Background

The UN Kosovo Team (UNKT) is in the pre-final year of the current UNCDP (UNDAF like document) named UN Common Development Plan (UNCDP) 2016-2020 for Kosovo. In 2019, UNKT is undertaking evaluation of the UNCDP as per UN Development Group’s (UNDG) guidance on UNDAF ToRs for evaluation, UN Evaluation Group (UNEG) Norms and Standards, and UNEG ethical guidelines.
The UNCDP was designed in a two-track approach that combined traditional analysis and formal consultations with more informal efforts to redesign the way that the UNKT members collaborate as a team.

Current UNCDP was designed in a process as agreed by the Heads of Agencies (HoAs) with the conclusion to include only joint work and joined up approaches of the UNKT into the CDP. With time, this posed quite a limitation to reporting on non-CDP UNKT activities in Kosovo and as agreed among HoAs, individual agencies programmes and projects that extend beyond the CDP identified priority areas are currently captured through a process called “UNCDP+”. This captures all UNKT strategic developmental, programmatic and operational activities in Kosovo whether those are joint or individual actions implemented by UN Agencies.

In terms of UN context, Kosovo is a UN mission context, in what is called a non-integrated UN mission setting. UNKT is comprised of 18 UN agencies, programmes and affiliate partners. With current UN reforms on development system and on peace and security, the UN Kosovo team (UNKT) and the UN Mission (UNMIK), share a joint Integrated Strategic Framework to ensure complementarity and coherence as well as a Joint Programme “Justice 2020” involving selected UN organizations. Additionally, and as part of individual agency mandates, post-conflict dimensions are integrated in agency projects and programmes, including those with normative frameworks, and OHCHR and UNODC offices based in UNMIK, also participates in the UNKT meetings, retreats and results groups. UNMIK Gender, Rule of Law and Communication Officers also participates in relevant results/thematic groups.

The Kosovo authorities were part of the prioritization process and design of UNCDP Outcomes. In a non-UN recognized context, the UNCDP was signed by all participating UN organizations, and was endorsed through exchange of letters with the Prime Minister, while the annual reporting and planning was presented to the authorities, particularly recently in connection to the SDGs.

The SDGs were not integrated into the current version of the CDP as the Prioritization and Out-come/Output definition had been completed before the final endorsement of the SDG Targets and Indicators was approved.

It important to point out that Kosovo has joined the Agenda 2030 global commitments despite not being a signatory to the UN General Assembly (GA), by formally ratifying an SDG Resolution by the Parliament in 2018 and establishment of a Council for Sustainable Development in early 2019 as well as an incipient group on SDGs implementation and monitoring in the Office of the Prime Minister. National Development Strategy is the main strategic document that has been aligned to the SDGs at the level of both targets and indicators. The NDS focuses on private sector development, governance and human capital. As such it misses other relevant social indicators which determine real human development.

In addition, UNKT has organized two pre-MAPS missions to Kosovo, in July 2017 and November 2019 on awareness raising as well as on SDG integration with the Kosovo institutions, donors, civil society and private sector. Apart from the structures, the Kosovo Agency of Statistics has committed to work on SDG Data by appointing the focal points for this task. The OPM Team has requested the UNKT to do mapping of SDG indicators and policy objectives, which would provide space for and their integration within government strategic documents. Through a Rapid Integrated Assessment (RIA), mapping of the 25 strategies took place in 2018 with 25 more planned for 2019.

Kosovo CDP 2016-2020 main characteristics
In an extensive consultative process with the involvement of the Kosovo authorities, civil society and the UN organizations, UNKT defined the CDP priority areas and key Outcomes that were aligned to Kosovo’s economic, social and overall development needs. Each area has three defined Outcomes (total 9 Outcomes and more than 30 Outputs). Each Output was “owned” by the proposing organization. Specific indicators and targets were developed at the levels of Outputs and also Outcomes. Those were measured annually as agreed at the HoA level, reflected through UNKT Annual reports.
List of Areas, Outcomes and leadership for their achievement is included below:

By focusing on the alignment of this document to Kosovo’s priorities, UNKT aimed to leverage its unique, comparative advantages in pursuit of positive, transformative changes that will benefit all Kosovars. This effort considered complementarities with and partnering as necessary with the international community, civil society and other major stakeholders in Kosovo.

