UNICEF- KYRGYZSTAN
TERMS OF REFERENCE
International consultant – evaluation team member
EVALUATION OF UNICEF COUNTRY PROGRAMME
AND STRATEGIC POSITIONING IN KYRGYZSTAN
Consultancy Purpose: high quality contribution to the successful and fruitful evaluation of
the UNICEF-Kyrgyzstan Country Programme, in a close cooperation and under leadership of the
evaluation team leader
1. Context
Country background
Kyrgyzstan is a mountainous country located between China, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan and
Tajikistan in Central Asia. Formerly part of the Soviet Union, it became independent in 1991.
Since its independence, the Kyrgyz Republic has had a turbulent political history with two
presidents overthrown by the public, most recently in April 2010 when a deadly clash broke out.
In June 2010, persistent social tensions that had been on the rise in the south of the country,
where large ethnic Kyrgyz and Uzbek communities live side by side, and which had been
aggravated by the political instability, climaxed in violent inter-ethnic clashes
The Kyrgyz Republic is the only country in central Asia with a parliamentary democracy, albeit
not firmly established, and with a burden of problems inherited and emerging issues ranging from
respect for human rights to pervasive corruption, leaving the country in an unstable situation.
With the gross national income (GNI) per capita for 2013 estimated at US$ 1,200, increasing from
US$ 1,040 in 2012, the Kyrgyz Republic has just recently been re-classified as lower middleincome country.
The country has a population of over 5.6 million, and is divided administratively into seven oblasts
and two main cities. An informal geographical division also exists in the country between the
north (Talas, Chuy, Issyk Kul and Naryn oblasts and Bishkek city) and the south (Jalalabad, Osh
and Batken oblasts and Osh city). While both north and south are predominantly made up of
sparsely populated mountain areas, the majority of the north’s population lives in the denselypopulated Chuy Valley, with most of the population in the south in Kyrgyzstan’s portion of the
Fergana Valley.
Kyrgyzstan has had mixed results in its efforts to meet its Millennium Declaration Goals (MDGs).
It was reported that target benchmarks had already been reached for some indicators for MDGs
1, 4, 7 and 8 (respectively, elimination of poverty and hunger, child mortality, environmental
sustainability, global partnership). However, the MDGs on maternal mortality and HIV and AIDS
(MDG 5 and MDG 6) appear much more challenging to meet. In 2013 the Kyrgyz Republic was
equal 125th with neighbouring Tajikistan in the Human Development Index (HDI). 1
Poverty and disparities continue to take their toll on every third child in Kyrgyzstan, and many
children remain ‘invisible’ from state systems and excluded from social networks. This is proved
by disaggregated data on child and maternal mortality showing alarming signs of increasing
1
UNDP, Human Development Report, 2013, at http://hdr.undp.org/en/content/human-development-report-2013
UNICEF- KYRGYZSTAN
trends towards home deliveries and maternal and child deaths, especially in remote rural
mountainous settings. Many children in Kyrgyzstan do not have birth certificates and their
parents lack passports and marriage documents, mainly due to the high level of labor migration
and growth in unofficial marriages that eventually prevent access to basic services and cash
transfers. There are no reliable figures for the number of migrant workers from Kyrgyzstan,
though some estimates put the figure at about 500,000. Many children are left with relatives,
often grandparents, who may find it difficult to meet the material and emotional needs of the
growing children, many of whom are thus placed in residential institutions
A key group of children more susceptible to deprivation are those from rural areas, who are
more likely to be from poor families, have less access to social facilities including schools and
healthcare facilities and suffer lower quality service provision. These problems are particularly
acute in remote mountainous areas of the country. Shortages of healthcare and educational
equipment are also more common in these areas. Child protection, as well as health and
education, is also hampered by the fact that professionals, as well as beneficiaries, have much
further to travel to ensure that needs are met, and often have less resources to do this with.
Kyrgyzstan is still shaking off the legacy of the Soviet model of care of disabled children. The
medical model of disability still prevails and influences those caring for disabled children
including teachers, parents and medical personnel. Mechanisms that result in the segregation
of disabled children are still in place. Children with disabilities are often segregated in
specialized schools, living in institutions separate from their families, and excluded from many
social activities. Meanwhile, those children that stay at home with their families may receive no
education at all. There are concerns that the number of children with disabilities may be
underreported.
