Ghana - Final Evaluation of Mining Sector Support Programme

Lot:2 - Transport and infrastructure - EuropeAid FWC Beneficiaries 127054

DONWLOAD Terms of References

3.1. Education, experience, references of each expert

The Consultant shall provide a project team consisting of three experts:

1 Senior Expert in Institutional Strengthening,
1 Senior Expert in Geology/Geophysics,
1 Senior Expert in Environmental Impact Assessment and Strategic Impact Assessment.

Senior Expert in Institutional Strengthening
He/she will be holder of a Masters degree or an equivalent academic level.
He/she will have at least 15 years experience in capacity building and institutional strengthening and 10 years proven experience in developing countries. This experience should include strong knowledge of the project administrative procedures of the EDF. Experience in project/programme evaluation is required.

Senior Expert in Geology / Geophysics
He/she will be holder of a Masters degree or an equivalent academic level.
He/she will have at least 15 years proven experience in the mining sector industry in geology and geophysics.
He/she will have at least 10 years proven experience in developing countries.
Experience in geological mapping and airborne geophysical surveys will be considered

Senior Expert in Environmental Impact Assessment and Strategic Impact Assessment
He/she will be holder of a Masters degree or an equivalent academic level.
He/she will have at least 15 years proven experience dealing with environmental issues in the mining sector industry.
He/she will have at least 10 years proven experience in developing countries.

Team Leader
The Consultant will select the Team Leader among the experts. Communications to and from the Consultant and the Contracting Authority shall be exclusively via the Team Leader. He should be computer literate. He will be responsible for the production of all reports.

3.2 Office accommodation
The consultant will have to provide his own office accommodation.

3.3 Facilities to be provided by the Consultant
The Consultant shall ensure that experts are adequately supported and equipped. In particular it shall ensure that there is sufficient transportation, administrative, secretarial and interpreting provision to enable experts to concentrate on their primary responsibilities.

3.4 Working languages
The contractual and working language will be English. All the experts shall be fluent in English.

4. LOCATION AND DURATION
4.1 Starting period
The start of the assignment is planned for 3rd May 2010.

4.2 Foreseen finishing period / duration of the assignment
The foreseen duration from the start of the assignment until the submission of the final report is a maximum of 90 calendar days.

4.3 Schedule and number of days for the assignment per expert
The consultant shall provide the following personnel:
 1 senior Expert in Institutional Strengthening.
 1 senior Expert in Geology / Geophysics
 1 senior Expert in Environmental Impact Assessment and Strategic Impact Assessment
The duration of the experts’ assignments will be of 23 working days and comprises
- 18 days on activities related to the evaluation exercise in Ghana (place of assignment).
- 5 days for report writing (3 for draft final and 2 for final report) at home office
The consultant is to note that 18 days include one (1) day for travelling.

4.4 Planning
The contract shall be implemented over a maximum period of 90 days.

4.5 Locations of assignment
The location of the assignment will mainly be in Accra. A field visit to Tarkwa is also foreseen

2.1 Objectives of the evaluation
The final evaluation, which has been foreseen in the Technical and Administrative Provisions of the project’s Financing Agreement, will provide the decision-makers in the Government of Ghana the relevant external co-operation services of the European Commission and the wider public with sufficient information to:
• make an overall independent assessment about the past performance of the project/ programme, paying particularly attention to the impact of the project actions against its objectives;
• identify key lessons and to propose practical recommendations for follow-up actions.

The evaluation is to ensure that the Programme Components have been fully executed in accordance with the stipulated conditions and the desired benefits have either been or will be achieved by programme completion date.

The beneficiaries of the evaluation are on the one hand the Government of Ghana through the National Authorising Officer (NAO) of the European Development Fund, the Ministry of Lands and Natural Resources and the European Commission.

Specific objective
The specific objective of this assignment is the assessment of the relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, impact and sustainability of the project with regard to its purpose, objectives, expected results and impact (as established in the Development Assistance Committee guidelines.

Requested service, including suggested methodology
The Consultant is required to carry out this assignment in accordance with the Project Cycle Management Guidelines and the Evaluation Methodology of the European Commission .
The evaluation will carry out:
- a quantitative and qualitative assessment of the works carried out since the beginning of the project;
- an identification and description of the problems (technical and /or managerial) encountered by the project, proposing possible measures to overcome them.

The final evaluation shall be based on a participatory approach, involving beneficiaries and all stakeholders concerned as well as in accordance with the OECD's Development Assistance Committee’s (DAC) agreed set of standard international criteria to guide all evaluations of development assistance.

With reference to the above, the Consultant shall carry out, inter alia, the following overall tasks, and the appropriate intervention levels:

2.2. Issues to be studied

The evaluation should look at the programme impact, its contribution to the mining sector objectives and performance in terms of the purpose and results of the programme. Additional emphasis should be put to the programme sustainability.

The key cross-cutting issues to be considered during the evaluation are detailed in annex n°5.

The consultant should also address the issue of the special conditions and accompanying measures taken by the Government as defined in Art3.5 of the Financing Agreement.