For full implementation of the CDP necessary resources were estimated to be about USD 33.3 million USD of which 17.8 million USD were available (almost 50%). The estimated funding gap at the CDP implementation outset was 15.5 million USD.

The UN Development Coordinator and the UNKT are responsible for the effectiveness and accountability towards the UNKT interventions. Under the overall UNDCO guidance and oversight, the UNKT Results Groups, and functional teams (Communications, Gender Theme Group, and Monitoring and Evaluation) contributed to the cooperation and collaboration between the United Nations Organizations in key thematic areas such as gender and youth issues, employment, environment and health, migration issues, SDGs etc. These results will be further evaluated through this assignment.

Finally, the rationale for this UNCDP evaluation is twofold:

a. provide an independent evaluation of the results of the UNKT’s work and records achievements against the outputs and outcomes set forth in the current CDP, and potential desired impact of results by the end of the CDP cycle, including to draw key lessons learned and good practices for the UNKT and its partners from the current UNCDP cycle;
b. to inform and provide guidance for development of the next UNCDP cycle, with fully integrated SDGs in support to Kosovo’s commitments, with strengthened complementarity to other international cooperation partners, bilateral and multilateral and to help the UNKT to align with new generation of UNDAFs and the wide UN development system and peace and security reforms;

Duties and Responsibilities

The UNCDP evaluation scope, purpose and objectives:

SCOPE of this evaluation will include an examination of the relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, and sustainability of the interventions adopted and implemented by the UNKT, as well as coordination and collaboration within UN Agencies and added value of the work of the UNKT in Kosovo.
Kosovo was not a full Delivering as One programme, but elements which UNKT took on voluntarily are: Communicating as one, One Programme, operation as one. Evaluation will look at implementation of these elements which reflect internal coherence and efficiency gains of the UN.
The scope of this evaluation will cover the period from 1 January 2016 to 30 June 2019.

OBJECTIVES of this UNCDP evaluation are to find responses to the question of what has been achieved for the duration of the UNCDP, what has changed and did that make an impact on people’s lives. Also, the aim is to improve accountability within the UN system by enabling learning about what has worked, what has not, and identify why has that occurred. Ultimately, the objective is to use knowledge from this implementation, in terms of mechanisms, structures and tools, and how did those contribute to advance cross cutting aspects of work (RBM, Human Rights Based Approach, and Gender equality).

These objectives will enable design of recommendations for improvement of UNKTs performance and include changes into the new UNDAF.

Evaluation Criteria and Questions

UNDAF evaluation will fully rely on the United Nations Evaluation Group ‘Norms and Standards for Evaluation”, in and specifically supported by the five principles of OECD/DAC and their questions below:

Relevance: The extent to which the objectives of UNCDP are consistent with Kosovo’s needs, priorities, the country’s international and regional commitments (EU integration and SDGs), including on human rights (CEDAW, CPRD, CRC, etc.) and the recommendations of Human Rights mechanisms, sustainable development, environment, and the needs of women and men, girls and boys in Kosovo.
• To what extent are UNCDP objectives or outcomes still valid and aligned to key Kosovo’s development priorities including their underlying and root causes priorities?
• To what extent have human rights principles and standards been reflected or promoted in the UNCDP?
• To what extent and in what ways has the UNCDP responded to reducing inequalities and other cross-cutting issues reflected in UNCDP? Were the specific goals and targets for vulnerable and marginalized people set and if so have they been met?
• To what extent has institution-building and institution-strengthening taken place in human rights and gender equality terms?
• To what extent the UNCDP clearly articulated results (outcome level), indicators for measuring progress, and budgetary resources reflected UN focused framework and the system’s comparative advantage?
• To what extent UNCDP incorporates the SDGs agenda currently and how can the UNDS in Kosovo ensure that the Agenda 2030 is fully incorporated in the next UNCDP cycle?