Girls of whatever ethnicity coerced into early marriage often become the victims of forced
domestic labour, are denied opportunities of education, and are rarely granted property rights.
Poverty and unemployment, patriarchal traditions, and religious conservatism are underlying
factors in the prevalence of early marriage. Because of early marriage, ethnic Uzbek girls are
less likely to complete school than Uzbek boys. Ethnic Kyrgyz girls, particularly in rural areas,
are susceptible to being abducted for marriage.
For more on the country context, MDGs and data regarding situation of children and women,
please see for instance the following web-pages:
http://www.kg.undp.org/content/kyrgyzstan/en/home/mdgoverview.html
http://www.data.unicef.org/countries/KGZ.html.
UNICEF Country Programme context
Country Programme of Cooperation between the Government of the Kyrgyz Republic and UNICEF
(2012-2016) was signed in January 2012. The Mid-Term Review (MTR) of the Country Programme
was carried out between March 2014 – May 2015. The Situation Analysis of the Rights of Children
in Kyrgyzstan was commissioned in 2014 in order to bridge information gaps. Findings of the
Situation Analysis, Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey (MICS) 2014, Post-2015 discussions, and
UNICEF Strategic Plan 2014-2017 were presented at the series of stakeholder consultations.
The MTR encompassed the analysis of the Country Programme through the prism of the thematic
Theories of Change (TOCs), analyses of recent data, reports, studies and evaluations, and sectoral
UNICEF- KYRGYZSTAN
consultations with the engagement of the government counterparts, civil society organisations
and international development partners. The MTR concluded that the country programme is on
track and is contributing to the progressive achievement of the long-term, systemic results
identified in the Country Programme Document. The shifts mainly involve the approaches for the
Country Programme implementation, but the Programme Components, Programme
Components and Programme Component Results CR and IR statements remain valid. UNICEF
Kyrgyzstan will continue to influence reforms through systems changes aligned with the National
Sustainable Development Strategy 2013-2017 through the use of combination of implementing
strategies in line with the UNICEF 2014-2017 Strategic Plan.
The overall strategies described in the CPAP were reconfirmed during the MTR with greater focus
on the equity for the most disadvantaged children and their families who are most in need. The
post-MTR strategic directions or priorities can be summarised in two pillars:
1) To accelerate the equity gap reduction by enhancing the outreach to the most vulnerable
and marginalized through the development of effective case management and
implementation of social protection reform, with particular attention on cross-sectoral
cooperation and capacity building of service providers;
and
2) To overcome social norms, social and cultural beliefs and practices, and attitudes that
negatively impact the protection of children’s right through solid and practical C4D
strategy and rigorous implementation.
UNICEF Kyrgyzstan’s close cooperation with the Parliament continued to bring important
legislative framework for the realization of children’s rights in 2014, such as State Programme on
Justice for Children, amendments in Flour Fortification and Protection of Breastfeeding Laws. The
partnership with the Ombudsman’s Office effectively promoted ‘School without Violence
Programme’, enhanced complaint mechanisms and monitoring of closed institutions.
Development Partner’s Coordination Council (DPCC) is a well-established aid-effectiveness
mechanism of donor coordination, in which UNICEF Kyrgyzstan undertakes a few important roles.
UNICEF took its leadership chairing the Education and Social Protection working group
respectively in 2014, while being a member of a number of other thematic working groups.
UNICEF took an active role as a lead facilitating agency in Scaling Up Nutrition (SUN) Movement,
to support the Government’s SUN focal point, Ministry of Health, in coordinating key
stakeholders inputs in Kyrgyzstan’s actions on nutrition. This partnership resulted in
development of State Food Security and Nutrition Programme, creating Alliance of NGOs,
initiating steps for a high-level multi-sectorial coordination to prevent micronutrient deficiency
among vulnerable population.
Kyrgyzstan’s Healthcare Sector enjoys successful organization of Sector-Wide Approach (SWAP)
which effectively coordinates development partners’ investment and assistance on
implementation of “Den Sooluk” Health Reform Strategy. This significantly contributes to
Kyrgyzstan’s participation in Global Child Survival Commitment and SUN Movement towards the
achievement of MDG4.
