Support Expert - Evaluation of the SUN Movement MPTF

UNOPS mission is to serve people in need by expanding the ability of the United Nations, governments and other partners to manage projects, infrastructure and procurement in a sustainable and efficient manner.

Within these three core areas of expertise, UNOPS provides its partners with advisory, implementation and transactional services, with projects ranging from building schools and hospitals, to procuring goods and services and training local personnel. UNOPS works closely with governments and communities to ensure increased economic, social and environmental sustainability for the projects we support, with a focus on developing national capacity.

Working in some of the world’s most challenging environments, our vision is to advance sustainable implementation practices in development, humanitarian and peacebuilding contexts, always satisfying or surpassing partner expectations.

With over 7,000 personnel spread across 80 countries, UNOPS offers its partners the logistical, technical and management knowledge they need, wherever they need it. A flexible structure and global reach means we can quickly respond to our partners' needs, while offering the benefits of economies of scale.

UNOPS Development Group Cluster is based in the GPSO - New York Office and supports a diverse and complex portfolio including partners such as the United Nations Development Programme (the Bureau for Development Policy, the Special Unit for South-South Cooperation), the United Nations Population Fund, the United Nations Secretariat and a broadening community of primarily New York-based UN partners in the delivery of project management, implementation and administration services.

BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT:

Scaling Up Nutrition Movement

The Scaling Up Nutrition (SUN) Movement, established in September 2010, is a collaboration of stakeholders in governments, civil society, business, research groups and international organisations to encourage increased political commitment and programmatic alignment to accelerate reductions in under-nutrition. The emphasis is on women and children under two years of age.

The current institutional structure of the SUN Movement was established in early 2012 under the aegis of United Nations Secretary-General, Ban Ki Moon. At the heart of the Movement are the countries that have opted to join: so far there are 55. They have created an inclusive multi-stakeholder political movement for nutrition.

The stakeholders who support the SUN Countries have organized themselves into four networks (United Nations, Donors, Business and Civil Society) so that they better align their support for country priorities and programmes. These networks respond to the needs and specific gaps identified by national governments.

The Movement is steered by a Lead Group that includes 27 high level leaders from SUN Countries, civil society, business, donor agencies, foundations, alliances and international organizations convened by the UN Secretary General. It seeks to ensure the coherence and impact of the Movement, and is accountable for the way it responds to national needs.

Since 2012, the SUN Movement Secretariat has developed as a small coordinating mechanism operating under the strategic guidance of the Lead Group. It has no operational role, but seeks to link together countries and networks in the SUN Movement to ensure that support, requested in countries to intensify actions and achieve nutrition objectives, is received in a coordinated and coherent way. It also ensures that the Movement’s progress is tracked efficiently and communicated clearly.

To ensure that the Movement is fit for purpose to contribute to achieving the goal of ending malnutrition, the Lead Group commissioned, in September 2013, an Independent Comprehensive Evaluation which took place in 2014. The evaluation represents an opportunity for the Lead Group to assess the relevance, efficiency and effectiveness of the Movement and adjust the priorities, operating modalities and stewardship arrangements accordingly.  The findings of the evaluation are now informing a visioning process that seeks to ensure that the Movement is fit for purpose after 2015.

SUN Movement Multi-Partner Trust Fund

In March 2012 the SUN Movement Multi-Partner Trust Fund (SUN Movement MPTF) was established by Participating UN Organizations (PUNOs) [1] and Donors [2]. It was formulated in response to a perceived gap in funding or difficulty in mobilizing funds for country-level platforms for scaling up nutrition, particularly those pertaining civil society alliances.

Since its establishment the SUN Movement MPTF has worked along established principles. It has been conceived as catalytic tool to stimulate actions by members of the SUN Movement for scaling up nutrition, especially to catalyse support for SUN governments’ plans to enhance and expand nutrition-specific and nutrition-sensitive interventions. The SUN Movement MPTF has not been designed to be a vertical nutrition fund for large scale investments in food and nutrition security, nor to replace existing funding pathways at country level (both from national budget and from bilateral and multilateral resources). The SUN Movement MPTF has been meant to be used as a small fund of last resort (when other funding is not available) for stakeholders to access small grants through which their engagement in the SUN Movement at country level can be initiated and/or enhanced. As a last resort funding mechanisms any potential recipient is supposed to explore all other funding opportunities before being able to access the SUN Movement MPTF funds. It has also to be proved that a recipient receive additional funding from other sources to be able to sustain the next phase of the project after the catalytic start up being funded by the MPTF comes to an end.

The SUN Movement MPTF Logframe with planned results (impact, goal, outcomes and outputs) was established as the central mechanism for assessing the quality and contribution of projects to the overall aims of the SUN Movement. In particular, the theory of change set forth for Window II articulates a virtuous circle of change and synergy that should enhance and align civil society contributions to national level efforts to scale up nutrition. A revised Logframe was later agreed to clarify roles and responsibilities more clearly and to ensure collating data aligned MPTF and donors reporting to mininise duplication.

The SUN Movement MPTF has three funding Windows:

• Support for initial SUN actions at country level (Window I): Facilitate initial actions with SUN Countries for which financial support is not available – including support for the strengthening of multi-stakeholder platforms, stock-taking of nutrition specific and nutrition sensitive activities, or SUN launches that provide opportunities for sharing of experiences amongst key stakeholders in national regional and global SUN meetings.
• Catalytic programmes for countries (Window II): Fund SUN Movement partners’ participation in SUN country plans.
• Support for global SUN strategic efforts (Window III): Fund other initiatives, including the development and outsourcing of strategic pieces of work, such as on resource mobilization and transfer strategies, communications work, triangulation and validation of progress indicators.

