In 2018, the Government of liberia passed the Land Rights Act (LRA). This legislative framework is a milestone in land legislation, paving a passage for more equitable, fair land rights for the citizens of Liberia. Nearly 70 percent of Liberia’s 3.3 million citizens live in rural areas and own their lands collectively according to customary laws. Despite strong customary claims, for the past six decades the Liberian government claimed all lands as owned by the state and allocated roughly 35-40 percent of the country to foreign investment without consulting community members. Disputes related to overlapping boundaries, rightful ownership, conflicting claims and land grabbing are the most pronounced among communities as well as between communities and concessionaires. Communities in general are affected by concessions due to a lack of transparency in allocating land to concessions made by the government. Most of the concession contracts are negotiated in Monrovia with little or no consultations, neither are the agreements shared with local communities. In addition, activities undertaken by concession companies, such as production of palm oil, rubber, extraction of gold, diamonds and iron ore, have severely impacted the environment and its surrounding.
The project builds on several other interventions including the “Strengthening Conflict Prevention through Establishment of Multi-stakeholder Platforms and improved Alternative Livelihoods in Concessions Areas” which supported the establishment of structures called Multi-Stakeholders Platform (MSP) to educate communities about their rights and how they can benefit from their lands through concessions; the “Liberia Decentralization Support Programme (LDSP)” that supported the de-concentration of essential services through a concept of establishing County Service Centers (CSCs) where community members can access these services; and “Strengthening Local and Traditional Mechanisms for Peace at Local and National Levels” that supported the establishment of local Early Warning and County Peace Committees structures to mediate and report conflict related issues.
To address the continued challenges on land governance and related conflict, the UN Peacebuilding Support Office approved a project implemented by UN Women, UNDP and WFP and entitled “Sustaining Peace and Reconciliation through Strengthening Land Governance and Dispute Resolution Mechanisms”. The project was funded by the UN peacebuilding Fund (PBF) for a budget of $4 million over three years. The project has been supporting the implementation of the Land Rights Act (LRA) and Local Government Act (LGA), the latter of which was also passed in 2018 and should fully devolve political, administrative and fiscal authorities to counties over a ten-year period. The joint implementation of the two Acts aim to provide opportunities for empowering rural communities, including women and youth, by allowing them to manage their land and land-based resources to advance their economic growth and development, and thus contributing to a reduction of land-related disputes in conflict prone counties (Grand Cape Mount, Sinoe, Maryland and Nimba). It is also worth noting that, the proposed interventions aim to tackle the major problems identified by the Government, development partners and CSOs and respond to the issues identified in the conflict analysis and land related assessments.
In light of this, UN Women Liberia, the lead Agency for the project, is seeking to hire 2 Consultants: an International Lead Evaluation Consultant and a National Evaluation Consultant to conduct the end of project Evaluation. The International Evaluation Consultant will lead the evaluation process and decide on planning and distribution of the evaluation workload and tasks. The National Evaluation Consultant will provide requisite support to the International Evaluation Consultant throughout the evaluation process, including support with local access, cultural aspects and logistics.
Description of the joint Project
The joint project titled “Sustaining Peace and Reconciliation through Strengthening Land Governance and Dispute Resolution Mechanisms” is funded by the United Nations Peacebuilding Fund. The project is being implemented by UNW, UNDP and WFP in Nimba, Grand Cape Mount, Sinoe and Maryland Counties. In these counties, the project is strengthening the capacity of County Land Offices and further linking them with existing land dispute-related structures as well as the new structures created through the passage of LRA as well as supported the initial steps of formalization of customary land as a measure to prevent disputes relating to customary landowners and users. In addition, several interventions aimed to strengthen existing semi-formal and informal land dispute resolution mechanisms such as Multi-Stakeholder Platforms and the new mechanisms established with LRA such as CLDMCs, with
a view to reducing conflicts in a more transparent, effective and gender and youth responsive manner. The project started in January 2020 and was due to end in January 2023, an implementation period of 36 months. The total budget for the entire project duration is USD 3,996,522.48. A three month No Cost Extension has been sought to finalise some residual activities as well as this evaluation.