UN Peace Building Programme brings an important partnership forum in its Joint Steering
Committee led by the Presidential Administration. UNICEF is one of the most significant
contributors in the UN peacebuilding interventions, addressing needs of most vulnerable children
and families.
UNICEF- KYRGYZSTAN
UNICEF Kyrgyzstan continued productive partnership with major donors like DFID and
Governments of Japan and Russian Federation. Overall, the accumulative amount of the donor
funds raised in 3 years, since the beginning of Country Programme, has reached nearly
US$30.9mln.
2. Purpose of the Evaluation
The purpose of the evaluation is to assess the key thematic/sectoral strategies used to implement
UNICEF Kyrgyzstan Country Programme of Cooperation 2012-2016 through the prism of the
Country Programme structure, applying UNICEF Core roles lens.
The Country Programme aims to contribute to achieving four Outcomes and sixteen related
Outputs focused on programmatic areas, namely:
OUTCOME 1.1 By 2016, at national level, more children and women have increased access to
quality and responsive services, including social benefits
-
-
-
-
-
OUTPUT 1.1.1 By end 2016, within the SWAp, the Ministry of Health manages and
monitors the provision and performance of quality and responsive priority life-saving
health services for children and mothers from poor and vulnerable families
OUTPUT 1.1.11 MCH Systems and Policies the Ministry of Health manage and monitor the
provision and performance of quality and responsive health services for HIV prevention
and treatment interventions for children, pregnant women and adolescents
OUTPUT 1.1.12 MCH Systems and Policies the Ministry of Health manage and monitor the
provision and performance of quality and responsive health services for children and
mothers from poor and vulnerable families, including nutrition services and diagnostic
OUTPUT 1.1.2 By end 2016, the Ministry of Education and Science support inclusive and
quality education through systematic and effective addressing the issue of OOSC,
fostering multilingual and multicultural education policy, promoting the issue of teacher
quality and availability, improving emergency preparedness of the sector and generating
knowledge to advance the issue of quality and inclusiveness of basic education (RKLA4)
OUTPUT 1.1.21 MOES ensures increased equity in access to pre-school education, a better
quality teaching and learning environment in basic education, and effective responses to
the needs of out-of-school children (RKLA 3)
OUTCOME 1.2 By 2016, Kyrgyzstan makes significant progress in addressing key
recommendations of international treaties, including the CRC
-
-
OUTPUT 1.2.1 By end 2016, national and local authorities prevent and respond effectively
to cases of violence, abuse and neglect, separation of children from their families, ensure
rights to birth registration, prevent and protect children in conflict with the law
OUTPUT 1.2.2 By end 2016, the Ministry of Social Protection implements effective
response policies, programmes and services that target child poverty, including an
equitable social cash transfer system
OUTCOME 2.1 By 2016, with a focus on the most vulnerable groups in specifically targeted
areas, more women, girls and boys have access to and use a continuum of integrated social
services, including sanitation services
-
OUTPUT 2.1.1 By end 2016, in coordination with national Government, district and local
authorities in the 55 target municipalities, provide for a continuum of quality, basic and
UNICEF- KYRGYZSTAN
-
-
-
-
-
guaranteed social services
OUTPUT 2.1.11 By end 2016, in coordination with national Government, district and local
authorities in the 55 selected municipalities, provide for a continuum of quality, basic and
guaranteed social services (in the area of Child Protection)
OUTPUT 2.1.12 By end 2016, in coordination with national Government, district and local
authorities in the 55 municipalities provide adequate support to implement local
emergency preparedness and disaster risk reduction
OUTPUT 2.1.2 Local authorities and communities in selected municipalities promote the
increased use of priority life-saving health services for vulnerable children and women,
OUTPUT 2.1.21 Local authorities and communities in selected municipalities promote
better access to adequate sanitation in primary health care centres and in schools, and
the adoption of good hygiene practices by school children, women and families.