While the fund is open to governments, UN agencies, civil society groups, other SUN partners and support organization, the vast majority of funds has been allocated since 2012 to support civil society participation and actions for scaling up nutrition (Window II). Since 2012 donors have contributed to the SUN Movement MPTF with a total of USD 10,119,317[3]. As of May 2015 the SUN Movement MPTF has disbursed USD 9,664,170 for 28 approved projects. This corresponds to approximately 95.50% of the total funds deposited.

• Window I (USD 962,000) has been utilised to support a pilot project (USD 642,000) led by PROCASUR to improve sharing and learning initiatives between national SUN multi-stakeholder platforms and for a project (USD 320,000) in support to the SUN Movement Community of Practice on Planning, Costing, Implementing and Financing Multi-sectoral Actions for Improved Nutrition.
• Window II (USD 7,606,115) is providing financial support to civil society actors in 24 countries [4] across Africa, Asia and Latin America. Support has also been granted to the SUN Civil Society Network Secretariat through Window II (USD 1,036,055) 10.24% of the total SUN MPTF funding has been allocated under this window for civil society support, either on network or country specific projects. The Civil Society Alliances in five countries [5] are funded bilaterally by Donors.
• Window III (USD 60,000) has been used to support the development of the SUN Movement Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) framework. It will be used to fund the evaluation of the SUN Movement MPTF.

In November 2014 the Management Committee approved the extension of the SUN Movement MPTF until 31 December 2016. Currently the SUN Movement Secretariat is working with Participating UN Organizations on those projects who may need to extend the time frames of their projects’ implementation after 2015.

Governance arrangements of the SUN Movement MPTF

The governance of the SUN Movement MPTF is based on the SUN Lead Group, which provides overall strategic direction to the SUN Movement and hence the priorities of the fund.

The Management Committee of the SUN Movement MPTF is the body that takes decisions on fund allocations, based on funding availability, criteria determined by the overall strategic direction set by the SUN Lead Group and the technical evaluation of the SUN Movement Secretariat. Members of the Management Committee include: Coordinator of the SUN Movement (Chair), Participating UN Organizations [6], Donors [7], Administrative Agent as ex officio member (UNDP MPTF Office), and the SUN Movement Secretariat as an ex-officio member. Other organizations and entities involved in the SUN Movement may be invited by the Management Committee to join the meetings as observers such as the SUN Network Facilitators (i.e. UN, Business, Civil Society, Donors and Country Network) and delegated officials from the SUN Lead Group.

The SUN Movement Secretariat supports the Management Committee as its Technical Secretariat in developing guidelines for the preparation and submission of proposals for approval by the Management Committee; in reviewing proposals submitted by requesting entities for consistency with agreed SUN Movement principles and SUN Movement MPTF criteria and Logframe; in transmitting proposals to the Management Committee for their review and potential approval; and in assessing and compiling lessons-learned from the programme and initiatives supported. The SUN Movement Secretariat is also responsible for developing and implementing an effective knowledge management system and facilitating independent evaluations, as needed. It is also its responsibility to ensure that policies and strategies decided by the SUN Lead Group are implemented and adhered to.

The UNDP Multi-Partner Trust Fund Office (MPTF Office) serves as the Administrative Agent of the SUN Movement MPTF and is responsible for a range of fund management services, including: receipt, administration and management of contributions; transfer of funds approved by the Management Committee to Participating UN Organizations; reporting on the source and use of contributions received; synthesis and consolidation of the individual financial progress reports submitted by each Participating UN Organization for submission to contributors through the Management Committee; and ensuring transparency and accountability of SUN Movement MPTF operations.

Participating UN Organizations (UNOPS, WFP, WHO, UNICEF) that have signed the Fund’s Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with the MPTF Office assume full programmatic and financial accountability for funds transferred to them. Their responsibilities include: preparing and submitting proposals; supervising and overseeing projects financed by the SUN Movement MPTF and providing periodic narrative and financial reporting, in accordance with provisions of the MoU and decisions of the Management Committee.

At the global level, the SUN Civil Society Network (CSN) was established to support the formation and evolution of Civil Society Alliances (CSAs) in SUN countries, as well as facilitate communication and coordination across CSAs, and with the broader SUN Movement. Through SUN Movement MPTF Window II’s support, the SUN CSN Secretariat has recruited two full time staff [8]. The primary purpose of the SUN CSN Secretariat is to encourage the alignment of civil society organizations’ strategies, programmes and resources with country plans for scaling-up nutrition. The SUN CSN Secretariat aims to achieve this through strengthening the support available for and capacity of national Civil Society Alliances. To date, the SUN CSN Secretariat has worked very closely with the SUN Movement Secretariat to share information and answer queries by the Management Committee regarding the progress of SUN Movement MPTF Window II projects as well as to share lessons from civil society alliances funded by the SUN Movement MPTF.  

PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES OF THE EVALUATION:

The Management Committee of the SUN Movement MPTF agreed to use funds available against Window III to commission an evaluation of the MPTF to take place in the second half of 2015. The evaluation will provide the Management Committee of the SUN Movement MPTF and the Transition Stewardship Team of the SUN Movement with findings, recommendations and fund design options that are expected to assist in identifying the best course of action for the future.