2.3. Methodological aspects

Key issues to be addressed in the interim evaluation of the project are as follows:

 Relevance

The relevance concerns the appropriateness of the project design to the problems to be resolved at two points in time: when the project was designed, and at the time of the evaluation.

The evaluation analysis of relevance will therefore focus, without being limited to, on the following:

- Identification of real problems or needs, and of the correct beneficiaries, and how the project’s initial design addressed them;

- Preparatory activities undertaken and how well the findings were incorporated into the final project document, and any obvious omissions;

- Appropriateness of initial consultations with, and participation by, local key stakeholders including the Delegation, national authorities and intended beneficiaries before implementation started;

- Complementary and coherence with related activities undertaken elsewhere by Government or other donors, at the same level or at a higher level.

- The quality of the entries in the assumptions, risks and conditions column of the LogFrame at the appropriate level;

- Overall design strengths and weakness including:
- Quality of the LogFrame
- Clarity and internal consistency of the stated overall objectives, purpose and results
- Whether the objectively-verifiable indicators of achievement were well-chosen
- Realism of quantity of inputs

 Efficiency

The efficiency criterion concerns how well the various activities transformed the available resources into the intended results in terms of quantity, quality and timeliness.

The evaluation analysis of efficiency will therefore focus, without being limited to, on the following:

- The quality of the day to day management of the programme, including :
- management of the budget
- management of personnel, information, property
- relation/co-ordination with local authorities institution, beneficiaries
- respect for dead lines

- A cost effectiveness analysis (how far the costs of the project were justified by benefits?);

- How well did the technical assistance provide appropriate solutions and develop local capacities to define and produce results;

- Quality of monitoring (its existence, accuracy and flexibility);

- Whether the chosen indicators of efficiency are suitable; if not what should be these indicators?

- Did any unplanned result arise from the activities?

 Effectiveness

The effectiveness criterion concerns how far the project’s results were used or their potential benefits were realised (do they achieve the project purpose?).

The evaluation analysis of effectiveness will therefore focus, without being limited to, on the following:

- Whether the planned benefits are delivered and received, as perceived mainly by the key beneficiaries.

- The appropriateness of the indicators of benefit used in the above assessment to measure achievement of the project purpose.

- Whether behavioural patterns have changed in beneficiary organisations at various levels; and how far the changed institutional arrangements and characteristics have produced the planned improvements;

- Whether the balance of responsibilities between the various stakeholders was correct.

- How unplanned results may have affected the benefits received

 Impact

The analysis, which should be both quantitative and qualitative wherever possible, will need to take account of the fact that, at this level, the project will normally be only one of a number of influences contributing to the wider outcome.

The evaluation analysis of impact will therefore focus, without being limited to, on the following:

- On what extend the planned overall objectives have been partly or totally achieved, and how far that was directly due to the project;

- How far did they enhance economic and social development beyond the level of their immediate users?

- If there were unplanned impacts, how they affected the overall impact;

- Whether the project’s LogFrame indicators at this level were suitable and, if not, whether management amended them;

- Whether overall the desired wider impact could have been better achieved otherwise;

 Sustainability

The sustainability relates to whether the positive outcomes of the project at purpose level are likely to continue after external funding ends, and also whether its longer-term impact on the wider development process can also be sustained at the level of the sector, or country.

The evaluation analysis of sustainability will therefore focus, without being limited to, on the following:

- Ownership of objectives and achievement. How far all stakeholders were consulted on the objectives from the outset, and whether they agreed with them and remain in agreement at the time of the evaluation;

- Policy support and responsibility of the beneficiary institutions. How far Commission policy and national policy corresponded, and the effects of any policy changes; how far the relevant national, sectoral and budgetary policies and priorities affected the project positively or adversely; the level of support from governmental, public, business and civil society organizations;

- Institutional capacity. The degree of commitment of all parties involved, such as Government (through policy and budgetary support) and counterpart institutions; the extent to which the project is embedded in local institutional structures; how far good relations with existing institutions were established; whether the institution appears likely to be capable of continuing after the project ends (is it well-led, with adequate and trained staff, sufficient budget and equipment?);

- the adequacy of the project budget for its purpose;

- Socio-cultural factors. Whether the project is in tune with local perceptions of needs and of ways of producing and sharing benefits; whether it respects local power-structures, status systems and beliefs, and if it seeks to change any of those, how well-accepted are the changes both by the target group and by others;

- Financial sustainability. Whether enough funds were available to cover all costs (including recurrent costs, operating and maintenance costs), and continue to do so when the funding will end; and the economic sustainability;

- Technical issues. Whether (i) the technology, knowledge, process or service provided fits in with existing needs, culture, traditions, skills or knowledge; (ii) alternative technologies were considered, where there was a choice; (iii) the intended beneficiaries are able to adapt to and maintain the technology acquired without further assistance;

- Wherever relevant, crosscutting issues such as gender equity, environmental impact and good governance; or more over-arching issues such as poverty alleviation, all of which bear on sustainability from the outset of the project.

In addition, the Consultants shall review the follow-up to the conclusions and recommendations of the Mid-term evaluation of the MSSP.

PLEASE NOTE: ONLY SELECTED CANDIDATES WILL BE CONTACTED