OUTPUT 2.1.3 In targeted municipalities, local authorities in cooperation with Civil Society
Organizations (CSOs) promote positive behavioural outcomes among communities and
mobilise increased demand for quality early education and child protection services; and
selected municipalities in the south promote demand for ‘safe and tolerant schools’
OUTPUT 2.1.4 Improved peace and stability and a lessening of ethnic tension in the
conflict affected areas of Southern Kyrgyzstan through raising of living standards,
increased employment opportunities and reduced frustration and alienation among the
poorest children, youth and families in the Programme target areas
OUTCOME 3.1 By 2016, an alliance consisting of government, NGOs and communities,
contribute to the increased and sustainable civic engagement of and partnerships for Child
Rights
-
-
OUTPUT 3.1.1 By end 2016, national and local authorities in targeted areas, as well as
alliances for children, involving the private sector, CSOs and the media facilitate a secure
enabling environment for the active engagement and participation of adolescents and
youth in activities promoting social cohesion, peace building and reconciliation
OUTPUT 3.1.2 By end 2016, national monitoring and evaluation systems inform policy
making and budgeting around issues related to youth and children, including child rights
While approaching to the end of the programme cycle and starting the planning phase for the
new one, the knowledge generated by the evaluation will be used by the GOK and UNICEF to
inform the new Country Programme Document 2018-2022. The findings will be used as a basis
for discussions and planning exercises between UNICEF and national actors.
Specific objectives of the evaluation:
The main objectives of this evaluation are to:
-
Assess the relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, impact and sustainability of the strategies
adopted to achieve Country Programme results (with a particular focus on the relevance
and effectiveness);
Identify and document lessons learnt in relation to type, combination and way of
implementation of the strategies, considering the country context and UNICEF’s
comparative advantage;
Provide recommendations and guide the strategic planning for the next program cycle,
based on the lessons learnt and successes of the current CP.
UNICEF- KYRGYZSTAN
The evaluation is intended to answer whether and how the key strategies have contributed to
better position UNICEF in the national development agenda of Kyrgyzstan, and whether and how
these key strategies can accelerate and strengthen the achievement of better results beyond the
sum of the sectoral results delivered by the programmes that are supported by UNICEF.
The evaluation will also identify good practices to be taken forward, and develop
recommendations on how to further strengthen the strategic positioning of UNICEF in
Kyrgyzstan, with a view to contributing to the achievement of best possible development results
for children.
Given that the first two objectives of the evaluation imply a more 'backward looking' (i.e.
summative) character of the evaluation the evaluation is not purely formative, but combining
summative and formative elements.
Scope of the evaluation
As mentioned, the evaluation will assess key sectoral strategies as applied in selected
programmatic areas through the lens of UNICEF Core Roles across the Country Programme. It
will cover most of the programme cycle implementation period, from 2012 to the end of 2015.
As several evaluations in some thematic areas, including multi-country evaluations across the
CEE/CIS region, were conducted recently, this evaluation is expected to be more focused on the
not evaluated programme components. The geographical scope will include both national and
local levels; however, specific locations may vary, depending on strategy under assessment and
respective programme area.
Evaluation is also expected to shape the CPAP and UNICEF’s future strategic approaches, the
focus is primarily on establishing UNICEF’s potential for achieving expected development
results and adding value in line with its comparative advantages, both within the country and
globally.
The evaluation requires analysis across various CP Outcomes and Outputs. Analytical work will
be conducted through a desk review of the secondary data and complemented by key
informants’ interviews and focus group discussions. Given several evaluations of key
programmatic areas carried out, in-depth look at the areas not yet evaluated (e.g. Water and
Sanitation, Disaster Risk Reduction, Youth and Peace-building and Social protection
programmes) is expected.