The purpose of the evaluation will cover two distinct dimensions:

• Assessing the current SUN Movement MPTF. Assess whether the current SUN Movement MPTF has met its objective in supporting any of the four strategic objectives [9] of the SUN Movement. It will consider the value added by the SUN Movement MPTF and will capture its major achievements, challenges, institutional knowledge, experiences, and lessons learned by the various stakeholders involved in the operation of the SUN Movement MPTF since its inception.
• Forward looking at the need for catalytic last resort fund. By focusing on the areas requiring financial support to contribute to the objectives of the SUN Movement (2016-2020), consider future needs for a catalytic last resort fund to support national multi-stakeholder platforms during the next phase of the SUN Movement. These areas for support shall be identified in the revised Strategy of the SUN Movement and Roadmap that will be developed during the same period of the evaluation. The evaluation will as well determine whether a pooled financing mechanisms like the MPTF would be the most appropriate mechanism or whether alternative financing models could be better fit for the purpose and consider the comparative advantage and/or complementarity vis-a-vis newly established financing facilities (e.g. Power of Nutrition, UNITLIFE).

The objectives of the evaluation are:

Assessing the current SUN Movement MPTF

• To determine the extent to which the SUN Movement MPTF funds are proving catalytic for actions to scale up nutrition in-country, with specific attention on the contribution of the SUN Civil Society Alliances.
• To assess the validity of the SUN Movement MPTF Theory of Change and Logframe and the extent to which the SUN Movement MPTF has contributed to the changes identified in its Theory of Change and Logframe and to improved alignment of projects funded under the three Windows.
• To ascertain what extent the SUN Movement MPTF was (or has been) the most appropriate financing architecture in providing catalytic and last resort grants to SUN Movement.
• To ascertain the opportunities and limitations that the current MPTF legal arrangement and governance mechanism has had in supporting the development and implementation of actions for scaling up nutrition and to understand how it compares to alternative sources of financing. 

Forward looking of the need for catalytic last resort fund

• Based on elements coming from the revised SUN Movement Strategy consider future needs for a catalytic last resort fund during the next phase of the SUN Movement and propose possible support measures (Windows) in line with the revised strategy.
• If a similar fund will be considered needed, present several different funding design options based on the analysis of existing systems.
• Look at alternative monitoring systems that can capture and evaluate more broadly the different functions, roles and effects and assess the different needs of all stakeholders involved. Consider the need for a strengthened monitoring and evaluation framework for any future pooled funding mechanism.

SCOPE OF THE EVALUATION:

The evaluation will cover the SUN Movement MPTF duration from March 2012 until the start date of the evaluation (September 2015) having in mind that the new end for the mandate is 31 December 2016.  

The evaluation will provide both an assessment of the current SUN Movement MPTF as well as a set of clear forward-looking recommendations to inform management decisions in designing the forthcoming (if any) fund mechanism for the SUN Movement and to strengthen the role this mechanism could have in contributing to the new strategy of the SUN Movement (2016-2020). The evaluation will particularly take into consideration and reflect on the position and value of a potential future MPTF in regards to other (existing) funding mechanisms. It will have to reflect the aspirations and concerns of all stakeholders involved including Donors, Participating UN Organization, Implementing Partners, SUN Networks, Civil Society Alliances, SUN Movement Secretariat and the MPTF Office.

The evaluation is expected to consider all aspects of the current SUN Movement MPTF and of any alternative fund mechanism(s): architecture and governance structure; objectives and results achieved; working models; decision, fund transfer, indirect cost recovery, implementation and reporting processes; role of the fund within the broader SUN Movement; its efficiency as a catalytic and last resort funding mechanism; its appropriateness in terms of size and the additional benefits/shortfalls if the fund were to be expanded in size.

The evaluation will at minimum cover the criteria of: relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, sustainability of the current SUN Movement MPTF. The evaluation should look at the extent to which projects funded through the SUN Movement MPTF have been relevant or not to the achievement of any of the four strategic objectives of the SUN Movement Strategy (2012-2015). It should consider the extent to which the SUN Movement MPTF has been an effective funding channel to in-country civil society stakeholders and how this can be considered having contributed to the objectives outlined in the SUN Movement MPTF Logframe and to the broader objectives of the SUN Movement. When evaluating the potential impact of CSAs efforts the evaluation team should take into consideration the diversity of funding timeframe (most of CSAs projects lasted for 1 to 2 years, while few others for 3 years). The efficiency of the fund architecture should be explored. The evaluation should focus as well on the sustainability of the fund in the outcomes that it is trying to achieve. For doing this the evaluation will need to look at the broader picture of funding for national CSAs including the role of International Non-Governmental Organizations in their nurturing and support to them.

The evaluation will as well cover the criteria of relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, sustainability when looking at the future (if any) of the SUN Movement MPTF and of alternative pooled financing modelsthat could potentially support the new strategy of the SUN Movement (2016-2020). This analysis should be framed within the current global architecture for development, in particular the context of the Second International Conference for Nutrition and the discussion on the Post2015 development agenda.

The evaluation will not assess the relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, sustainability of the overall UNDP MPTF as a pooled financing mechanism for development but will rather focus on the SUN Movement MPTF and its role in contributing to the objectives of the SUN Movement. However the evaluation will inevitably have to analyse the fund overall architecture to assess if this pooled financing model will be well placed (or not) to support the next phase of the SUN Movement – should the need for a catalytic last resort fund be identified in the second phase of the SUN Movement.  