At national level the initiative supports the implementation of the 2017 Peacebuilding Plan, which was integrated into the Pillar 3: Sustaining Peace of the Government’s national development plan – the Pro-Poor Agenda for Prosperity and Development (PAPD). PAPD also calls for improving socio-economic human rights by passing and implementing the Land Rights Act to improve land tenure security; developing a regulatory framework for the actualization of the Liberia Land Authority Act; securing access to land by harmonizing of customary and statutory land tenure systems; and strengthening community land administration and governance framework (ensuring the inclusion of youth, women, and marginalized community members).
Likewise, it is aligned with the 2018 National Gender Policy which clearly calls for supporting women, land tenure and property rights including advocating for and promoting women’s access and control over land/land-based resources, and other forms of property and assets. In addition, there is alignment with the Liberian National Action Plan on Women Peace and Security (2019-2023), which emphasizes the importance of land, inheritance, and property rights for women. Moreover, the proposed intervention has been designed to support the Government of Liberia to implement the LRA and LGA including the Legal Aid Policy (2019) and the Land Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Policy.
The Government has identified land-related issues as critical drivers of conflict as well as the root causes of inter-community divisions. Land disputes at the local level impede development and have the potential to turn into large-scale conflicts. The passage of the Land Rights Act and the Local Government Act has significant peace dividends if successfully implemented. The Local Government Act provides for the decentralization of services and brings government closer to the people thereby reducing the potential of conflicts and addressing some of Liberia’s main conflict triggers and grievances. Further to this, the effects of environmental hazards vis-a-vis concessions are more likely to fuel conflicts in addition to already existent land disputes. Dialogue and confidence-building between concessionaires and communities will be an integral part of the proposed project, so that peacebuilding opportunities are not missed.
Key partners and beneficiaries of the project also consulted during project development include; communities from targeted counties, Rights and Rice Foundation (RRF), Government institutions such as the Liberia Land Authority (LLA), Office of the Legal Advisor to the President (OLA), and the Peacebuilding Office (PBO), the National Bureau of Concessions (NBC), National Centre for Coordination of Response mechanisms (NCCRM), Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) concession companies and civil society organizations.
In cognizance of past and ongoing projects in the land sector, the project aims to tackle major problems identified by Government and CSO partners and responds to the issues identified through the existing conflict analysis and land related assessments. The project outcomes respond to two key aspects; responds to the limited capacity of the Government to prevent land related conflicts and aims at strengthening the effectiveness, transparency and inclusiveness of land administrative structures at national and county levels. The second outcome aims at strengthening the existing land disputes resolution mechanisms.
The detailed project document including the results framework can be found as an annex to this TOR.
Project Theory of change and outcomes/outputs
IF customary governance authorities and communities in targeted counties are aware of the LRA and LGA, existing land disputes resolution mechanisms, concession agreements, and their role as well as have an improved understanding of women’s and youth rights to land; IF County land offices, county land boards, and Community Land Development and Management Committees in targeted counties have the capacity, procedures and systems in place to formalize customary land in a way that reflects rights and needs of all community members; IF existing semi-formal land dispute resolution bodies (i.e. MSPs) have the capacity
to provide a safe and inclusive platform for communities, government, and concession companies to resolve disputes in a gender and youth responsive manner; IF communities including women and youth in targeted counties have the capacity and skills to participate in formal and informal land dispute mechanisms; IF institutional capacity of LLA/NBC/EPA are strengthened to effectively prevent potential conflict triggers arising from concessionaires (i.e. environmental hazards and limited livelihood opportunities); IF Early warning and response mechanism become more sensitive to land disputes;THEN Land management will be more effective and inclusive, and land disputes will be better prevented and managed in targeted counties because existing semi-formal and informal land dispute resolution mechanisms; and government land management systems and capacities will be strengthened to reduce land related conflicts.
The Theory of Change is based on the following assumptions:
Existence of Government commitment to implement the LRA, LGA and the ADR policy at national and sub-national level;
The Government is willing to mainstream gender in their policies, rules and procedures;
Concessionaries are willing to deliver their commitments;
Targeted communities are willing to change attitudes towards women, youth and vulnerable group’s rights to land;
Stakeholders (Government, private sector, CSOs, Development partners) are able/willing to coordinate to maximize the impact of their work;
Outcomes and Outputs
Outcome 1. Authorities at national and local levels manage land allocation, registration and licensing processes in a more effective, transparent and inclusive manner reducing conflict.