Information sources
The following list includes general information sources related to the Country Programme as a
whole and key thematic reports
Planning and programme:
 Country Programme Document 2012-2016
 UNDAF 2012-2016
 Country Programme Action Plan 2010-2016
 Country Programme Mid Term Review (MTR) Report -2015
 Country Office Annual Reports 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015
 Rolling Management Plans 2012-2013, 2014-2015
 Rolling Work Plans 2012-2013, 2014-2015
UNICEF- KYRGYZSTAN

Thematic Theories of Change
Background / situation monitoring sources:








Situation Analysis – 2015
Kyrgyzstan MDG Report – 2014
CRC Concluding Observations on Kyrgyzstan, 2014
CEDAW Concluding Observations, 2015
Universal Periodic Review Report, 2014
Kyrgyzstan Country Development Strategy 2014-2017
State Program on Justice for Children and its Action Plan for 2014 – 2018
Optimization plan for management and financing of residential institutions for 2012 -2016
Key Studies, Surveys and Evaluations:





2014 Kyrgyzstan MICS Final Report
Evaluation of Perinatal Care Programme 2010-2013, 2014
Evaluation of UNICEF Equity Programme in the Southern Kyrgyzstan, 2014
Evaluation of School Without Violence Programme, 2015
Independent Multi-Country Evaluation of Results Area 3, Increasing Access and Equity in
Early Childhood Education in CEE/CIS 2014
 Early Childhood Development, SABER Country Report, Kyrgyz Republic, 2013
 Promotion reading among Young Children in Kyrgyz Republic, project final report, 2015
 Better Future for Every Child, 2012
 Sustainability of Community based Kindergartens, Analytical Brief, 2015
 CEE/CIS Multi-Country Evaluation of UNICEF Juvenile Justice programmes, 2015
 Global initiative on Out of School Children, Kyrgyzstan Country Study, 2012
 OOSC Initiative, Kyrgyzstan Mission Report, 2014
 Survey on OOSC in Eleven New settlements Around Bishkek, 2015
 The Situation of Teachers in Kyrgyzstan: Salary, Teaching Hours and Quality of Instruction,
2014
 Nutritional Status of children 6-29 months in Kyrgyzstan, 2014
 Analysis of residential institutions, 2012
 Analysis of reasons of abandonment, 2013
Specific limitations to the evaluation are not identified; UNICEF is not aware of any noteworthy
limitations to the evaluation but level of disaggregation of quantitative indicators, e.g.
Prevalence of X among children of specific age group living in the poor households.
Evaluability assessment
CPD, CPAP and CPAP Results and Resources Framework reveal much about programme goals,
organisation, resourcing, and provide a realistic justification of the Programme interventions
with key assumptions and risks identified and assessed. The objectives of the Programme are
clear, realistic and commonly understood by the government. List of key partners and donors is
regularly provided in the course of annual reporting – all the CO annual reports are public
documents.
UNICEF- KYRGYZSTAN
Key Programme Implementation thematic activities including 12 thematic TOCs were timely
and properly documented. A built-in M&E system monitors a wide range of performance
indicators, including internal CO efficiency indicators. Integrated M&E Plan was developed to
ensure monitoring data were collected on a regular basis against performance indicators.
In the course of the Programme implementation and MTR process, the Results and Resources
Framework has been modified; some expected Outputs were splint into several in accordance
with SP Outcomes breakdown, baseline and target data were amended, and few indicators
were reformulated and few excluded.
Evaluation questions
The evaluation questions must be formulated in accordance with the OECD/DAC evaluation
criteria of Relevance, Effectiveness, Efficiency, Impact and Sustainability. Below are the
tentative evaluation questions the Country office expects to be reflected in the evaluation
methodology, but that the specific questions should be reviewed and, if needed, revised by the
evaluation team.
Assessing relevance
Relevance is understood as the alignment of UNICEF’s programmes to government and
corporate priorities, taking into account UNICEF’s comparative advantages; and importance or
significance of UNICEF programmatic interventions and approaches in addressing key
developmental challenges.
-
To what extent are the CP Outcomes and Outputs relevant for and aligned with the
needs of national stakeholders, especially the most vulnerable groups?
Are the applied strategies (e.g. public advocacy, convening partnership, capacity
development, etc.) the most relevant to achieve the expected results in the concerned
programme area? Any suggested changes or shift to other strategy(ies) in this regard?
To what extent the needs and interests for target group and subgroups are addressed?
Were the bottlenecks and barriers that determine equity gaps affecting vulnerable
children identified well for the concerned programme area?
Assessing effectiveness
Effectiveness is understood as UNICEF’s contribution to the achievement of desired
developmental change at the outcome level. The primary concern of this formative evaluation
will be to establish the extent to which UNICEF has set itself up in a way that is likely to
contribute to the achievement of such change.