EVALUATION QUESTIONS:

Within the broader parameters indicated by this terms of reference it is expected that the evaluation team will propose a revised set of questions to the SUN Movement MPTF Steering Group [10]  within the first 2 weeks  of the evaluation. Through a consultative process with the Steering Group the set of questions will be agreed and will form the basis for the evaluation.  They should cover both dimensions of the evaluation: assessing the current fund and looking at alternative future models.

The evaluation criteria that will be used include: relevance, effectiveness, efficiency and sustainability of the current SUN Movement MPTF and of any alternative pooled financing model. It will have to encompass the following elements:

• The architecture and governance of the fund, including its monitoring and evaluation framework
• The role and work of the Management Committee
• The role and work of Participating UN Organizations
• The role and work of Implementing Partners
• The role and work of the SUN CSN Secretariat
• The role and work of the SUN Movement Secretariat as MPTF Technical Secretariat
• Progress, achievements and challenges by the MPTF funded projects against the three Windows.

While Window II will inevitably receive a stronger focus due to the number of projects and share of funding allocated to it, all three Windows should be addressed by the evaluation and gain similar attention in order to reflect well on their respective relevance and their interrelation for impact.

The role and work of the MPTF Office while not part of this specific evaluation should be considered within the broader assessment of the architecture and governance of the SUN Movement MPTF.

The evaluation, while encompassing the elements above, will consider the following questions when assessing the current SUN Movement MPTF. Similar questions will have to be considered when looking at the future (if any) of the SUN Movement MPTF and of alternative pooled financing models.

QUESTIONS ON RELEVANCE

• To what extent were the SUN Movement MPTF objectives and strategies in the assessment period (2012 – 2015) consistent with the needs of beneficiaries and partners?  And to what extent are they still relevant or have they changed with new needs identified?
• To what extent has the SUN Movement MPTF and its expected results contributed towards the achievement of any of the four strategic objectives of the SUN Movement?
• How has the role and strategic focus of the SUN Movement MPTF been relevant to national actions, strategies, policies towards scaling up nutrition?

QUESTIONS ON EFFECTIVENESS

• To what extent has a three Windows fund contributed to the achievement of the SUN Movement MPTF objectives? How have these three Windows been interconnected for impact? To what extent were the objectives achieved/are likely to be achieved? What have been the effects (positive or negative) of achieved results?
• How did the SUN Movement MPTF as a last resort catalytic fund influence national actions for scaling up nutrition and add value to the overall SUN Movement? 
• How adequate is the SUN Movement MPTF design including its results framework, monitoring and reporting system and theory of change for decision-making and for measuring progress?
• What role have the civil society alliances played at country level (e.g. holding other actors accountable, campaigning for policies)? What level of engagement in the policy processes and in the delivery of services have the established alliances had?
• Has there been unexpected results of the SUN Movement MPTF funded activities?  If so, what have been their key effects on the mechanism and achievement of the four strategic objectives of the SUN Movement?
• What factors influenced: a) the motivation for specific interventions supported by the SUN Movement MPTF; b) the role and level of engagement of partners; c) the appropriateness of different implementation modalities chosen; d) the value added and the results achieved?

QUESTIONS ON EFFICIENCY

• How efficient was the organization and management systems of the SUN Movement MPTF especially with relation to the planning of activities, disbursement of funds, implementation, monitoring and reporting of activities, and division of labor? Were activities cost-efficient? Were objectives achieved on time? Was the programme or project implemented in the most efficient way compared to alternatives?
• What is the overall level of satisfaction (with respect to each user’s interest) among key stakeholders (particularly including beneficiaries) involved in the SUN Movement MPTF?
• What effect did the management and institutional arrangements of the SUN Movement MPTF have in terms of programming, delivery and monitoring of implementation of MPTF funded projects?
• What monitoring and reporting procedures were applied (and to what extent were they effective) by SUN Movement MPTF stakeholders to ensure greater accountability?
• How effective has been the role of the CSN Secretariat in tracking and supporting progress by civil society alliances funded by the SUN Movement MPTF? Which are the key factors that underpin the usefulness, strengths and weaknesses of the role of the CSN Secretariat within the SUN Movement MPTF? Which (different if any) role should the CSN Secretariat play in a future pooled financing mechanism supporting the new strategy of the SUN Movement? What should be the accountability lines between the SUN CSN secretariat and the SUN CSAs within any future pool-funding facilities? 

QUESTIONS ON SUSTAINABILITY

• To what extent have the programs and partners considered sustainability of outcomes as part of their decisions and during implementation? How was this concern reflected in the design of the projects, the implementation of activities, the delivery of outputs and the achievements of outcomes? Did the activities promote sustainable changes in attitudes, behaviors or strengthen existing systems aimed at scaling up nutrition beyond the MPTF lifespan?
• Have there been program results and activities with a likelihood of continued long-term benefits after MPTF funding ceased? Have the SUN Movement MPTF finances contributed to build capacities? (e.g. to engage with other actors)
• To what extent do stakeholders have confidence that they will be able to build on the changes promoted by the SUN Movement MPTF activities?
• What has been the commitment of key partners’ towards making results and activities sustainable over time?

EVALUATION METHODOLOGY:

The evaluation team will have the independence and degree of flexibility, within the scope and objectives of this TORs, to define and concentrate on those areas where there is more strengths to be built on and weaknesses to be addressed and to explore in greater depth those issues which are identified as being of critical importance. A Steering Group [11] composed by key representatives of the broader community of stakeholders involved in the SUN Movement MPTF will ensure the quality and independency of the evaluation.