Output 1.1. Customary governance authorities and communities in targeted counties are aware of the LRA, existing land disputes resolution mechanisms, concession agreements, and their role as well an improved understanding of women’s and youth rights to land
Output 1.2. County land offices and county land boards in targeted counties have the capacity, procedures and systems in place to formalize customary land in a way that reflects rights and needs of all community members
Output 1.3. CLDMCs are established in targeted counties and have the capacity to initiate the formalization and recognition of their land rights
Output 1.4. Early warning and response mechanism is engendered and integrates land disputes related data
Output 1.5. Institutional capacity of LLA/EPA/NBC/SPRC is strengthened to effectively prevent conflicts driven by the depletion of livelihood opportunities and environmental hazards
Outcome 2. Existing semi-formal and informal land dispute resolution mechanisms are strengthened, more sustainable and able to reduce conflict in a more effective and gender responsive manner
Output 2.1. Existing Semi-formal land dispute resolution bodies (CPC, CLDMC, SPRC, peace huts, multi-stakeholders’ platform) have strengthened capacity to resolve disputes in a sustainable gender and youth responsive manner
Output 2.2. Communities including Women and youth in targeted counties have the capacity and skills to participate in formal and informal land dispute mechanisms
Output 2.3. Coordination between Government agencies in charge of implement the LRA and LGA, development partners and CSOs is strengthened.
Output 2.4. Enhanced Multi Stakeholders Platforms capacity to find agreeable solutions, propose alternative livelihoods and address the effects of environmental hazards
Purpose (and use of the evaluation)
This evaluation is a mandatory component of project management, and the final evaluation report will be submitted to PBSO. As a -summative process, the purpose of this evaluation is to examine project progress and results. The evaluation will generate substantial evidence for informed future interventions and best practices. The evaluation will identify key results, challenges, lessons learnt, good practices, conclusions and recommendations that will support future joint programming and foster organizational learning and accountability.
The evaluation findings will be used by relevant stakeholders to:
Inform and enhance collective capacities of the Government at both the national and local levels to support and implement gender responsive land governance processes
Enhance capacities of CSOs and communities to participate actively in Land management processes
Enhance participation of women in leadership and in key decision-making structures and processes especially on Land governance
Enhance peace building initiatives and social cohesion through the adoption of Alternative dispute resolution mechanisms
Inform the development of future programming interventions to strengthen the results of this PBF funded flagship project peacebuilding initiatives.
This evaluation should inform the implementation of the Government’s Strategic Plan, new strategic documents such as the new United Nations Development Cooperation Framework (UNSCDF) and future programming actions of UN Women, UNDP, WFP including joint programming actions.
The findings of this evaluation will also be used by the UN to further refine its approaches towards the promotion of Women Peace and Security agenda and to inform the implementation of strategic documents including the 2020-2024 Strategic Note of UN Women Liberia CO.
Ultimately, the results of the evaluation will be publicly accessible through the Global Accountability and Tracking of Evaluation Use (GATE) system for global learning and the PBF website.
The main evaluation users include UN Women, UNDP and WFP in Liberia, as well as the Peacebuilding Fund and UNCT mor ebroadly. Furthermore, national stakeholders such as the Ministry of Gender Children and Social Protection (MGCSP), Liberia Land Authority (LLA), National Bureau of Concessions (NBC), Ministry of Internal Affairs (MIA), Peacebuilding Office (PBO), Office of the legal advisor to the President (OLA), Environment Protection Authority (EPA), National Center for the Coordination of Response Mechanisms (NCCRM), Rights and Rice foundation (RRF) and other CSOs.
The evaluation will be guided by the standard OECD/DAC evaluation criteria and GERAAS criteria list; i.e., a focus on relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, impact, coherence, sustainability, and Human Rights and Gender Equality.
The objectives of the evaluation are to:
Assess the relevance of the intervention, strategy and approach in the implementation of the women’s Peace and Security Agenda and achievement of women’s land rights and the broader peacebuilding needs of Liberia as well as the needs of the targeted communities;
Assess the effectiveness of the project implementation, including what outcomes and outputs were achieved and how they contributed to peacebuilding objectives;
Assess the efficiency of the project towards the achievement of results, including efficiency of project management, M&E and coordination, timeliness, value for money;
Assess the project coherence including quality of the inter-agency coordination mechanisms that were established at country level, but also coherence with previous relevant interventions and with interventions by other actors;
Assess sustainability of the project;
Determine whether human rights approach and gender equality principles are integrated adequately in the project..