Effectiveness: The extent to which the UNKT contributed to, or is likely to contribute to the outcomes defined in the UNCDP. The evaluation should also note how the results have affected Kosovo’s development positively or negatively as per foreseen plans.
• To what extent UNCDP objectives or outcomes were achieved? What are the major factors that facilitated or hindered the achievement of these objectives?
• What can be learned and incorporated into the next UNDAF cycle?
• What are the collaborative advantage of the UN organizations to contribute to the achievement of development objectives in Kosovo? How have the UN agencies used these to support the implementation of the UNCDP?
• What system and tools exist for monitoring implementation of the UNCDP? What challenges have been experienced in ongoing monitoring of UNCDP implementation?
• To what extent the UNCDP contributed to the SDGs - although its priorities were agreed before the SDGs were adopted in 2015?

Efficiency: The extent to which outcomes are achieved with the appropriate amount of resources and maintenance of minimum transaction cost (funds, expertise, time, administrative costs, etc.).
• To what extent does the UNCDP demonstrate a complementary and coordinated approach by the UN Development System (UNDS), including consideration of joint programming and common positions on situations of concern? Are UNCDP priorities sufficiently targeted to maximize efficiency?
• To what extent does the UNCDP underpin the UN transparency and accountability to beneficiaries of assistance, including through clear mechanisms for accountability?
• To what extent and how has the UN system mobilized and used its resources (human, technical and financial) and improved interagency synergies to achieve its planned results in the current UNCDP cycle?
• To what extent harmonization measures at the operational level contributed to improved efficiency and results?

Sustainability: The extent to which the benefits from a development intervention have continued, or are likely to continue, after it has been completed.
• Has UNCDP enabled innovative approaches embedded in institutional learning for capacity development (government, civil society and NGOSs) to enable these actors to continue achieving positive results without the UN/development partners’ support?
• Have complementarities, collaborations and /or synergies fostered by UNCDP contributed to greater sustainability of results of Development partners and Government interventions in the country?
• Does the UNCDP respond to the challenges of capacity development and promote ownership of programmes?
• Analyse to what extent results achieved and strategies used by the supported Country Programmes and projects are sustainable (i) as a contribution to Kosovo’s development and (ii) in terms of the added value of UNCDP for cooperation among individual UN agencies.
• To what extent and in what ways have capacities been enhanced in Kosovo’s institutions, civil society and NGOs?
• Have complementarities, collaboration and / or synergies fostered by UNCDP contributed to greater sustainability of results of Country Programmes and projects of individual UN agencies?

Additional evaluation cross-cutting questions that need to be addressed are:
a. Five UNDAF (UNCDP) Programming Principles. To what extent have the UNCDP programming principles (human rights-based approach, gender equality, environmental sustainability, results-based management, capacity development) been considered and mainstreamed in the UNCDP chain of results?
- To what extent did the UNCDP make use of and promote human rights and gender equality standards and principles (e.g. participation, non-discrimination, accounta-bility, etc.) to achieve its goal?
- To what extent did UNCDP strengthen the capacities for data collection and analysis to ensure disaggregated data on the basis of race, nationality, age, sex, geographic location, etc. and did those subject to discrimination and disadvantage benefited from priority attention?
- Did the UNCDP effectively use the principles of environmental sustainability to strengthen its contribution to local development results?
- Did the UNCDP adequately use RBM to ensure a logical chain of results and establish a monitoring and evaluation framework?
- Did the UNCDP adequately invest in, and focus on, local capacity development? To what extent and in what ways did UNCDP contribute to capacity development of government, NGOs and civil society institutions?
b. Other factors. A number of Kosovo-specific factors that have affected the performance of the UNKT in the framework of the UNCDP need to be examined:
- How well did the UNKT use its partnerships (with civil society/private sector/local government/parliament/ human rights institutions/international development partners) to improve its performance?
- Regarding ownership of objectives and achievements, to what extent was the “active, free, and meaningful” participation of all stakeholders (including non-resident agencies) ensured in the UNCDP process? Did they agree with the outcomes and continue to remain in agreement? What mechanisms were created throughout the implementation process to ensure participation?
- How adequately did the UNKT respond to change (e.g. elections, shifting priorities) in planning and during the implementation of the UNCDP?