The evaluation will be transparent and will be asked to provide information which is considered evidence-based, reliable and useful. The evaluation team is expected to work following a consultative approach ensuring the engagement of all stakeholders through the Steering Group of the SUN Movement MPTF. The SUN Movement Secretariat will provide support to this consultative process by ensuring that regular meetings/calls are organized.   

The evaluation will seek to obtain data from a range of sources, including desk review and document analyses, interviews, surveys and questionnaires as well as stakeholders consultations both at the level of the governance structure of the SUN Movement MPTF as well as at the level of in-country recipient projects. It is recommended that different sources of data are accessed and that different stakeholder groups are consulted so as to help the interpretation of a set of data which due to their nature linked mostly to institutional and behavioural change will be critically dependent on the evaluation team judgment. While appreciating the challenge of providing evidence to behavioural changes by in-country actors towards scaling up nutrition the evaluation team will try to provide wherever possible counterfactual evidence of what may or may not have occurred in the absence of the SUN Movement MPTF (through a triangulation of different sources of evidence).

Governance analysis. At the inception of the evaluation it will be important to conduct an analysis of the governance architecture and the different partners involved in order to identify, inter alia, the different actors and steps involved in the management of the fund.

Documentation desk review. The evaluation team shall maximise the use of existing information and will review all relevant source of information including governance foundation documents, annual progress reports of the MPTF, individual project reports, financial statements, minutes of the Management Committee meetings, and any other documentation deemed relevant for the evaluation. This phase can be supported by interviews with different stakeholders of the SUN Movement MPTF including the SUN Movement Secretariat, PUNOs and the MPTF Office. The evaluation team is asked to consult Annex 1 with a list of relevant documents.

Interviews. The evaluation team will collect most of the information from having interviews and consultations with relevant partners. These should be identified in the inception phase of the assignment and documented. Wherever possible interviews should take place on the phone to reduce travel costs.

Surveys. It is recommended that the evaluation team will consider the added value of conducting a survey for the collection of specific additional information and data. Surveys could also be used to validating some findings.

Country case studies and country visits. All projects in the three Windows funded by the SUN Movement MPTF should be included in the desk review. The review should consider the implication on funds disbursement, project approval process and timeliness imputable to projects belonging to either the first or the second call for proposals.

A one pager analysis on key achievements and added value of each of the 24 CSAs funded through the SUN Movement MPTF is to be developed. Key areas to look for these one pagers are: a) five key achievements by the CSAs; b) five ingredients for success in political cultural and social context with link to the SUN Movement processes; c) five obstacles and challenges; d) what has not worked and why?; e) main lessons learnt and recommendations moving forward; f) five key areas the CSAs will focus on and how this connects to strategic priorities of SUN Movement 2.0; g) how useful has the SUN Movement MPTF been to the CSAs and what have been some of the challenges? How have these challenges been overcome?; h) have the CSAs explored and / or secured funding to support sustainability of the alliance after the MPTF funding?

The scope of the evaluation will not permit the selection of the totality of the MPTF funded projects for an in-depth analysis which should be rather conducted on a selected number of case studies where site visits will be done. In addition to the above key areas that should frame the analysis of the 24 CSAs, for the case studies receiving a site visit the evaluation team should pay particular attention at stakeholder dynamics in country and how these have impacted on CSA efforts.

It is expected that the evaluation team will suggest which case studies would benefit from a country visit (up to a maximum of 5). When selecting the range of case studies to be looked at more in to depth and to be visited, they should be considered sufficiently representative of the overall fund. The findings from these selected cases will have to be generalized to the totality of the projects therefore the evaluation team will have to be sensible in selecting the cases. It is expected that individual case studies (from Window II [12]) will have to be selected using the following parameters:

• Projects representing the geographic distribution of SUN Countries and context diversity (including fragile context and situation and others).
• Countries with presence of REACH .
• Projects that by the time of the evaluation have established CSA and projects with CSAs in the process of being set up.

While selecting the countries to visit the evaluation team is invited to look at the countries selected by the Independent Comprehensive Evaluation (ICE) of the SUN Movement and used for the ICE analysis of the SUN Movement MPTF. [13] To the extent possible the selected CSAs should complement those visited for the ICE (if appropriate). However, other countries should also be selected.

It is expected that the methodology as well as the country case studies and country visits will be clearly presented and detailed in the Inception Report. The evaluation team will be solely responsible for the evaluation findings and recommendations. But it is expected that they will consult widely in deriving them, in order to ensure both their evidence base and the potential for follow up. It would be expected that the evaluation would provide more than a fund design option, including its advantages and disadvantages, for the future (if any) of a pooled fund supporting the SUN Movement in its next phase.

The evaluation will use a combination of evaluation methods but it any case it will have to build upon the findings of the Independent Comprehensive Evaluation of the SUN Movement (conducted in 2014) and the vision being developed by the Lead Group for the strategic direction, operational modalities and stewardship arrangements for the Movement  after 2015.

While this is not an evaluation of the relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, sustainability of the UNDP Multi-Partner Trust Fund as a pooled financial mechanism but rather of the SUN Movement MPTF itself, it will be essential that the evaluation assesses the SUN Movement MPTF within the broader architecture of the MPTF. For this the evaluation team will have to access any existing evaluations and analysis of the broader MPTF as pooled financial mechanism or of other MPTFs such as the evaluation of the Central Fund for Influenza Action.[14]

EVALUATION PRODUCTS AND TIMETABLE:

The evaluation is expected to present findings, conclusions and targeted recommendations that will allow the Transition Stewardship Team (TST) of the SUN Movement and Donors to consider options for catalytic financing mechanisms that could support the updated strategy of the SUN Movement (2016-2020).