Assess the overall impact of the project in terms of changing behaviors and attitudes related to land conflict and land management and Women, Peace and Security in this theme.
Identify and highlight important lessons learned, best practices and, strategies for replication and provide actionable recommendations for the design and implementation of future interventions.
Identify and highlight innovative approaches in all aspects of the project
Document and analyze possible weaknesses in order to improve next steps of UN programming in the area of women, peace, and security programming and land governance;
Scope of the evaluation
The evaluation will cover the implementation period of the Joint project, thus, January 2020 to January 2023 (36months).
It is intended that as much as possible the evaluation will provide a comprehensive assessment of the joint program covering all three levels of the program scope and their interconnections:
Community level - assessing how the joint programme initiatives, particularly by implementing partners on the ground, have created favorable conditions for women to exercise their rights to land, and led to enhanced participation of women in land governance and decision-making processes, dispute resolution processes etc.
- County level – analyze achievements of significant impact of the programme on the capacities of county level land administration
- National level - analyzing achievements over the last months of implementation, more specifically what have been the successes, opportunities missed, and constraints encountered.
The project implemented in four counties, Nimba, Grand Cape Mount, Maryland and Sinoe. The geographic scope of the evaluation will be decided in consultation with the evaluation team during the inception phase. The project targeted four counties and challenges that might hinder the data collection process at county level is the bad condition of roads during rainy season.
Evaluation design (process and methods)
The evaluation process is divided in six phases:
1) Preparation Phase
2) Inception phase
3) Data collection phase
4) Data analyses and syntheses phase
6) Dissemination and Management Response
The evaluation team (the International and National Consultants) is responsible for phases two, three, four and five while phase one and phase six are the responsibility of the Joint program Managers, the Deputy Country Representative of UN Women and designated representatives of UNDP and WFP in collaboration with the PBF Secretariat in the Resident Coordinator’s Office.
In addition, UN Women is a UN System-wide Action Plan on Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women, or UN-SWAP reporting entity and the consultants will take into consideration that all the evaluation in UN Women are annually assessed against the UN-SWAP Evaluation Performance Indicator and its related scorecard. In line with the above mentioned, the Evaluation Report will be subjected to UN-SWAP quality scoring and must demonstrate evidence of gender integration in the evaluation process and report. The methodology should clearly focus on highlighting gender issues in the implementation of the program. This is one of the elements by which this evaluation report will be scrutinized by a team of external evaluators, using the UN-SWAP criteria. The evaluation performance indicator [UN SWAP EPI Technical Guidance and Scorecard] is used to appreciate the extent to which the evaluation report satisfies the following criteria:
GEWE is integrated in the evaluation scope of analysis and evaluation indicators are designed in a way that ensures GEWE related data will be collected.
GEWE is integrated in evaluation criteria and evaluation questions are included that specifically address how GEWE has been integrated into the design, planning, implementation of the intervention and the results achieved;
A gender-responsive methodology, methods and tools, and data analysis techniques are selected.
Evaluation findings, conclusions and recommendations reflect a gender analysis.
A Project Evaluation Reference Group comprising UN Women, UNDP, WFP, PBF Secretariat, PBSO and relevant stakeholders will be established and will review the content and quality of all evaluation deliverables and provide joint comments to the evaluators within 7-10 days of submission and whose comments need to be considered and responded to by the evaluators
Duties and Responsibilities
The Consultant will undertake the following tasks, duties and responsibilities:
Review of Documents: UN Women will gather and share with the consultants all relevant reports and documents including the baseline study, the perception survey. The evaluators shall familiarize themselves with the programme through a review of relevant documents, including, but not be limited to: Project document, Joint Programme Work Plan, Annual and Semi-annual progress reports, Programme Monitoring reports Project procurement and financial reports,
Minutes of Project Management meetings, Policy briefs, studies and any other technical reports, etc.
Key Informant Interviews: The evaluator shall do a comprehensive stakeholder mapping in the beginning to identify the key informant interviewees. The evaluator shall carry out key informant interviews with major stakeholders. The interviews should be organized in a semi-structured format to include for instance. focused group discussions; individual interviews; surveys; and/or participatory exercises with the community or individuals. The information from this assessment will be used as a baseline for PAPD and UNSCDF.
