TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR A SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT OF SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES INITIATIVE (SCI)

Transcription

1 TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR A SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT OF SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES INITIATIVE (SCI) 1. BACKGROUND TO THE FINAL EVALUATION 1.1. Project background In 2001, WWF embarked on a landscape-level approach to integrate community development, with conservation in Nepal. The Sustainable Communities Initiative was designed to scale up community conservation by addressing the need for sustainable economic development as a necessary component of natural resources management. The vision was to achieve a sustainable balance between the needs of local people and that of species and ecosystems that comprise the landscape. WWF has enjoyed an extremely productive decade working with over 200 community-based conservation organizations. As a result, degraded forests have been restored, wildlife populations increased, local household incomes through nature-based enterprises are higher, communities have better access to clean drinking water, and education and health services have empowered communities to become independent stewards of their forests. In 2014, a pilot was launched to transition the Successful Communities to the Sustainable Communities Initiative (SCI), focusing on two villages Amaltari in the Terai lowlands; a buffer zone of Chitwan National Park, and Thulo Syafru in the mountains; a buffer zone of Langtang National Park, to test approaches in the two landscapes and determine essential lessons for future replication in both geographic regions. 1.2 Project vision and goal The vision of this project is to transition the two successful communities to sustainable communities. As such, the project goal is to ensure that these villages develop the capacity needed to take responsibility for maintaining/sustaining momentum once WWF engagement ceases in the region. 1.3 Project Approach The project follows the approach of sustainability with three pillars - environmental, economic and social. The project also identifies four areas that need scaling up under the three pillars of sustainability: a. Environmental pillar of sustainability Sustainable management of natural resources: Innovative community-led projects; focusing on alternative energy sources and improved agriculture, will be forged as more community members make the connection between quality of life and environmental stewardship. b. Economic pillar of sustainability Economic development: Ecologically sustainable income-generating activities, such as ecotourism and sustainable harvesting of non-timber forest products, will be scaled up to sufficiently create economic resources for targeted communities. c. Good governance and social pillar of sustainability Good governance and social inclusion: Using the assessment on the status of good governance and social inclusion in the region, a plan to strengthen good governance will be created and necessary training conducted to strengthen identified weaknesses within each organization. Health, education and sanitation: Local leaders will develop and implement programs that offer sustained and expanded access to crucial natural resources e.g., ensuring access to safe drinking water and family planning services. Under these areas, the project is also intended to focus on strengthening local capacity; especially in support of women and disadvantaged ethnic minorities, to increase social stability and facilitate sustainability by addressing some of the communities basic needs and creating forest-based economic opportunities. 1

2 1.4 Expected Outcomes The project expects the following 13 outcomes to transition two of the successful communities into sustainable communities: Pillar 1. Sustainable Management of Natural Resources 2. Economic Development 3. Good Governance and Social Inclusion Outcome 80% of households using alternative energy or energy efficient technologies Zero wildlife crime maintained Human wildlife conflict managed Increased area and quality of forest, grassland and wetland Increased resilience of local communities to manage impacts of climate change and natural disasters At least 60% of households engaged in nature-based economic initiatives 100% of households having an annual income of at least NRs. 61,800 (equivalent to US$ 618, poverty line established by the government) At least 50% of community annual income from management of natural resources invested in conservation and development Technically capable local institutions take full charge of local natural resource management Financially capable local institutions take full charge of local natural resource management At least 33% of women represented in decision making bodies of local natural resource management institutions Social inclusion of poor, vulnerable, socially excluded and marginalized people in decision making and benefit sharing 100% of households having access to health, education and sanitation Additionally, with support of the baseline survey conducted at the beginning of the project, site specific goals and indicators were set and comprehensive workplan/m&e plan was developed to achieve these outcomes. 2. OBJECTIVES OF THE ASSESSMENT This three-year project is on its last year of implementation and it is now important to see if the community can be called sustainable. The objective of this assessment is therefore to analyze whether the vision of the project to transition a successful community into a sustainable community has been achieved or not. This assessment will evaluate strengths, weaknesses, and feasibilities of the SCI model. This assessment is also important to consolidate the concept/model, to sustain conservation and social development gains through learnings from this project, which can then be replicated in other sites across the country. The specific objectives of this project assessment include: Evaluation of overall performance highlighting strengths, weaknesses, impacts and failures. Showcase lessons learned to inform future projects, and consolidate the SCI model. Determine institutional capacity to assess future threats and opportunities in the communities. Provide evidence-based analysis of the SCI model, its feasibility, clear statement of whether it worked or not, and how it might be replicated. 3. SCOPE OF THE ASSESSMENT: STAKEHOLDERS AND GEOGRAPHICAL AREA The assessment covers ; the project operating time period, and is expected to be a future oriented strategic evaluation concentrating on issues of impact/influence, coherence, compatibility, interlinkages and sustainability; with due attention on the major outcomes as defined in the project document. The supporting field visits and interviews shall be arranged so that maximum benefit can be achieved from the time allocation. The central findings and conclusions shall be synthesized in the main report. 2