In addition to these core standard questions, the evaluation experts will develop context-specific sub-questions during the inception phase of the UNCDP evaluation. For this purpose, during the inception mission the evaluation expert will conduct a stakeholder analysis followed by ample in-country consultations will all key response stakeholders, to ensure that their views on issues that need to be considered, potential sub-questions, etc. are incorporated into the UNCDP evaluation. The evaluation is intended to be forward looking and therefore needs to take into consideration what is important for the future UNCDP, including with regard to the 2030 Agenda.

Evaluation methodology

The approach of the evaluation shall be participatory, that is, be flexible in design and implementation, ensuring stakeholder participation, and facilitating learning and feedback. In all cases, consultants are expected to use all available information sources that will provide evidence on which to base evaluation conclusions and recommendations. Anticipated approaches to be used for quantitative and qualitative data collection and analysis by the evaluator are desk review, surveys/interviews with key stakeholders, field visits, focus groups and participatory techniques.

Data collection methods: This evaluation will capture all relevant documents, reports and analysis that have been developed during the last three years. These will include the Annual UNKT reports (2016, 2017, and 2018), the SG reports, the EU Country reports (2017, 2018), Gender scorecard reports and MAPS mission reports.
The UNCDP evaluation will draw on a variety of data collection methods including, but not limited to:
- Documents/desk review focusing on UNCDP planning documents, including joint work plans, annual reports and past evaluation reports (including those on projects evaluations commissioned by UN Agencies and those issued by Kosovo institutions), strategy papers, plans and policies and related programme and joint project documents. The key strategic documents which guided and continue to be relevant to UNCDP include the National Development Strategy (NDS), the Stabilization and Association Agreement (SAA) process, the European Reform Agenda (ERA), Economic Reform Programme (ERP), and cross sectoral strategies, Reports on the progress against local and international commitments. Some relevant reports launched over the last years include; and 2016 on labour market development for women and youth. Also World Bank’s Country Snapshots, economic and environmental issues reports and Doing Business reports; UNICEF and KAS MICS, The Multiple Overlapping Deprivation Analysis (MODA) for Kosovo (2014), The Demographic Dividend Study for Kosovo – A time sensitive opportunity (2015), UNHCR and IOM’s data on migration and refugees, and other UN reports, have fed into the repository of collective UN knowledge.
- Semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders including key government counterparts, donor community members, representatives of key civil society organizations, UNCT members, and implementing partners, direct beneficiaries.
- Surveys and/or questionnaires including participants in development programmes, UNKT members, and other stakeholders.
- Focus Group discussions involving groups of stakeholders, beneficiaries, UN partners, including UNMIK, and decision-makers.

In general, the evaluation approach should follow the UNEG guidance on integrating human rights and gender equality, UNEG norms and standards and international principles for development evaluation. In particular, in line with the UN System-Wide Action Plan (UN-SWAP) on gender equality, data collection methods and process should consider gender sensitivity.

