Subscribe via RSS Feed

Mid-term Evaluation of the Mining for Sustainable Development Programme



Job: Mid-term Evaluation of the Mining for Sustainable Development Programme

Application closing date: 15 August

Implementation period: September – October 2017

1.     Introduction

Transparency International (TI) is the global civil society movement leading the fight against corruption. Through more than 100 National Chapters[1] worldwide, and an International Secretariat in Berlin, Germany, TI raises awareness about the devastating impact of corruption and works with partners in government, the private sector and civil society to develop and implement effective measures to tackle it.

The Mining for Sustainable Development Programme is one of five Global Thematic Network Initiatives (GTNI) or specialised centres of thematic expertise. GTNIs are globally operating programmes hosted by TI national chapters. They are shaped by their innovative approaches and ambition to have a global impact in a defined thematic area. GTNIs aim to strengthen cross-regional cooperation, foster learning and improve both organisational sustainability and anti-corruption impact of the global TI movement.

Mining for Sustainable Development

Led by TI Australia, Transparency International’s Mining for Sustainable Development Programme (M4SD) seeks to enhance the contribution of mining to sustainable economic and human development through a focus on enhanced transparency and accountability in awarding mining-related permits, licences and contracts across a range of national jurisdictions.

The Programme engages with a wide range of actors to create an enabling environment, and to positively influence practices in the mining sector. Participating TI Chapters and their local partners work together to support:

  • civil society and affected communities in accessing, interpreting and monitoring information and decisions relating to the allocation of mining permits, licences and contracts;
  • operating companies and their affiliates in adopting, implementing and enforcing relevant international transparency and accountability standards; and
  • governments in adopting, enabling and enforcing effective transparency and accountability policies, procedures and practices.

The programme runs over five years and is divided into 2 Phases.

Phase I (2016-2017): TI Chapters in 20 countries are identifying and assessing the risks of corruption in the mining awards process in their country using the Mining Awards Corruption Risk Assessment (MACRA) Tool developed for Transparency International. They will publish a national risk assessment report on their results. In coalition with key stakeholders, National Chapters will then use the results to develop local action plans to address these risks. A global analysis report will also be produced from the national risk assessments.

Phase II: Planned to start in 2018, national, regional and global strategies will be implemented to create changes to policy and practice in selected countries and globally to increase transparency and accountability in awarding mining sector permits, licences and contracts.

2.     Objectives of the evaluation

The Transparency International Secretariat is seeking the services of a Monitoring and Evaluation consultant to design and implement a Mid-Term process evaluation of M4SD to assess whether the Programm assumptions are still current and whether we are on the right track to achieve impact.

The overall objectives of the evaluation are to:

  • Provide an assessment of whether the Programme assumptions are still current and whether the Programme is on the right track to achieve impact.
  • Identify key challenges and successes in implementing Phase I activites and understand why they occurred in order to generate lessons learned and good practices.
    • Identify forward looking recommendations that can guide the Programme and National Chapters in their interventions, and to further strategic and programme planning, design and management, including on the governance and management model of M4SD.

3.     Key issues to be adressed

The following questions could be addressed during the mid-term evaluation, but are subject to discussion and agreement with Transparency International Secretariat (TI-S) during the period of designing the evaluation approach.

Relevance:

  • To what extent are the initial objectives of the Programme still appropriate?
  • To what extent are the initial assumptions that underpin the Programme design still valid?
  • Are the activities and outputs consistent with the programme goals and objectives?

Effectiveness:

  • How effectively has the programme been governed and managed?  How suitable is the current organisational structure for and conducive of positive progress?
  • To what extent is the programmatic approach strengthening TI Australia and the National Chapters?

Efficiency:

  • Is the programme being implemented in an economically justifiable way under the given circumstances? Is progress being achieved at reasonable costs?
  • What resources were available to the programme? To what extent were these resources allocated and used effectively to achieve project outputs in Phase I?
  • To what extent has the Secretariat´s contribution added value to the implementation and management of the Programme?

Sustainability:

  • To what extent is the programmatic approach strengthening both TI Australia and the National Chapters?
  • To what extent is TI Australia developing and implementing effective strategies to make its role within the Mining Programme sustainable?

Furthermore, the following more specific questions could be addressed focusing on activity implementation and chapter capacity:

Research

  • To what extent did TI chapters demonstrate the assumed ‘expertise and resources required to implement the initial ‘mapping’ exercise and/ or research’.  What further capacity assessment, changes to research method or capacity support & training would be required for new chapters to more effectivly implement the research in Phase II?
  • What kinds of challenges did chapters, and their researchers, experience implementing the research method?
  • How did chapters access and collect data from key sources in different sectors (private sector, government, civil society/communities) for their research? What was successful, what was challenging and why?
  • How did chapters manage the research process? What was successful, what was challenging and why?

Stakeholder engagement

  • To what extent did TI chapters have the assumed  ‘sufficient convening power to build or restore trust between government, industry and civil society within their countries’? What further capacity assessment and support would be required to support chapter to do this effectively in phase II of the Programme?
  • What processes have national chapters used to engage with key stakeholders?
  • What worked well in facilitating stakeholder meetings and what did not? Why?

Communicating findings

  • To what extent did TI chapters have the assumed  ‘skills, channels and resources required to communicate any research findings, and the impact of corruption at the permits, licences and contracts state, effectively to different groups of stakeholders/ target audiences’? What further capacity assessment and support would be required to support chapters to do this in Phase II of the Programme?

