extent possible given the short life of the IAP to-date, does the evidence show how IAP advocacy efforts and reports are contributing to a shared understanding of meaningful accountability, shaping leadership agendas, influencing resource allocations for every woman, every child, every adolescent, and how institutional priorities are being affected? What has been the IAP’s role in addressing key accountability bottlenecks, including better tracking of resources, ensuring social accountability and the engagement of communities and civil society stakeholders?
3. Is the current arrangement with PMNCH the most advantageous to effectively deliver on the IAP’s independent accountability mandate?
4. How effective has been the IAP’s internal process for the theme selection?
5. What has been the effectiveness of the IAP in harmonizing monitoring and reporting within the multi-stakeholder EWEC architecture?

Scope of the Evaluation

The Evaluation shall limit itself to the role of the IAP within the EWEC framework and the supporting functions of other stakeholders within the framework.

• The focus of the evaluation shall be (1) the IAP’s products, their relevance, dissemination, adoption, impact on implementation and stakeholders, and (2) the IAP’s advocacy and high-level engagement in national and international fora.
• The Evaluation shall assess EWEC partners’ coordination with and support for the IAP, including support for implementation of IAP recommendations at national and international levels.
• The Evaluation shall not focus on the overall effectiveness of any other stakeholder, save where it affects the fulfillment of the IAP objectives.

Key Deliverables

The evaluation process and deliverables for the evaluation consultant are indicated below:

Expected Travel

Home based consultant.  The Consultant will be expected to travel to New York and/or Geneva for two meetings with the External Reference Group (ERG), and possibly for interviews of key informants. 

Qualifications and Experience

The Evaluator will have the following mix of knowledge, skills, and experience:

1. Master’s degree and relevant expertise in women’s, children’s and adolescents’ health
2. At least ten years’ experience at international senior management or policy level in a relevant area, or
3. At least ten years’ experience in Evaluation, with experience in organizational analyses, change management, risk assessment, or related fields.
4. Fluency in English is required
5. Senior level experience in global health or public health, specialized in one of the SRMNCAH fields

Compensation

The Consultant will be compensated for the following services:

• • The evaluation as defined in the Terms of Reference. Applicants are reminded that their financial proposals are evaluated for competitiveness even if they are within budget.
  • The travel related costs for the participation in the two meetings with the reference group, interviews of key informants.

The payment schedule will be as follows:

1. 30% on acceptance of the Final Inception Report
2. 15% on acceptance of Draft Final Report
3. 3 % on presentation of the Report (PowerPoint) at Stakeholder Workshop
4. 17% on acceptance of the Final Report and Final PPT

Note: No payment will be processed until the corresponding deliverable are formally approved by the Evaluation Manager. Travel Related and ‘Other’ Out-of-Pocket expenses will be paid in a total of instalments to be decided with the Evaluation Office and to be agreed upon contract signature.

Bidding instructions

1. The Technical Bid should be concisely presented and structured in the following order to include, but not necessarily be limited to, the following information:
   
   1. Understanding of the Terms of Reference and requirements for services (1 page). This section should include any assumptions as well as comments on the scope of services as indicated in the TOR or as you may otherwise believe to be necessary.
   2. Proposed Approach and Methodology of the evaluation, including a description of the manner in which you would respond to the ToR (1 page). This section should address: 
      
      1. An understanding of the objective and scope of the evaluation
      2. A discussion on which methodologies will be applied
      3. Comments on any challenges or difficulties, which might arise in structuring and conducting the evaluation, suggesting solutions when applicable
   3. CV of evaluator
2. The technical bid is evaluated on the basis of its responsiveness to the Terms of Reference by reviewing the technical proposals submitted by the bidders against the evaluation criteria published below. (Maximum score allocated is 100 total points, after calculations based on weighting of each of the evaluation criteria.)

PLEASE SEND APPLICATIONS TO : rtavares@unfpa.org by 16 July 2019 with "Evaluation Consultant" as the subject.