OverviewIntroduction and Project OverviewWorld Wildlife Fund, Inc. (WWF) policies and procedures for all GEF financed full-sized projects require a midterm evaluation (MTE). The following terms of reference (TOR) sets out the expectations for the MTE for the project:Expanding and Consolidating Madagascar?s Marine Protected Areas Network, hereafter referred to as the ?Project.? The technical consultant selected to conduct this evaluation will hereafter be referred to as ?evaluator.?The Project Objective is Madagascar?s marine biodiversity and productivity are effectively managed through a sustainable, resilient national network of marine protected areas (MPAs). The Project was organized into the following components:Component 1:Establishing an extended, representative, and sustainable network of coastal and marine protected areas and locally managed marine areas (LMMAs)Component 2:Building a robust enabling environment for MPAs/LMMAsComponent 3:Enhancing management effectiveness and contributions to sustainable development through MPAs and LMMAs at site levelComponent 4:Knowledge management, monitoring and evaluationScope and Objective for the EvaluationWWF is seeking an independent consultant to undertake a Midterm Evaluation (MTE) of the Project. The scope of the MTE will cover the WWF GEF financed components.The objective of this evaluation is to examine the extent, magnitude, sustainability and potential for project impacts to date; identify any project design or management issues; assess progress towards project outcomes and outputs; and draw lessons learned that can improve the project effectiveness, efficiency and sustainability of project benefits. Based on this assessment, it is expected that the evaluator will provide feasible recommendations that could be applied for the remaining duration of the project.**Responsibilities**:Evaluation Approach and MethodThe evaluation will adhere to the relevant guidance, rules and procedures established by WWF(1) and align with guidance from the GEF Evaluation(2) and Ethical Guidelines.(3) The evaluation must provide evidence-based information that is independent, participatory, transparent, and ethical. The evaluator must be unbiased and free of any conflicts of interest with the project. The evaluator is expected to reflect all stakeholder views and follow a participatory and consultative approach. There should be close engagement with government counterparts, the GEF operational focal points in each country, the Executing Agency project management unit (PMU), partners and key stakeholders. Contact information will be provided.The Evaluation process will include the following, with deliverables (submitted in French and English) marked by ?*?:Inception meeting.Desk review consisting of, but not limited to:Project governance documents (agreements between WWF-US and FABM, WWF MD and MEDD, and between the PMU and FABM, etc.);Project Document and CEO Endorsement Letter;Relevant safeguards documents, including WWF GEF Agency Categorization and Compliance memo, Environmental and Social Management Framework, Process Framework, Grievance Redress Mechanism, sub-project safeguards screens, if applicable;Gender mainstreaming strategy;Annual Work Plans and Budgets (AWPBs);Project Progress Reports (PPR) including Results Framework (RF) and AWPB Tracking;GEF Agency reports, including Project Implementation Reports (PIRs) and Project Implementation Supervision Mission (PrISM) reports;Management Effectiveness Tracking Tool (METT) reports, if available;Relevant financial documents, including financial progress reports; co-financing monitoring tables and co-financing letters, and audits;Meeting minutes for Project Steering Committee (PSC) and relevant virtual meetings with the WWF- GEF Agency and support team; andOther relevant documents provided by the Executing Agency and partners.Inception report that outlines evaluation methodology; *Field visits with PMU and project partners, as necessary and feasible;Interviews, discussions and consultations with executing partners, GEF Operational Focal Points (OFP), Project Steering Committee (PSC) members, beneficiaries, WWF-GEF Agency and support team; Project Management Unit, and others;Debrief and presentation* of initial findings to project management team and other partners as feasible;Draft report* not to exceed 50 pages (excluding annexes) shared with GEF AMU and PMU for review, feedback and approval. A sample outline is provided; andFinal approved MTE report* that has incorporated feedback and corrections.Expected Content ofEvaluation ReportThe Midterm Evaluation report will include the following (see Annexes for details):Information on the evaluation process, including when the evaluation took place, sites visited, participants, key questions, summary of methodology and rating rubric, and feedback log showing how comments on draft were incorporated;Assessment of Relevance (project design, theory of change) and CoherenceAssessment of project Results Framework plus rating of project objective and outcomes (individual and overall);Assessment of Effectiveness and ratings of Implementation and Execution;Assessment and rating of Risks to the Sustainability of project outcomes;Assessment and rating of Monitoring and Evaluation Design and Implementation;Assessment of knowledge management approach, including activities and products;Assessment of replication and catalytic effects of the project;Assessment of stakeholder engagement, gender strategy and gender-responsive measures;Assessment of any environmental and social impacts and safeguards used for the project. A review of risk category classification and mitigation measures;Evaluation of rules of conduct in social matters, fraud and corruption according to WWF policies and in accordance with the contract between WWF-US and FAPBM;Assessment of Efficiency, financial management and summary of co-financing delivered;Summary table of key findings by core criteria(4) and GEF ratings, including justification and/or indicators for their determination;Key lessons tied to identified strengths or issues;Recommendations that include:practical and short-term corrective actions by evaluation criteria to address issues and findings; and reflect best practices towards achieving project outcomes and knowledge sharing / replication for other projects of similar scope.**Qualifications**:Evaluation Team QualificationsRequired Qualifications and ExperienceMinimum 10 years of relevant professional experienceNoted experience with evaluation methodologiesExcellent written and oral communication in English and French.Preferred Qualifications and ExperienceRecent experience conducting evaluations (for GEF financed projects is an advantage);Technical knowledge in marine management and biodiversity, including MPAs, other effective area-based conservation measures (OECMs), etc.;Knowledge of GEF Monitoring and Evaluation Policy;Experience with WWF Project and Program Management Standards or Conservation Standards;Experience with social assessments, participatory techniques, and gender mainstreaming;Fluency in Malagasy;Experience in Madagascar; andKnowledge of the Malagasy context in terms of sustainable management and conservation of marine resources and biodiversity.Payment modalities and specificationsPayment, expense reimbursement, and other contractual terms and conditions will be outlined in the consultant agreement made between WWF and the evaluator(s). Payments will be made following submitted and approved deliverables. Twenty-five percent of payment will correspond with completion and approval of the Inception Report. Fifty percent of the payment will correspond with submission and approval of the debrief presentation and the Draft Report. The final twenty-five percent will be delivered with the submission and approval of the Final Report.Application processPlease Find the Relevant Annexes for the position here.(1) WWF Procurement Policy(1) For additional information on evaluation methods adopted by WWF, see the WWF Evaluation Guidelines, published on our WWF Program Standards public websi
