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:
- Preparatory and inception phase
- Data and information collection (including country
visits)
- Report writing
- 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