-
To what extent has the strategy(-ies) contributed to achieving (or not) the expected
outcome and output level results in the concerned programme area?
To what extent has the strategy contributed to reducing bottlenecks and barriers?
To what extent will the objectives be (most likely) achieved?
To what extent is the target group reached?
What were the main factors that promoted or hindered the effectiveness of the
strategy?
Assessing efficiency
UNICEF- KYRGYZSTAN
Efficiency is understood as the way in which UNICEF manages its resources, including
partnerships, with a view operationalizing its strategies, implementing activities and delivering
outputs.
-
How well has the strategy implementation been managed in the concerned programme
area?
- To what extent were the costs and benefits of the development interventions in a
reasonable proportion to each other?
- Could the same results have been achieved using different strategies (or set of
strategies) and with less resources?
Where cost analysis to assess efficiency is not feasible or is very basic and no cost analysis is
included in the report, some rationale for this exclusion should be provided.
Assessing impact
Impact is defined as positive and/or negative, primary and secondary long-term effects
produced in the course of strategy implementation, directly or indirectly, intended or
unintended.
-
What evidence exists of positive or negative long-term effects of the country program?
What real difference to the beneficiaries is made? How many have benefitted/been
affected? Are they most vulnerable?
Assessing sustainability
Sustainability is understood as the extent to which measures have been, or expect to be, put in
place with a view to ensuring the medium to long-term ownership of rights holders and
commitment by duty-bearers and their national and international development partners.
-
To what extent are the positive changes and effects sustainable? To what extent will
activities, results and effects be expected to continue after UNICEF support has ended?
Did the strategy contribute to promote ownership over the different programme areas
and correspondent results by national stakeholders?
What are the opportunities for and risks to the sustainability in the short and long
terms?
3. Evaluation Approach and Management
Approach for data collection and analysis
The evaluation methodology will be guided by the Norms and Standards of the United Nations
Evaluation Group. The approach should be participatory, gender and human rights responsive.
The data should come from a variety of sources to ensure its accuracy, validity and reliability, and
that all affected people/stakeholders are considered. Methodology should explicitly address
issues of gender and human rights, with a special focus on equity and under-represented groups.
Generally, data collection will be based on a multiple method approach, including primarily desk
review of reference materials (including monitoring reports and other sources, where necessary)
and focus group discussions and interviews with different partners, independent experts, and
concerned UNICEF staff. Field visits and observations of different kind to collect primary data
(mainly qualitative) may be required to ensure data triangulation (to increase report credibility).
UNICEF- KYRGYZSTAN
The evaluation will be conducted in a participatory manner, involving key national actors
(including Development partners, such as EU, UKAid, World Bank and NGOs). UNICEF
management and key UNICEF-Kyrgyzstan programme staff will also be fully involved. The
participation of the key stakeholders will be ensured in all phases of the evaluation, including the
planning, inception, fact-finding, reporting phases as well as the management response phase
when determining the concrete use the findings and recommendations, follow-up decisions, and
dissemination strategies as relevant.
The evaluation report should include a description of, inter alia, how gender issues were
implemented as a cross-cutting theme in programming, and if sufficient attention to promote
gender equality and gender-sensitivity was paid.
The evaluation approach should envisage learning and participation opportunities (e.g. round
tables, debriefing, participation in the field visits) to ensure that key stakeholders are fully
integrated into the evaluation learning.
Evaluation Team Composition
The Evaluation Team will be comprised of two international consultants (one of which is Team
Leader) and a local English-speaking consultant (hired separately by UNICEF). Also if needed and
requested, an interpreter may be additionally hired by the UNICEF CO.
Due to multi-faceted structure of Country Programme, the evaluation needs to be undertaken by
multi-disciplinary team. The team members must bring different types of expertise and
experience to the team. If possible, at least one member of the team should have an experience
and sound knowledge of the country programme evaluations. At least one should preferably be
an evaluation specialist and be experienced in using the specific evaluation methodologies that
will be employed for that evaluation. The evaluation team should also possess a general
understanding of the major economic and social development issues and problems in the
country. Background or familiarity with peace-building problematique is also desirable.