Developing Action Plans

  • What approach did chapters take to developing action plans? How did they involve stakeholders? What did they find challenging?

Programme support to chapters

  • What specific interventions were put in place by the programme to:

-  Facilitate coordination, learning and sharing between the chapters?
-  To effectively plan, report and implement their project activities?
-  To manage and implement the research process?

  • What suppport did chapters find most useful and why? What could be added or improved in Phase II?

4.     Methodology

The evaluator is ultimately responsible for the overall methodological approach and design of the evaluation and is expected to propose methods that they consider most appropriate to achieve the aims of this evaluation. However, the evaluation should use a participatory and gender-sensitive approach engaging relevant staff at TI-S, TI Australia and implementing partners and stakeholders through structured methods and selected field visits. A strong preference is for the research to include a number of case studies.

The Programme’s monitoring data should be utilised and there must not be  duplicate data collection. Existing data available to the consultant includes programme narrative reports, a revised theory of change for the programme, a Baseline report and monitoring data from National Chapter reporting on the programme’s change markers, a meeting report from the July 2017 Global Programme workshop. Additional data collection may include interviews primarily with TIA & TIS programme staff and select chapter staff, with internal and external stakeholders, and desk review of relevant documents. .

The evaluator is expected to refine the scope and methodology of this evaluation during the inception phase in cooperation with TI-S and provide a detailed evaluation plan. The evaluation expert should present a detailed statement of the proposed review methods in the technical proposal.

5.     Deliverables

The evaluator, or team is expected to deliver:

  • A concept note outlining the proposed methodology, timeframe of planned actions including scheduled country visits for approval by TI-S
  • A draft evaluation report, including case studies, for review and comments by TI-S including annexes covering conducted interviews, questionnaires and list of reviewed documents.
  • A validation workshop (possibly remotely) with the team in Berlin, and Australia and key staff to discuss the draft report
  • A final review report, including clear lessons-learned and action-oriented recommendations

The Final Report should not be longer than 30 pages, excluding the annexes and the executive summary. All evaluation deliverables are to be submitted in English, in electronic form, in accordance with the deadlines stipulated below. The consultant is responsible for editing and quality control of language. Annexes to the Final Report should be kept to an absolute minimum. Only those annexes that serve to demonstrate or clarify an issue related to a major finding should be included. Existing documents should be referenced but not necessarily annexed.

The proposed structure of the report is as follows:

  1. Title Page
  2. Table of Contents
  3. Abbreviations/acronyms
  4. Executive Summary
  5. Brief description of the project
  6. The Evaluation Methodology
  7. Findings (including case studies)
  8. Lessons Learned
  9. Summary of Recommendations
  10. Annexes

6.     Logistics and workplan

The mid-term evaluation is due to start in September and end by mid-October. A detailed timeline needs to be agreed at the beginning of the assignment.

Preparation Desk review and analysisDesign of the evaluation approach (inclusive discussion and agreement with TI-S)
Implementation Data collection: Interviews with relevant staff at TI and external stakeholders
Documentation Draft reportValidation workshop (remotely), and power point presentation summarising the findingsFinal report, with actionable lessons learned and recommendations to TI-S, TI Australia, national chapters and the donor

Contracts: A TI-S standard contract based on EU costs norms for engagement of external consultants will be applied for this assignment. Associated travel and administrative costs will also be covered. It is expected that the lead/international consultant will be responsible for contracting their own team.

The consultant should provide a detailed breakdown, before any VAT or other charges, of all their estimates costs (including travel if necessary).

7.     Selection criteria

Applicants should have the following competencies and experience:

Core competencies

People skills: be able to mediate the different expectations of the different internal stakeholders, and to communicate clearly and transparently across different teams.

Work style: organised even within a fluid working environment and has a capacity for initiative with competent analytical and problem solving skills.

Language: excellent command of English to a native speaker’s level. Spanish and French an asset.

Technical competencies

Applicants should have the following skills and experience:

  • University degree in social sciences or related field.
  • Substantial experience in participatory approaches to MEL in NGOs, with specific emphasis on monitoring programmes.
  • Experience working in complex, multi-stakeholder programmes that involve a large number of implementing partners across world regions.
  • Demonstrable experience of working in good governance programmes, with focus on accountability, transparency and the mining sector.
  • Experience in working across cultures, with acute sensitivity to working with partners whose 1st language is not English.
  • Regional experience and good understanding of political, socio economic and human rights issues in Africa, Asia and/or Latin America.

8.     Application process

Applications (in English) must be sent by email to miningMTR@transparency.org by close of business on 15 August 2017. Applications should contain:

  • A proposal of how the assignment will be approached, including a budget.
  • A letter of motivation, specifically focusing on concrete examples relating to what is requested in this Terms of Reference regarding the necessary skills and experience.
  • Curriculum Vitae with full description of the applicant’s profile and experience.
  • Contact details for at least two independent referees with in-depth and proven knowledge of the applicant’s expertise and relevant work experience for this Terms of Reference.
  • A sample evaluation, as first author,  published in the last 2 years.
  • A completed VAT Form for Tenders/Vendor Form.

Due to the high volume of applications, we will only notify short-listed candidates. If you do not hear from us two weeks after the deadline, it is because you have not been shortlisted.

Download ToR.

TI retains the right to reject any or all of the applications and/or to enter into additional negotiations with one or more of the tendering parties.



[1] The Chapters are all independent civil society organisations registered in their own countries and internationally affiliated with TI.






ACFID Logo
TI Australia is committed to complying with ACFID's Code of Conduct and the Code’s complaints handling process.