Field visits: During site visits, the evaluator will carry out interviews with the community, making sure that the perspective of the most vulnerable group is included in the consultation. This shall include Focus Group discussions.
The evaluation team should take measures to ensure data quality, reliability and validity of data collection tools and methods and their responsiveness to gender equality and human rights; for example, the limitations of the sample (representativeness) should be stated clearly, and the data should be triangulated (cross-checked against other sources) to help ensure robust results.
Evaluation team is solely responsible for data collection, transcripts or other data analyses and processing work. Usage of online platforms and surveys as a complimentary and additional methodology is highly recommended. The evaluation team is expected to manage those platforms and to provide data analyses as defined in the Inception report.
The evaluation team should detail a plan on how protection of subjects and respect for confidentiality will be guaranteed. In addition, the evaluation team should develop a sampling frame (area and population represented, rationale for selection, mechanics of selection, limitations of the sample) and specify how it will address the diversity of stakeholders in the intervention
The evaluation should be conducted in accordance with UN Women evaluation Policy, evaluation Chapter of the Programme and Operations Manual (POM), the Global Evaluation Reports Assessment and Analysis System (GERAAS evaluation report quality checklist), the United Nations System-Wide Action Plan Evaluation Performance Indicators (UN-SWAP EP) and UN Women Evaluation handbook. All the documents will be provided by UN Women at the onset of the evaluation.
The evaluation methodology will be mixed methods, including quantitative and qualitative data collection methods and analytical approaches to account for complexity of gender relations and to ensure participatory and inclusive processes that are culturally appropriate.
The detailed methodology for the evaluation will be developed and presented by the consultants and validated by the Project Evaluation Reference Group at the inception of the evaluation
Participatory and gender sensitive evaluation methodologies will support active participation of women and girls, men and boys benefiting from the project interventions.
The evaluators are expected to discuss during the Inception phase how the process will ensure participation of stakeholders at all stages, with a specific emphasis on rights holders and their representatives. Their participation is crucial at each stage as follows: 1. Design; 2. Consultation of stakeholders; 3. Stakeholders as data collectors; 4. Interpretation and 5. Reporting, dissemination and usage of data. The list of stakeholders can be found in section III. Furthermore, a stakeholder analysis should be provided in the inception report.
It is important to pay particular attention to the participation of rights holders—in particular rural women. The evaluators are expected to validate findings through engagement with stakeholders at stakeholder workshops, debriefings or other forms of engagement.
Evaluation questions and criteria
The evaluation should be guided but not limited to the evaluation questions listed below. UN Women/UNDP/WFP and the PBF/PBSO could raise any other relevant issues that may emerge during the inception process. Importantly, the evaluator should not individually respond to each question through a separate report section, as this may lead to duplication, but should keep these questions in mind when drafting the analysis under each evaluation criterion.
Relevance: The extent to which the objectives of the Joint Programme are consistent with national evolving peacebuilding needs and priorities of the beneficiaries, partners, and stakeholders and are aligned with programme country government priorities as well as with UN Women, UNDP and WFP policies and strategies.’
Did the project results address the major peacebuilding needs of the target groups and of the country, more broadly?
How timely and urgent was the project vis-a-vis the sustaining peace context in Liberia and how did it effectively utilize windows of political opportunities?
How suitable for the context is the range of substantive areas in which the project is engaged (i.e. Women rights to land, Women participation in land governance processes, Alternative dispute resolution, Strengthening government institutions at national and local level, Enhanced livelihoods for concessions affected communities)
How does the project reflect and align to Liberia’s national plans on gender promotion as well as the PAPD and the UNDAF and to the specific government priorities on land governance and land conflict?
Effectiveness: The extent to which the project’s objectives were achieved or are expected/ likely to be achieved.
What has been the progress made towards achievement of the expected outcomes and outputs? What results were achieved?
What were the major interventions that contributed to the achievement of the outcomes and outputs?
To what extent are beneficiaries satisfied with the results?
To what extent did the project’s Theory of Change prove realistic and was implemented?
To what extent are the project approaches and strategies innovative? What types of innovative practices have been introduced? What are the unsuccessful innovative practices?
Has the project built synergies with other programmes being implemented at country level by United Nations, International NGOs and the Government of Liberia?
Efficiency: A measure of how economically resources / inputs (funds, expertise, time, etc.) were converted to results. It is also a measure of the operational efficiency, i.e management and timeliness.
