Evaluation Consultant for Mainstreaming Biodiversity Conservation in the Tourism Sector of the Protected Areas and Strategic Ecosystems of San Andres, Old Providence, and Santa Catalina Islands - World Wildlife Fund

World Wildlife Fund, Inc. (WWF) policies and procedures for all GEF financed full-sized projects require a midterm evaluation (MTE). The following terms of reference (TOR) sets out the expectations for the MTE for the project: “Mainstreaming Biodiversity Conservation in the Tourism Sector of the Protected Areas and Strategic Ecosystems of San Andres, Old Providence, and Santa Catalina Islands” hereafter referred to as the “Project.” The technical consultant selected to conduct this evaluation will hereafter be referred to as “evaluator.”

The Project seeks to mainstream biodiversity conservation and green recovery in the tourism sector to maintain ecosystem health and the environmental goods and services provided by the Seaflower MPA. The Project was organized into the following components:

• Component 1 - Planning and Institutional Framework for a biodiversity focused tourism sector in the MPA, PAs and three islands of the Archipelago, in the context of the POMIUAC. Component 1 seeks to integrate into the POMIUAC different strategies and regulations for mainstreaming biodiversity in the tourism sector of the Archipelago, inclusive of beach areas and other landscapes in the project intervention areas. This component, therefore, seeks to address improved governance, the identification of effective policies, and capacity building.
• Component 2 - Management of tourism impacts on the key biodiversity of the MPA, PAs and the three islands. This component focuses on the generation of comprehensive and reliable information on the impact of the tourism sector on the biodiversity of the Archipelago for supporting management decisions and to ensure its proper diffusion and dissemination with policy makers, authorities, and the public; and using this information to undertake management actions to reduce the threats caused by tourism on key ecosystems and species.
• Component 3 - Biodiversity mainstreaming in innovative coastal and marine local tourism development in the MPA, PAs and three islands. This component seeks to consolidate tourism as a tool for the conservation of biodiversity in MPAs, PAs and the three islands of the archipelago - it will engage with the small-scale tourism operators of the Islands to strengthen and mainstream biodiversity conservation and green recovery approaches into existing local tourism initiatives, develop a strategy to integrate and preserve biodiversity-friendly culturally rich community-based tourism, select small tourism businesses preliminarily identified by CORALINA, and the development of marketing plans and strengthening of business models and promote the alignment of the business models with the conservation actions of the ecosystems and species management plans.
• Component 4 - Monitoring and Evaluation, awareness raising and knowledge management.

Scope and Objectives of The Evaluation       

WWF is seeking an independent consultant to undertake a Midterm Evaluation (MTE) of the Project. The scope of the MTE will cover the WWF GEF financed components.

The objective of this evaluation is to examine the extent, magnitude, sustainability and potential for project impacts to date; identify any project design problems; assess progress towards project outcomes and outputs; and draw lessons learned that can improve the project effectiveness, efficiency and sustainability of project benefits.  Based on this assessment, it is expected that the evaluator will provide feasible recommendations that could be applied for the remaining duration of the project.

Evaluation Approach and Method

The evaluation will adhere to the relevant guidance, rules and procedures established by WWF^[1] and align with guidance from the GEF Terminal Evaluation^[2] and Ethical Guidelines.^[3] The evaluation must provide evidence‐based information that is independent, participatory, transparent, and ethical. The evaluator must be unbiased and free of any conflicts of interest with the project. The evaluator is expected to reflect all stakeholder views and follow a participatory and consultative approach. There should be close engagement with government counterparts, the GEF operational focal points in the country, the Executing Agency project management unit (PMU), partners and key stakeholders. Contact information will be provided.

The Evaluation process will include the following, with deliverables marked by “*”:

1. Desk review consisting of, but not limited to:
   • Project Document and CEO Endorsement Letter;
   • Relevant safeguards documents, including the Safeguards Screen and the Categorization memo, Stakeholder Engagement Plan;
   • METT tools for the MPA and 3 Protected Areas;
   • Annual Work Plans (AWP) and Budgets;
   • Project Progress Reports (PPR) including Results Framework and AWP Tracking;
   • GEF Agency reports, including Project Implementation Reports (PIRs) and Supervision Mission Reports (PrISM);
   • Relevant financial documents, including financial progress reports; co-financing monitoring tables and co-financing letters;
   • Meeting minutes (Project Steering Committee (PSC)) and relevant virtual meetings with the WWF- GEF Agency and support team; and
   • Other relevant documents provided by the Executing Agency and partners.
2. Inception report that outlines evaluation methodology*, which shall include data sources and data collection procedure, initial list of partners and stakeholders to be contacted for visits and interviews, revised timeline, survey tools or questionnaires to be utilized ,Evaluation Matrix with guiding questions, etc ;
3. Field visits with PMU and project partners, as necessary and feasible;
4. Interviews, discussions and consultations at local levels, national and international levels, including CI Colombia, CORALINA, other executing partners, GEF Operational Focal Points (OFP), Project Steering Committee (PSC) members, beneficiaries, Technical Committee Members, WWF GEF and Extended Team primarily conducted virtually;
5. Post-field visit debrief and presentation* of initial findings to project management team and other partners as feasible;
6. Draft report* not to exceed 60 pages (excluding annexes) shared with GEF AMU and PMU for review and feedback.  A sample outline will be provided; and
7. Final MTE report* that has incorporated feedback and comments.