The final report should be compliant with UNEG quality checklist of evaluation reports and acknowledge how inclusive stakeholder participation was ensured during the evaluation process and any challenges to obtaining the gender equality information or to addressing these issues appropriately. Data should be systematically disaggregated by sex and age and, to the extent possible, disaggregated by geographical region, ethnicity, disability, migratory status and other contextually-relevant markers of equity. Adherence to a code of ethics and a human rights based and gender sensitive approach in the gathering, treatment and use of data collected should be made explicit in the inception report. Perspective from both rights holders and duty bearers shall be collected.

Validation: The UNCDP evaluation will use a variety of validation methods to ensure that the data and information used and conclusions made carry the necessary depth. Triangulation of information sources and findings improved validity, quality and use of evaluation.

This work will be done through three key phases:

1. Planning and preliminary analysis - preparation for work, collections of documents, preliminary desk review, meetings with the UNKT in support to preparations for an Inception Report;
2. Conduct of the evaluation – Field mission including meeting with all agreed relevant stakeholders leading up to preparation of the Draft UNCDP Evaluation Report;
3. Follow up and finalization – Production of the Final UNCDP Evaluation Report, and coordination with UNKT to finalize the report.

Key UN resources that will be used for evaluation:
http://www.uneval.org/document/guidance-documents
http://www.uneval.org/document/download/2014
http://www.unwomen.org/en/how-we-work/un-system-coordination/promoting-un-accountability
http://www.unevaluation.org/document/detail/607

Management and Conduct of the Evaluation

The UNCDP evaluation consultant will work under the supervision of a dual-tiered evaluation management structure: an UNDAF Evaluation Steering Committee (UESC) and an UNDAF Evaluation Management Group (UEMG) and with the advisory support of the Evaluation Reference Group. These are ad-hoc structures created for the duration of the UNADF evaluation as is required by the UNEG evaluation guidelines as well as UNDGs UNDAF evaluation guidelines for ToRs.

UNDAF Evaluation Steering Committee (UESC) is represented by the RC, the Chairs and co-Chairs of Results Groups, UN Head of Agencies and government representatives. UESC is the decision-making organ for the UNDAF evaluation. UESC will guide, provide strategic inputs in a consultative process, and validate all the deliverables during evaluation. The UESC is also the main body responsible for providing a written and agreed management response to the evaluation within a month of receiving the final evaluation report. The UESC will meet at least three times: for validating the Inception report, for providing feedback to the draft report and for the Final Report presentation.

UNDAF Evaluation Management Group (UEMG) will provide necessary support during commissioning of the evaluation such as contact person to be interviewed, review of data collections methods proposed by the evaluator, review of inception review and provide comments and review of draft report and provide comment. The UEMG members will be either focal points appointed by HoA and M&E team members. They will be responsible for the support to day-to-day implementation of the evaluation including providing inputs to the ToR, supporting and guiding the consultant, reviewing and providing substantive comments on evaluation work plan inception report, analytical framework and methodology.

Evaluation Reference Group (ERG) will assume the day-to-day responsibilities for managing the evaluation process and serve as the focal point for ensuring the evaluation runs smoothly. This follows the standard procedures for organizing a major evaluation.

All members are expected to attend presentation of initial key evaluation findings, and the final presentation of UNDAF Final report. All deliverables will be reviewed first by members of the UEET and the DCO staff before sharing with the UESC members for their validation.

Support of the RC/DC Office/UNKT to the evaluation process

The RC/DC Office will support the Evaluation Consultants with the following:
- Securing relevant background documentation required for a comprehensive desk review and guidance
- Provision of list of contacts in advance and additional information as requested
- Provision of vehicle and driver or taxi for field visits
- Provision of office/working/meeting space during the assignment. The consultants will however have to use his/her own computer/laptop

Composition of the Evaluation Team and reporting requirements
A team of two evaluators is necessary to cover the complexities of Kosovo’s UNCDP evaluation context. The evaluation team will consist of one International Consultant and one Local-Team leader.

The team leader- Local Consultant will lead the entire evaluation process, working closely with UNKT, produce Inception report, Draft and Final Evaluation Report.