The key steps for the evaluation exercise include – while not limited to – the following stages:

1. Preparatory and inception phase
2. Data and information collection (including country visits)
3. Report writing
4. Findings presentation

During the preparatory and inception phase the evaluation team will hold consultations with the Steering Group of the SUN Movement MPTF to define the evaluation purpose and scope. The evaluation team will prepare an inception report, within 2 weeks of evaluation start-up, for review by the Steering Group. In preparing the inception report the evaluation team will take into account the considerations listed in the section “methodology” and well as the outcomes of the preparatory phase. The evaluation team is however encouraged to suggest different approaches as considered more appropriate for the scope of this exercise. The inception report will provide a comprehensive road map for the evaluation, the methodology proposed for the evaluation and an outline of:

• Exhaustive list of issues and questions to be examined by the evaluation;
• Stakeholders to be interviewed;
• Countries to visit for case study analysis.

During the data and information collection phase the evaluation team will carry out detailed consultation, analysis, interviews, country visits in accordance with the process set forth and agreed in the inception report.

An interim briefing of key findings to be presented to the SUN Movement Global Gathering (20-21-22 October 2015) where the last Movement-wide consultation on the updated SUN Movement Strategy (2016-2020) will be held. It will have to be delivered in time for translation in French and Spanish. It is expected that the interim briefing will be maximum 3 pages. 

An interim report is expected to be submitted to the Steering Group by the end of October 2015.

The interim report will outline the principal preliminary findings, including hypothesis and several options for broad recommendations on the future need for a catalytic last resort fund and on how such a fund (MPTF or an alternative model) may be relevant to the next phase of the SUN Movement. It is expected that the interim report will be maximum 10 pages including a short executive summary (2 pages). The interim report is expected to be shared for quality check in advance with the Steering Group and in time for translation.

The report writing phase will be based on the analysis conducted, the country visits and the feedback received by the Steering Group. It will have as well to be recalibrated by taking into account the outcomes of the consultations held at the SUN Movement Global Gathering.[15] The evaluation team will prepare a draft (zero) of the final report to be reviewed for quality check by the Steering Group. The evaluation team will revise it if there are any comments. A final draft will be made available to the Management Committee by the first week of January 2016. While a draft will be offered to the Steering Group for comments the final report of the evaluation will remain under the entire responsibility of the evaluation team. It is expected that the final report will be maximum 20 to 30 (plus annexes) and will include an executive summary of 2 to 3 pages summarizing key findings, conclusions and recommendations.

The evaluation team will be asked to present the findings of the evaluation to stakeholders of the Movement in several occasions including – but not limited to: SUN Movement Global Gathering – TBC (20-21-22 October 2015), calls of the SUN Movement Government Focal Points (January 2016 TBC) and a call of the Management Committee (January 2016). It will be also asked to present the findings to the Transition Stewardship Team if requested. The evaluation team will be asked to prepare an evaluation brief summarizing the main conclusions and findings for use in stakeholder presentations together with a powerpoint presentation. It will be asked that the evaluation team makes itself available to reply to any queries or request for clarification during the month of January 2016.

All deliverables will be as concise as possible. The reports will be submitted in standard English [16]. The language used should be direct, free of jargon, avoid euphemisms in describing problems and weaknesses, and be reader-friendly. Annexes and appendices should be included only if there is a clear rationale for doing so. Executive summaries should be included and address findings and recommendations. When submitting the final report, the evaluation team is required to provide an “audit trail”, detailing how all received comments on the draft findings have (or have not) been addressed in the final evaluation report. This audit trail should also include those issues agreed for analysis in the inception report which could not be addressed satisfactorily in the course of the evaluation – the evaluation team should provide a satisfactory justification for this. The consultant will be flexible in undertaking a series of revisions on the text (for all materials that are listed above) that will lead to sound final drafts. If, in the estimation of the Steering Group, any of the materials do not meet these required standards, then the consultant will, at their own expense, undertake the editing that is necessary to bring them to the required standards.

The total duration of the evaluation is estimated over approximately 4.5/5 months for a total of roughly 60 to 70 working days each consultant. The evaluation is expected to start the first week of September to be able to submit the final report by the first week of January 2016. Payment modality will be linked to the submission of key deliverables (Inception Report, Interim Report, Final Report and Finding Presentations). A more detailed timeframe is expected to be presented in the Inception Report including a contingency plan should delays be encountered during the evaluation period.

Activity / Completion Date

Inception Report to the Steering Group: Two weeks from start-up of evaluation

Interim Briefing of key findings for the SUN Movement Global Gathering (20-21-22 October 2015): 9 October 2015

Interim Report to the Steering Group: 30 October 2015

Draft Final Report to the Steering Group: 14 December 2015

Final Report to SUN Movement MPTF Management Committee: 4 January 2016

Findings presentations (ad hoc) – including evaluation brief and PPP: October 2015 and January 2016

EVALUATION ETHICS:

The evaluation will be undertaken by an independent evaluation team in accordance with the parameters defined in this TOR and within the framework of the UNDP Evaluation Policy[17] and the United Nations Evaluation Group norms and standards[18].


IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENTS:

The principal responsibility of the evaluation stays with the Management Committee of the SUN Movement MPTF.