Have resources been allocated strategically to achieve project outcomes?
Were resources sufficient to enable achievement of the expected outputs?
Is the joint project and its components cost-effective? Could activities and outputs have been delivered with fewer resources without comprising project quality?
Were the project’s organizational structure, management and coordination mechanisms effective in terms of project implementation and monitoring? Are there any recommendations for improvement?
Has the joint nature of the project improved efficiency in terms of delivery, including reduced duplication, reduced burdens and transactional costs? If so, what factors have influenced this?
How was data from monitoring used for management action and decision making?
Does the project have effective monitoring mechanisms in place to measure progress towards achievement of results?
Have the project’s organizational structures, managerial support and coordination mechanisms effectively supported the delivery of the project?
Sustainability: The likelihood of a continuation of project results after the intervention is completed or the probability of continued long-term benefits.
What is the likelihood that the project results will be of use in the long-term? What is the likelihood that the results from the project will be maintained for a reasonably long period of time once the project ends?
Which components of the project should be carried over into the next phase, and are there any recommendations for their improvement? Which positive /innovative approaches have been identified if any and how can they be replicated?
How have partnerships (with governments, UN, donors, NGOs, civil society organizations, religious leaders, the media) been established to foster sustainability of results?
Did the intervention design include an appropriate sustainability and exit strategy (including promoting national/ local ownership, use of local capacity, etc.) to support positive changes, including in Gender Equality and Human Rights after the end of the intervention? To what extent were stakeholders involved in the preparation of the strategy?
Gender Equality and Human Rights (GE&HR)
To what extent have gender and human rights considerations been integrated into the project design and implementation?
To what extent have GE&HR been reflected in the overall intervention budget?
Were there any constraints or facilitators (e.g., political, practical, bureaucratic) to addressing GE&HR issues during implementation? What level of effort was made to overcome these challenges?
Were the processes and activities implemented during the intervention free from discrimination to all stakeholders?
Coherence. Includes internal that addresses the synergies and interlinkages between the intervention and other interventions carried out by the same institution as well as the consistency of the intervention with the relevant international norms and standards to which that institution adheres. External coherence considers the consistency of the intervention with other actors’ interventions in the same context. This includes complementarity, harmonization and co-ordination with others, and the extent to which the intervention is adding value while avoiding duplication of effort.
Has the project-built synergies with other programmes being implemented at country level by United Nations, International NGOs and the Government of Liberia?
To what extent has the project’s intervention been consistent with interventions of others in the same context?
To what extent is the project complimentary, harmonized and coordinated with other interventions in this area?
Impact. addresses the ultimate significance and potentially transformative effects of the intervention. It seeks to identify social, environmental and economic effects of the intervention that are longer term or broader in scope than those already captured under the effectiveness criterion.
Has the project identified and addressed social, environmental and economic effects of the intervention that are longer term?
What indirect, secondary and potential consequences of the intervention were captured.
The questions above are a suggestion and could be changed during the inception phase in consultation with members of the Reference Group and UN Agencies. It is expected that the evaluation team will develop an evaluation matrix, which will relate to the above questions, the areas they refer to, the criteria for evaluating them, the indicators and the means of verification. The questions will be revised by a Team of Evaluators during the Inception Phase. All evaluations conducted by UN Women are publicly available on the Global Accountability and Tracking of Evaluation (GATE) system along with their management responses.
The evaluation is expected to be conducted according to the following time frame:
Desk review and inception meeting
The evaluator will attend a virtual inception meeting where orientation on programme objectives will be offered, as well as on progress made. At this stage of the evaluation, the evaluator will have the chance to speak with UN Women, UNDP and WFP staff, and UN Peacebuilding Fund Secretariat in Liberia as well as with selected stakeholder representatives. The evaluator will be given key programme documents for review and the Terms of Reference of the Evaluation. The inception meeting, desk review of key programme documents (e.g. programme documentation, contracts, agreements, progress reports, monitoring reports, etc.)
Feb. 20 – 27, 2023
Submission of draft Inception Report to the evaluation reference Group
The evaluators are expected to discuss during the Inception Workshops how the process will ensure participation of stakeholders at all stages, with a specific emphasis on rights holders and their representatives.
February. 28, 2023
Submission of Final Inception Report. The inception report should capture relevant information such as proposed methods; proposed sources of data; and data collection procedures. The inception report should also include an evaluation matrix, proposed schedule of tasks, activities and deliverables and should also contain background information.