Evaluation Management Aspects
Evaluation Management Group comprised of UNICEF Deputy Representative, Head of Osh Field
Office, Social Policy Specialist and M&E Specialist will lead the evaluation throughout the entire
process. At the same time, for specific programmatic areas, respective UNICEF staff will facilitate
meetings, discussions, and overall collaboration with relevant GOK/NGO actors making sure that
adequate participatory mechanisms are in place. UNICEF programme staff will be accountable
for providing all project related documentation, reports etc., reviewing/approving the evaluation
methodology, inception and final evaluation report.
Evaluation Team Leader
Particularly, Team Leader will be accountable for:
 selection of evaluation team
 evaluation methodology (including finalization of evaluation questions and matrix),
detailed work plan and inception report
 overall coordination of evaluation process
 ensuring high quality of Evaluation/Summary reports and Power Point presentation of key
UNICEF- KYRGYZSTAN

findings and recommendations
presenting major evaluation findings
Evaluation Team Member – international consultant
International consultant, in close consultation with Team Leader, will be responsible for:
 technical support to the evaluation including finalization of evaluation methodology
(including finalization of evaluation questions and matrix) in some specific areas, detailed
work plan and inception report
 Present the methodology, tools, and guidelines to partners/stakeholders (e.g. ministries,
UN Agencies, etc.);
 Contribute substantively to the writing of the Inception Report and Final Report, in
accordance with required standards to ensure a timely release;
 Ensure that all evaluation related documents and deliverables (questionnaires, manuals,
expert reports, final report, datasets, etc.) are properly archived throughout the
evaluation process;
Ethical issues
The Evaluation team engaged in designing, conducting and managing evaluation activities
should aspire to conduct high quality work guided by professional standards and ethical and
moral principles in accordance with UNEG Ethical Guidelines for Evaluation 2. The team should
be able to exercise independent judgment and ensure that s/he is not unduly influenced by the
views or statements of any party. The evaluations must give a comprehensive and balanced
presentation of strengths and weaknesses of the project being evaluated, taking due account of
the views of a diverse cross-section of stakeholders.
4. Evaluation Work Plan and Duration
The duration of work Team Leader is around 50 working days, within a six-month period (March
– August 2016), including approximately 25 working days spent in the Kyrgyz Republic. For the
second international consultant estimated duration of work is around 35 working days including
approximately 20 working days spent in the country. A local consultant and an interpreter will
be hired separately by UNICEF Country Office for the period up to 5 months.
The evaluation process will consist of the following phases:
1. Inception phase including:
 Seven to ten days inception in the country for the team leader only
 In-depth desk review of available sources so that the evaluator(s) improve their
understanding of: the strategies under evaluation and related programme areas, involved
stakeholders, and the country context
 Preliminary discussions with the Evaluation Management Group and other relevant
actors, to facilitate an in-depth common understanding of the conceptual framework;
 More in-depth assessment of evaluative evidence;
 Refining the evaluation questions and adjusting data collection methods and sample;
2
UNEG Guidelines http://www.uneval.org/document/detail/102
UNICEF- KYRGYZSTAN

Inception report preparation, including: Evaluation Matrix for each finally agreed
evaluation question, data collection and analysis methods, sample (list of stakeholders to
be interviewed and locations to be visited), and operational plan. The inception report
will have to be shared with and approved by the Evaluation Management Group.
2. Data collection phase, including 20 days in the country for the whole team and 5 working
days for pre-mission desk review and preparations, will be comprised of a mix of abovedescribed data collection methods and respective analysis.
3. Reporting phase – nearly 10 working days for the whole team. Following the completion of
the fact-finding and analysis phase, a draft report (in English) should be submitted to be
shared within the Evaluation Management Group and with other key actors and validated.