A Steering Group will be appointed by the Management Committee. It will be chaired by the Coordinator of the SUN Movement and will consist of representatives from the SUN Movement MPTF donors, PUNOs, the SUN Donor Network and the Steering Group of the Civil Society Network.

Steering Group members will support the evaluation team in assuring the independence, adequacy, methodological soundness and overall quality of the evaluation. The Steering Group will play an important role in providing strategic, methodological and substantive inputs to the evaluation process, as well as peer review for the key outputs, including the inception, interim and final report. The Steering Group will ensure that the final report bases its claims on evidence, that the findings, conclusions and recommendations are grounded in solid analysis, that the key messages are communicated effectively, and that the report has a clear strategic focus with materials to inform decision-making at various level. This Group will also overview the finalization of this TOR and the consultants’ recruitment process. The Steering Group will report to the Management Committee periodically.

The SUN Movement Secretariat will facilitate communication with stakeholders, gather documents, and provide day to day support to the evaluation team and Steering Group.

One staff of the SUN Movement Secretariat will act as the Evaluation Manager serving as the liaison between the Steering Group and the Evaluation Team. The Evaluation Manager will report directly to the Chair of the Steering Group. The Evaluation Manager will facilitate and guarantee a smooth and timely implementation of the evaluation and help to manage and address any differences of opinion that may arise between the evaluation team and the stakeholders, while protecting the agreed independence of the evaluators and the Steering Group.

It will be essential that throughout the evaluation the work of members of the Steering Group, of the SUN Movement Secretariat and of other stakeholders reached out by the evaluation team is not disrupted by the evaluation. This will have to be carefully considered and taken into account by the evaluation team.

ANNEX 1:

List of all relevant documents:

• Governance Documents: Memorandum of Understanding between Participating UN Organizations and the United Nations Development Programme regarding the Operational Aspects of a Scaling Up Nutrition Movement (SUN Movement) Multi-Partner Trust Fund [http://scalingupnutrition.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/SUN-MOU-signed_WFP_WHO_UNICEF_UNOPS.pdf]
• Management Committee Terms of Reference and Rules for Procedures [http://scalingupnutrition.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/SUN_MPTF_Managmenet_Committee_TOR_and_RoPs-REV_May2013.pdf]
• Supplementary Guidance Note on Roles and Responsibilities [http://scalingupnutrition.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/150528_SUN-MPTF-Supplementary-Guidance-Note_FINAL.pdf]
• GATEWAY [http://mptf.undp.org/factsheet/fund/SUN00]
• SUN Movement website [http://scalingupnutrition.org/resources-archive/sun-mptf]
• 2012, 2013 and 2014 Annual Reports of the SUN Movement MPTF [http://scalingupnutrition.org/resources-archive/sun-mptf ]
• Minutes of the Management Committee Meetings [http://scalingupnutrition.org/resources-archive/sun-mptf]
• Individual projects [http://mptf.undp.org/factsheet/fund/SUN00]
• Transfer of funds tracking document (available upon request to the SUN Movement Secretariat)
• Final Report (with Annexes) of the Independent Comprehensive Evaluation of the SUN Movement [http://scalingupnutrition.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/SUN_ICE_FullReport-All(1-5-15).pdf]
• Visioning exercise of the SUN Movement [Update available upon request to the SUN Movement Secretariat. Information available also at http://scalingupnutrition.org/ ]
• 2012-2015 Strategy of the SUN Movement and its Road Map [http://scalingupnutrition.org/resources-archive ]
• SUN Movement Annual Progress Reports [available at http://scalingupnutrition.org/resources-archive]
• SUN Civil Society Network blog  [http://suncivilsocietynet.wix.com/suncsnblog]
• SUN Civil Society Network web page of the SUN website [http://scalingupnutrition.org/the-sun-network/civil-society-network]
• A business case on funding to CSAs developed by SUN SCN Secretariat (currently as a draft - available upon request to the SCN Secretariat)

[1] WFP, UNOPS, WHO. UNICEF joint later.

[2] Department for International Development (DFID), IrishAid, Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC)

[3] This includes Interest and Investment Income from Fund

[4] Bangladesh, Burundi, El Salvador, Ghana, Guatemala, Guinee, Kenya, Kyrgyz Rep., Lao PDR, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Mozambique, Myanmar, Nepal, Niger, Nigeria, Peru, Rwanda, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Sri Lanka, Uganda, Zimbabwe.

[5] Ethiopia, Pakistan, Tanzania, Togo, Zambia.

[6] UNOPS, WFP, WHO, UNICEF

[7] Department for International Development (DFID), IrishAid, Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC)

[8] The CSN Secretariat is referred to as the ‘Global CSO network’ in MPTF documents

[9] Strategic Objective 1: Creating an enabling political environment, with strong in-country leadership, and a shared space where stakeholders align their activities and take joint responsibility for scaling up nutrition;Strategic Objective 2: Establishing best practices for scaling up proven interventions, including the adoption of effective laws and policies; Strategic Objective 3: Aligning actions around high quality and well-costed country plans, with an agreed results framework and mutual accountability;  and Strategic Objective 4: Increasing resources towards coherent aligned approaches. (please see the SUN Movement Strategy -2012-2015)

[10] See section “Implementation Arrangements” for more information about the Steering Group

[11] See section “Implementation Arrangements” for more information about the Steering Group

[12]  Bangladesh, Burundi, El Salvador, Ghana, Guatemala, Guinee, Kenya, Kyrgyz Rep., Lao PDR, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Mozambique, Myanmar, Nepal, Niger, Nigeria, Peru, Rwanda, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Sri Lanka, Uganda, Zimbabwe

[13] Guatemala, Mozambique, Senegal, Tanzania, Bangladesh

[14] This level of information will have to be accessed to through the MPTF Office

[15] It is expected that the consultants will join the SUN Movement Global Gathering in Milano (20-21-22 October 2015) – especially the sessions dedicated to the new Strategy.