The inception report should be approved by the reference Group, UN Women, UNDP and WFP
March 9, 2023
Data collection will include both in-country, face-to-face and/or virtual (telephone, video conferencing) interviews.
March 9 – 31, 2023
Analysis and presentation of preliminary findings
to the Reference Group.
The evaluator will share preliminary findings and recommendations with the Reference Group at the end of the field visit. Prior to this presentation, The Consultant will share the initial findings and recommendations with the UN Women programme team.
April 3 –13, 2023
Submission of interim Evaluation Report. Report structure should follow UNEG evaluation reporting guidance. The evaluators finalize the draft report. UN Women will review the report as part of quality assurance and will share it with the reference group for their feedback.
April 24, 2023
Comments from Evaluation Reference Group and Evaluation Technical Committee
The report should be finalized on the basis of feedback from UN Women and the Reference Group. UN Women will present the draft report to stakeholders in a validation meeting facilitated by the National Consultant.
May 3, 2023
Evaluation Team UN Women Evaluation Manager, Evaluation Reference Group and Evaluation Technical Committee, Peace Building Office Secretariat, PBF
Submission of a Final Evaluation Report. The final report will be structured as follows:
Table of Contents
List of abbreviations and acronyms
Background and context
Evaluation objectives and scope
Evaluation methodology and limitations
Gender, Equity and Human Rights
Terms of Reference
List of institutions interviewed, and sites visited
Evaluation tools (questionnaires, interview guides, etc.)
Summary matrix of findings, evidence, and recommendations
The final report will be submitted in soft copies.
A report is considered “final” when the Evaluation Manager confirms that it is complete and satisfactory in reference to suggestions for improvement.
May 31, 2023
Dissemination of Report.
With recommendations from the evaluation team, UN Women will develop a dissemination and utilization plan following the finalization of the Evaluation Report.
June 6, 2023
June 16, 2023
The national evaluators will produce the following deliverables:
Final Inception Report. A detailed inception report, including a work plan that will respond to the TOR with clear links between the proposed evaluation approach and evaluation questions.
A briefing and report with preliminary findings and Power Point Presentation of preliminary findings presented to the Reference Group
Interim Evaluation Report. Report structure should follow UNEG evaluation reporting guidance.
Power point Presentation of draft report. A presentation of draft report should be done at a validation workshop facilitated by the National Consultant
Finalized evaluation reports which shows in tracked change mode how the evaluation team has responded to comments on the draft report.
Please see Annex 3 for detailed description of deliverables.
All the deliverables, including annexes, notes and reports should be submitted in writing in English.
Upon receipt of the deliverables and prior to the payment of installments, the deliverables and related reports and documents will be reviewed and approved by UN Women. UN Women will approve the deliverables when it considers that the deliverables meet quality standards for approval. The period of review is one week after receipt.
Management of evaluation
The evaluation is managed by UN Women through its M&E Specialist and in close collaboration with the PBF Secretariat that has the mandate to coordinate all PBF evaluations in PRF countries where they exist.
Evaluation Reference Group will be set up to review and validate the draft and final reports submitted by the external consultants. The external consultants will consolidate inputs from the Evaluation Reference Group which will comprise members of relevant government institutions, the agencies and donor (PBSO/PBF Secretariat).
Specific roles and responsibilities for the Evaluation Technical Committee and the Evaluation Reference Group are as follows:
The Evaluation Technical Committee, Evaluation Reference Group will participate in the evaluation process and quality assure the evaluation report on the basis of UNEG standards and norms, UN SWAP Evaluation Performance Indicator and GERAAS meta-evaluation criteria.
To enhance the quality of this evaluation, the Evaluation Technical Committee and Evaluation Reference Group will be asked by the UNW-Liberia M&E Specialist to provide:
Feedback to the draft inception and evaluation report;
Recommendations on how to improve the quality of the final inception/evaluation report.
The Evaluation Manager (EM) will review feedback and recommendations from ETC and ERG and share with the Evaluation Team leader, who is expected to use them to finalize the inception/ evaluation report.