The process will be guided by the following tentative schedule (expected to take place in March
– August 2016)
Activity
Timeframe
Location
Inception Phase: 15 working days (Team leader only)
Preliminary desk review
5 working days (TL ) Home-based
Inception in the country;
Refining evaluation questions and
7 working days (TL)
Kyrgyzstan
discussions with UNICEF team
Either
Preparation of the inception report
3 working days (TL)
Kyrgyzstan or
home-based
Data Collection Phase: 20 working days
In-depth desk review to gather
secondary quantitative/qualitative
data;
5 working days
Home-based
Preparation of data collection and
analysis tools
In-country data collection
15 working days
Kyrgyzstan
Data processing and analysis
Analysis and Report drafting: 15 working days
Drafting evaluation report
10 working days
Home-based
Presentation of draft report and
preliminary findings;
Consolidating comments and report
finalization
5 working days
Kyrgyzstan
Deliverables
Inception report
Data collection and
analysis tools
Presentation of
preliminary findings
Draft report
Final report
5. Deliverables and Structure of the Report
As described in the last column of the matrix in “Work Plan of the evaluation”, the expected
deliverables are the following:


Inception report – tentatively, to be delivered by end of April 2016;
Data collection and analysis tools - tentatively, to be delivered in May 2016;
UNICEF- KYRGYZSTAN



Presentation of the preliminary findings - to be delivered at the end of the in-country
mission, by end of July 2016;
Draft report - to be delivered in July - August 2016;
Final report - to be delivered by end of August 2016.
The Evaluation Report should comply with UNICEF Evaluation Report Standards as outlined at
http://www.unicef.org/evaldatabase/files/UNICEF_Eval_Report_Standards.pdf. Its quality will
be assessed through UNICEF Global Evaluation Reports Oversight System on the basis of these
standards. The report should include:









Executive summary,
Description of the object of the evaluation
Purpose of the evaluation, evaluation scope, objectives and criteria
Description of the evaluation methodology (including evaluability assessment, limitations
and ethical issues),
Findings broken down by strategy and evaluation criteria,
Overall analysis of all the strategies as a package within the Country Programme,
Conclusions and lessons learned,
Recommendations,
Annexes: Terms of Reference, data collection tools and other relevant information.
6. Required qualifications and areas of expertise
The evaluation will have to be conducted by an experienced evaluation team comprising a
sufficient number (tentatively, three experts) of qualifying international experts covering the
below requirements:









Documented experience (at least 5 full years) in conducting development evaluations
(having conducted evaluations for UNICEF is an asset);
Proven extensive experience in quantitative and qualitative data collection and analysis;
Proven experience in planning of complex programmes and exposure to UN strategic
planning processes (exposure to UNICEF planning is an asset);
Work experience in developing countries, experience in Commonwealth of Independent
States (CIS) (previous work in Kyrgyzstan is an asset);
Solid knowledge on child rights, HRBA and gender equality;
Experience in conducting country program evaluations is highly desirable;
Excellent report writing skills in English;
Good communication skills;
Fluency in Russian and/or Kyrgyz language is an asset.
7. Evaluation criteria for selection
The candidates are expected to reflect in his/her application the qualifications/ knowledge/
experience related to the qualifications and tasks above. Technical evaluation will be performed
through a desk review of applications.
UNICEF- KYRGYZSTAN
The selection will be based on the principle of “best value for money” among the technically
qualified candidates.
8. Payment schedule and logistics issues
Upon contract signing, payments shall be made as follows:
For Team Leader,
 10% will be paid upon contract signing;
 30% will be paid upon submission of the Inception Report;
 30% will be paid upon presentation of the Preliminary Report findings and
recommendations;
 30% will be paid upon submission of the Final report;
For the second consultant,
 10% will be paid upon contract signing;
 40% will be paid upon presentation of the Preliminary Report findings and
recommendations;
 50% will be paid upon submission of the Final report;
The evaluation team will be assisted with logistics related to the assignment. During in-country
visits, they will be provided with office space, vehicle for site visits and official meetings, visa
support and logistic support for meetings and presentations.
Note: In all cases, consultants may only be paid their fees upon satisfactory completion of services. In such
cases where payment of fees is to be made in a lump sum, this may only be payable upon completion of
the services to UNICEF’s satisfaction and certification to that effect, and any advance on the lump sum may
not exceed 30% of the fees. In such cases where payment of fees is to be made in installments, the final
installment may not be less than ten per cent (10%) of the total value of the contract, and will only be
payable upon completion of the services to UNICEF’s satisfaction and certification to that effect.