Expected Content of Report

The Midterm Evaluation report will include:

• Information on the evaluation process, including when the evaluation took place, sites visited, participants, key questions, summary of methodology and rating rubric, and feedback log showing how comments on draft were incorporated;
• Assessment of Relevance (project design, theory of change);
• Assessment of project Effectiveness and rating of project objective and outcomes (individual and overall);
• Assessment and rating of risks to the Sustainability of project outcomes;
• Assessment and rating of Monitoring and Evaluation design and implementation;
• Assessment of knowledge management approach, including activities and products;
• Assessment of replication and catalytic effects of the project;
• Assessment of Relevance of the project (e.g. with WWF and GEF priorities) and Coherence;
• Assessment of stakeholder engagement(e.g. private sector and communities), analysis of the level of participation, collaboration and ownership of various stakeholders, including commitments made by local partners and collaborators;
• Assessment of gender-responsive measures;
• Assessment of any environmental and social impacts and safeguards used for the project. A review of risk category classification and mitigation measures;
• Assessment of Efficiency, financial management and summary of co-financing delivered;
• Assessment and ratings of Implementation and Execution;
• Summary table of key findings by core criteria^[4] and GEF ratings, including justification and/or indicators for their determination;
• Key lessons tied to identified strengths or issues;
• Recommendations that include: practical and short-term corrective actions by evaluation criteria to address issues and findings; and best practices towards achieving project outcomes, and knowledge sharing / replication for other projects of similar scope.

[1] For additional information on evaluation methods adopted by WWF, see the WWF Evaluation Guidelines , published on our WWF Program Standards public website.

[2] For additional information on the GEF Terminal Evaluation Guidelines, see the GEF Terminal Evaluation Guidelines , published on the GEF Independent Evaluation Office website.

[3] Please see the GEF Ethical Guidelines as published on GEF website.

[4] See annex A

Required Qualifications and Experience

• Minimum 10 years of relevant professional experience in monitoring and evaluation of multilateral donor funded conservation projects;
• Diverse experience with evaluation methodologies
• Excellent written and oral communication in English and Spanish.

Preferred Qualifications and Experience

• Recent experience conducting evaluations (for GEF financed projects is an advantage);
• Technical knowledge in the- Biodiversity or Natural Resource Management, Natural Sciences, Public Policy, Sustainable Development;
• Knowledge of GEF Monitoring and Evaluation Policy;
• Experience with WWF Project and Program Management Standards or Conservation Standards;
• Experience with social assessments, participatory techniques, and gender mainstreaming;
• Knowledge and experience in implementing or reviewing application of social and environmental safeguards policies in GEF (or similar) projects;
• Regional experience an asset; and
• Ample experience working with government agencies and regional governance bodies, specifically in the region and, preferably, with multiple government bodies.

PROPOSAL PROCESS

Interested consultants are invited to submit a technical and financial proposal with their curriculum vitae, a relevant writing sample and three professional references. Only complete proposals will be accepted. The financial proposal should include fee and reimbursable expenses, if applicable. The total budget shall not exceed USD25,000 Individual, team or consulting firm proposals are welcome. Women and members of social minorities are encouraged to apply.

Interested consultants are requested to send their proposals to EvaluationsWWFGEF@wwfus.org by November 22, 2024.  All questions about the requirements or process should be submitted to this e-mail address by November 15, 2024. Responses to frequent and submitted questions will be available to all interested consultants in Annex F at the following link : https://docs.google.com/document/d/1q0edTy5lix9H7iJ-j2qvd-OotvKpjb-h/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=101431196757707270045&rtpof=true&sd=true.

The technical proposal and qualifications/experience of the individual or team will account for 90% of the weighted score of the proposal.  The technical score will be based on how the proposal reflects an understanding of the work and adherence to the TOR and quality of the proposal (readability, depth/breadth and suitability of the methodology), as well as the degree to which the candidate meets desired and required qualifications/experience mentioned in the terms of reference above. The financial elements of the proposal will account for 10% of the weighted score of the application.

Once all proposals have been scored by the review committee, a shortlist of proposals will be determined, and the candidates notified.  Shortlisted candidates will have their references contacted, proposal reviewed by project stakeholders and will participate in an interview. Shortlisted candidates who are not selected will be provided with information on relative strengths and weaknesses of their proposal, but specific scores and the identity of other candidates will not be shared.

The selection process will be in compliance with WWF and GEF requirements.  Any questions or concerns about non-compliance or irregularities in the process can be raised through WWF’s mechanism for reporting concerns available here: https://wwfus.ethicspoint.com.  

To see the full terms of reference with annexes, please go to: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1q0edTy5lix9H7iJ-j2qvd-OotvKpjb-h/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=101431196757707270045&rtpof=true&sd=true