The Evaluation Technical Committee is comprised of the UN Women Evaluation Manager (Liberia), UN Women Regional Evaluation Analyst, LMPTF-PBF Regional Evaluation Specialist, Secretariat M&E Analyst, and Project Focal Points from UNDP and WFP. The Evaluation Technical Committee (ETC)comm will be chaired by the UN Women Evaluation Manager who will provide approval of the deliverables after clearance by the ETC and in consultation with the Regional Evaluation Specialist, in compliance with UN Women’s Evaluation Policy.
The ETC provides oversight, makes key decisions and quality assurance of evaluation process and deliverables. Specific responsibilities will include the following: ensure oversight of the evaluation methodology, review draft reports; ensure that the deliverables are of quality; participate in meetings as key informant interviewees; manage the evaluation by requesting progress updates on the implementation of the evaluation workplan, approve deliverables, organize meetings with key stakeholders, and identify strategic opportunities for sharing and learning. ETC substantive inputs are expected throughout the evaluation process.
The Evaluation Reference Group is an integral part of the evaluation technical committee and is established to facilitate the participation of relevant stakeholders in the evaluation process, with a view to increase the chances that the evaluation results will be used, enhance quality, clarify roles and responsibilities and prevent void real conflict of interest.
The ERG will be composed of individuals from key Government line ministries ( ie. MGCSP, MiA through the PBO,NCCRM, LLA,NBC) including representatives from two implementing UN Agencies, Civil Society and a representative from the Peacebuilding Office. The ERG will be engaged throughout the whole evaluation process and willreview the draft Inception report andevaluation report. The ERG will be chaired by the Evaluation Manager. The Consultant is expected to integrate comments from the Evaluation Reference Group into the Final Report, with an audit trail of responses. To ensure transparency the process in line with the UNEG norms and standards, justification should be provided for any recommendations that the Evaluation team omits.
The evaluation is managed by UN Women LBR Evaluation Manager in consultation with the Evaluation Technical Committee (ETC), Evaluation Reference Group, and External consultants in the following matrix:
Management Structure and Responsibilities
The roles and responsibilities are arranged in line with the Joint Evaluation modality
Evaluation Technical Committee
UN Women LBR Evaluation Manager (Emebet)
UNW-WCA Evaluation Analyst (Romain)
PBO Monitoring and Evaluation Specialist (John)
Finalizes the TOR; contracts and manages the evaluation team; ensures deadlines and milestones are met; supports data collection activities; consolidates and solicits feedback that will feed into the key deliverables; provides the following lists: key informants in HQ, region offices, and country offices, sub grantees; provides key programme documents, and list of locations for site visits; accountable for its robustness; meticulously reviews all deliverables based on their role in the evaluation, provides substantive comments and approves on the context of the joint programme; ensures the quality and independence of the evaluation are in alignment with UNEG standards and principles; ensures evaluation questions, findings, and recommendations are in alignment with the OECD/DAC evaluation criteria; endorses the evaluation dissemination process; contributes to the management response; and provides logistical support for mission; provides logistical support for the presentation of the inception report and the final report; participates in meetings on: progress updates on the work plan, preliminary findings briefing, key informant interview, and final report presentation
Evaluation Reference Group
Government line ministries
Joint Programme Steering Committee
Plays a key role based on their expertise providing their perspective as an external individual on the way the programme has rolled out; shares views on the feasibility of the recommendations; makes recommendations on the dissemination of the findings of the evaluation; makes recommendations on the implementation of the management response; and participates in meetings as a key informant interviewee.
Independent National and International Consultant
Carries out the external evaluation; prepares evaluation reports, including the inception report, work plan, bi-weekly progress updates, preliminary results briefing, final report, and holds a dissemination presentation. The independent consultant(s) will report to the Evaluation Manager in Liberia
Required Skills and Experience
Evaluation team composition, skills and experiences
The evaluation team will be comprised of two evaluation experts: The Evaluation Team Leader (International Consultant) and Evaluation Team Member (National Consultant). The Evaluation Team Leader will have the overall evaluation responsibility and accountability for the report writing and data analyses. The independent consultants or team will report to and be managed by UN Women.
University degree in social sciences, political sciences, public administration or related field;
At least 3 years of professional experience in supporting project evaluations/conducting surveys, facilitating focus group discussions/liaising with different types of stakeholders/ understanding of the local cultural and political context and excellent organizational skills including in the area of Women Peace and Security
Experience Evaluating Land governance programmes is desirable
Knowledge and experience of the UN System is an asset;
Fluency in English (excellent writing, editing and communication skills).