[16] http://www.un.org/depts/OHRM/sds/lcp/English/resources_un.html The translation of the evaluation deliverables in English, Spanish, Russian, Arabic and Portuguese will be handled by the SUN Movement Secretariat but this will have to be taken into account in the evaluation timeframe.

[17] http://web.undp.org/evaluation/policy.shtml

[18] http://www.uneval.org/document/foundation-documents

The evaluation team will be composed of one Team Leader and one Support Expert. The Team Leader will provide overall leadership of the evaluation team and have a coordinating role. The Support Expert will report directly to the Team Leader. The evaluation team will report to the Chair of the Steering Group. The evaluation team, under the direct authority and responsibility of the team leader, will have sole responsibility for the direction, supervision and conduct of the evaluation process.

The evaluation team shall have prior experience in evaluating similar multilateral funds. The evaluation team selected should not have participated in the project preparation and/or implementation and should not have any conflict of interest with MPTF related activities. 

Required Competencies

• Policy Advice: Technical leadership on pooled financing mechanisms for development including a thorough understanding of latest developments in terms of policies, strategies, guidelines and programmes.
• Strategic and global thinking: proven ability to significantly contribute in the framing of new concepts using both qualitative and quantitative analytical competencies including ability to draw from theory as well as practice-based evidence.
• Analytical: proven conceptual and analytical capacity to monitor complex and interlinked issues to ensure that the main arguments are communicated.
• Communication: Excellent drafting skills. Speaks and writes clearly and effectively; listens to others, correctly interprets messages from others and responds appropriately; asks questions to clarify, and exhibits interest in having two-way communication; tailors language, tone, style and format to match audience; demonstrates openness in sharing information and keeping people informed.
• Strategic planning: a capacity to assess political, financing and operational contexts based on a sound understanding of power relations and experience of institutional dynamics, in order to establish strategy, develop tactics, grasp opportunities and present recommendations.

Desired Competencies

• Development sector experience: proven experience in the development cooperation or a related area including in an international working environment. Field experience in multi-sector and multi-stakeholder development programmes and policies including communication and advocacy of civil society organizations is an asset.
• Technical Assessment: relevant technical experience in agriculture, rural development or food and nutrition security and proven capacity to provide technical advisory services and technical analysis on these issues.
• Partnership building: strategic capacity to assess political and institutional contexts to develop a collaborative vision among multiple stakeholders, promote and secure consensus and identify emerging opportunities to move the common agenda forward.
• Knowledge of UNOPS system Rules and Regulations.

Education:

• Advanced or post-graduate degree in public policy, development studies, political sciences, international relations or related field.

Experience:

• Minimum 7 years of relevant experience in designing and conducting complex evaluations, preferable of international pooled financing mechanisms for development with a multi-stakeholder governance.
• Knowledge of MPTF and/or similar funds for development is a requirement.
• Knowledge or experience in the field of food and nutrition security including communication and advocacy of civil society organizations would be a strong asset.
• Strong communication skills, including excellent consultation abilities.
• Capacity to work collaboratively with multiple stakeholders.
• Strong analytical skills with the ability to synthesize information from various sources to deliver a coherent end product.
• Proven experience in qualitative and quantitative data analysis.

Language:

• Knowledge of English (written and spoken) at the level of a native speaker is essential. Ability to work in French and Spanish would be a strong asset.

Contract type: International ICA (retainer contract linked to deliverables).

Contract level: ICA-3/ICS-11

Contract duration: 20 July 2015 – 31 December 2015 – with possibility of extension until January 2016 if required.

Duty Station: home based with possible travel missions.

APPLICATION AND SELECTION PROCESS

The SUN Movement Secretariat will contract the selected evaluation team through its administering agency (UNOPS). UNOPS, on behalf of the SUN Movement Secretariat, will recruit the Team Leader and Support Expert and will manage the contractual relationship with the evaluation team (including travel arrangements and payment modality) following UNOPS specific rules and regulation.

The technical selection of the Team Leader and the Support Expert will be based on a balanced assessment of candidates by looking at the following criteria: knowledge and analysis of the subject matter; relevance of previous experience and technical expertise; education background; and language skills.

Application should include a current and complete CV in English with indication of the e-mail and phone contact. Shortlisted candidates will be invited to participate in an interview with the selection panel. Prior to the interview the shortlisted candidates will be requested to submit a maximum 5 page note on the proposed approach with suggested working days distribution, including duty missions. These should be returned to UNOPS within maximum 5 working days.

• Please note that the closing date is midnight Copenhagen time (CET)
• Applications received after the closing date will not be considered.
• Only those candidates that are short-listed for interviews will be notified.
• Qualified female candidates are strongly encouraged to apply.
• For staff positions only, UNOPS reserves the right to appoint a candidate at a lower level than the advertised level of the post
• The incumbent is responsible to abide by security policies, administrative instructions, plans and procedures of the UN Security Management System and that of UNOPS.  

It is the policy of UNOPS to conduct background checks on all potential recruits/interns.
Recruitment/internship in UNOPS is contingent on the results of such checks.