The International Consultant will provide quality assurance and global guidance as necessary during the entire process for successfully conducting of the evaluation, as well as prepare surveys and questionnaires that are needed for specific data collection and analysis. International consultant will also present finding to stakeholders and structures that are active part of the UNCDP evaluation.

Both consultants will also conduct the evaluation process in a timely manner and communicate with the EMG on a regular basis and highlight progress made/challenges encountered.

The quality assurance for this evaluation process is expected to contain three phases: provide quality assurance from global perspective and validate the Inception report and evaluation methodology; data collection design, collection and analysis; and, final editing and feedback throughout the evaluation process based on timelines below. Specific chapters that the International Consultant is responsible to write are: Key Findings; Lessons Learned, and Conclusions and Recommendations (jointly with the Local Consultant)

The Final UNCDP Evaluation Report should be between 40 and 50 pages of length (without annexes). Both draft and final reports should incorporate (as a minimum): (May change with the new UNCDP Evaluation templates)
- Title and opening pages
- Table of Contents
- List of acronyms and abbreviations
- List of tables and figures
- Executive Summary
- Introduction
- Scope of Evaluation, Methodology and Guiding Principles and Methodological constraint
- Kosovo’s development context
- UNCDP Analysis (per outcome)
- Key Findings
- Lessons Learned
- Conclusions and Recommendations
- Annexes (including interview list, data collection instruments, key documents consulted, ToR, Additional background data).

The final evaluation report should be presented in a solid, concise and readable form and be structured around the issues in the Terms of Reference (ToR). The report will be prepared in accordance with UNEG guidance (Quality Checklist for Evaluation Reports).

Timelines for the evaluation

Timelines for the International Consultant have been tentatively laid below:

Action/Deliverable

Desk Review/ quality assurance for Inception Report methodology (7 working days - home based) to be completed by 25 June 2019
Data collection methods design/field visits/ Analysis /Presentation of key findings an integration into the Draft Report (5 working days - in Kosovo) to be completed by 10 July 2019
Combination of Survey and field findings/ Design the Lessons learned and Recommendation chapters of the Draft Evaluation Report (3 working days - in Kosovo) to be completed by 25 July 2019
Quality assurance and professional editing/ Final Evaluation Report (5 working days - home based) to be completed by 25 August 2019

The Inception phase-the Local Consultant will undertake initial desk review of all collected documents, agree on the meetings schedule with the DCO team and UNCDP Evaluation Management Group (UEMG) and produce Evaluation Inception Report (which includes a joint proposed schedule of timelines, tasks, evaluation methodology, activities and deliverables for the full assign-ment). The Quality assurance for the Inception report’s methodology, timelines and content will be the responsibility of the International Consultant.

Meetings, focus groups and Presentation of initial findings - at the end of the field work, the Evaluation Consultant will present his/her draft findings and provisional recommendations through a PowerPoint presentation summarizing the main findings recommendations and lessons learned and conclusions.

The Questionnaires should be similar, and coordinated between the Focus groups evaluation questions, but targeting two major stakeholder groups for getting a better understanding on the UNCDP outcome results and UN’s contribution to those results. Questionnaire results will be analyzed and incorporated with the focus groups results (questionnaires designed by the International Consultant and facilitated partially jointly with the Local Consultant) for presentation (on PPT) by the International Consultant to the UESC and the DC/RC team.

Analysis, presentation and Draft Reporting– the Evaluation Consultants will prepare the draft evaluation report based on the analysis of findings, and will submit the report to the UNCDP EMG and UNCDP ESC for their review and comments. Opportunity to comment on the draft report will be open to the groups for a maximum of 15 working days. After this process ends, the Evaluation Con-sultants will proceed with production of the final evaluation report.

Final Evaluation Report- should include all the feedback from the UEMG and UESC as well as the stakeholders and the DCO team. The report should encompass all sections required in the draft report. The final report needs to be clear, understandable to the intended audience and logically organized based on the comments received from stakeholders. The final version should also be edited, cleared by the UESC and the DC before being accepted as final.

International Consultant

The main tasks include:

• Provide Quality assurance of the evaluation methodology and timelines proposed in the Inception report
• Design questionnaires for data collection methods to support evaluation of UNCDP outcomes and join the field visits and focus group discussions with the Local Consultant
• Provide analysis and presentation of the key findings to the UESC together with the Draft evaluation including quality assurance by UNEG evaluation requirements
• Combining findings into Lessons learnt and recommendations chapters
• Quality assurance and editing of the Final Report

The International and Local Evaluation Consultants are responsible to cooperate closely for the final editing and quality control for which the final report can be presented in the highest quality possible to allow for clearance and dissemination.

Remuneration - Lump Sum Amount
The Contract is based on lump sum remuneration and shall be processed subject to deliverables as per the schedule listed below
20% - to be transferred upon signature of the contract
20% - to be transferred upon submittion of the Draft Report
60% - to be transferred upon completion of all activities in the TOR

Recommended Presentation of Offer
The following documents must be submitted:

• Updated P11/CV, indicating all past experience from similar projects, as well as the contact details (email and telephone number) of the Candidate and at least three (3) professional references
• Letter of Confirmation of Interest and Availability
• Technical proposal, a max. 2-pages document explaining the approach and the methodology to be utilized for delivering the expected results within the indicated timeframe
• Financial Proposal that indicates the all-inclusive, lump-sum contract price. The Offeror must indicate and ensure at this point that all such costs are duly incorporated in the financial proposal submitted to the UNDP

Criteria for selection of the Best Offer
Offers will be evaluated utilizing a combined Scoring method – where the technical qualifications, the relevant work experience and the technical proposal will be weighted a max. of 70% and combined with the price offer which will be weighted a max of 30%.

Competencies

• Shares knowledge and experience and provides helpful feedback and advice;
• Conceptualizes and analyzes problems to identify key issues, underlying problems, and how they relate;
• Ability to identify beneficiaries’ needs, and to match them with appropriate solutions;
• Excellent communication and interview skills
• Excellent report writing skills
• Responds positively to critical feedback and differing points of view;
• Ability to handle a large volume of work possibly under time constraints;
• Focuses on result for the client and responds positively to feedback;
• Remains calm, in control and good humored even under pressure

Required Skills and Experience

Education:

• A master’s degree in international development, gender, economics, evaluation, social sciences or related field;

Experience:

• A minimum of 10 years of professional experience specifically in the area of evaluation and quality assurance of international development initiatives and development organizations;
• Extensive knowledge of, and experience in applying, qualitative and quantitative quality assurance to evaluation methods and in a wide range of evaluation approaches
• Technical competence in undertaking complex evaluations which involve use of mixed methods
• Knowledge of UN role, UN reform process and UN programming at the country level, particularly UNCDP;
• Strong experience and knowledge in the five UNCDP Programming Principles: human rights (the human rights based approach to programming, human rights analysis and related mandates within the UN system), gender equality (especially gender analysis), environmental sustainability, results-based management, and capacity development.
• Understanding of the development context and working experience in Kosovo is an asset;

Languages:

• Fluency in spoken and written English to allow for professional editing; knowledge of Albanian and/or Serbian language is considered to be an asset.

The International Consultant will be asked to sign consent to abide by the UNEG Code of Conduct for evaluation in the UN system.

Application Instructions:

• Click on the "Apply now" button
• Input your information in the appropriate sections: personal information, language proficiency, education, resume and motivation; you can type in, or paste your short Resume into the last box
• Upon completion of the first page, please hit "submit application" tab at the end of the page. On the next page, you will be asked to upload your Resume
• System will only allow one attachment. All docs (CV; P11; financial offer; list of similar profiles should be included as one attachment)
• Please make sure to submit all the requested documents/information; otherwise, your application will be considered incomplete