3 Stakeholders to be included in the evaluation are WWF Nepal, WWF US, Department of National Parks and Wildlife Reserve, National Parks (Chitwan and Langtang), WWF Nepal project offices, community based organizations (Amaltari BZUC and Suryakunda BZUC) and local government bodies (Ward). The geographical area of the assessment will cover both project sites. 4. ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED AND ASSESSMENT QUESTIONS 4.1. Evaluation questions The evaluation team is expected to draft the specific assessment questions which should cover the following aspects listed below. The assessment team should, however, use their professional experience and knowledge by adding questions deemed necessary. These questions should be shared with WWF Nepal for review as part of the Inception Report. What was the overall performance of the project? Are conservation and socioeconomic gains sustainable in the two project sites? If so, how and why? What are the most important factors contributing to environmental and socioeconomic sustainability? Are communities committed to sustaining the success? What could be the important lessons that can be learned from this project? Is the SCI model viable? What changes can make it viable and sustainable? What is the potential for replicability in other villages in conservation landscapes (mountains/plains)? Do communities need to have a robust foundation in place with respect to natural resource management, governance and economic development? Is this foundation a key precondition for success? Does WWF need to work more closely with partners that have expertise in social development? 4.2. Assessment criteria Based on the three pillars of sustainability, the assessment team should analyze sustainability of conservation initiatives and its socio-economic gains. For this due attention must be given to the nine outcomes mentioned in project documents and the set of indicators in the Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) matrix. The team should also consider the DAC criteria of evaluation: relevance, efficiency, effectiveness, impact, sustainability and coherence to evaluate overall performance of the project. The assessment should provide an honest analysis of the project results, including: project intervention impact; critical, detailed analysis of model s feasibility; critical, detailed analysis of model s replicability; and an evaluation of strengths and weaknesses of WWF and community implementation of the project. In addition, the assessment should include recommendations that provide an honest reflection on the SCI and its activities, whether they have helped push communities toward sustainability; and determine replicability of the model, stating where and how the model should be replicated. 5. METHODOLOGY Multiple methodologies (both quantitative and qualitative) should be used. However, the detailed methodology will be proposed by the team conducting the assessment, and shared with WWF Nepal for review. A well formulated approach and methodology combined with a realistic time schedule and evaluation matrix should form a solid basis for the field visits. Debriefing sessions with relevant stakeholders shall be arranged and WWF consulted on observations to identify the possible gaps and errors in information. Complementary interviews and e-questionnaires can be organized in the final stages of report drafting. Possible methods that can be used for data collection and analysis are: Desk study covering project work plans, reports, documents, and other materials 3

4 Direct field observations Develop a robust methodology; to be shared and reviewed with WWF Nepal, that states how project outcomes and indicators will be assessed for sustainability. Personal and group interviews with relevant stakeholders and key informants Other data/information collection tools such as surveys and questionnaires The methodology should ensure that the evaluation process: is participatory and inclusive, involving different stakeholders including the final beneficiaries takes into consideration aspects of gender and human rights respects local traditions and cultural norms 6. THE EVALUATION PROCESS, SCHEDULE and REPORTING The time-frame of the evaluation will be 35 effective working days, effective from the day the contract is signed. The evaluation should start at the end of January 2018 and final report should be submitted by the 1 st week of March It is expected that the assessment team will: Finalize the assessment methodology and prepare an inception report which will be reviewed by WWF before the assessment activities begin Evaluate relevant sources of information through desk reviews and literature studies Carry out field visits, observations and surveys Interact/discuss with relevant stakeholders (Focused Group Discussions) Prepare draft report with assessment findings and recommendations Receive and incorporate feedback from WWF before finalizing the reports Organize a feedback session with WWF, to receive comments and test the results (skype meeting or similar) Prepare final report of the assessment in English and submit it to WWF Nepal. Consultant should submit 2 copies each (hard and soft copies) of the final report Present the final report to WWF Nepal to present and discuss the findings, and clarify questions 7. TIMELINE Deadline Last week of January 2018 Activities Desktop review, finalize evaluation tools and techniques, and submission/presentation of inception report 1 st and 2 nd week of February 2018 Field visit 4 th week of February 2018 Draft report presentation/preparation 1 st Week of March 2018 Final report preparation The final report should: be a maximum of 30 pages, including annexes be concise and include only relevant information answer the main assessment questions reflect on cross-cutting objectives clearly state whether the SCI model is sustainable and replicable, with detailed descriptions of why or why not include key lessons learned from testing the SCI model provide recommendations for how WWF Nepal should pursue the replication of this model 4

5 include pictures include findings and clear table of recommendations include a list of interviewed stakeholders The publication of the report shall be the responsibility of WWF. WWF Nepal will hold copy right of the report and the consultant cannot publish in part or in full any findings from the assessment or report; without prior approval from WWF Nepal. 8. EXPERTISE REQUIRED The evaluation team should comprise of experts (1-3 members) that have an in depth understanding of Nepal as the operational environment and/or comprehensive expertise in the region; with at least one of the experts a resident of Nepal. The team should comprise of a team leader and WWF Nepal will sign the contract with the one company or lead consultant only. The team should have strong expertise in conducting evaluations alongside expertise in the following thematic concepts: Evaluation experience preferably on conservation projects Sustainable community development Environment and livelihoods (socio-economic aspects, governance/institutional aspect, climate change and adaptation) Cross-cutting themes of: Human rights, gender equality and climate sustainability. The evaluation team should have experience with sustainable finance and conservation finance. The evaluation team should also have ability to speak and understand the Nepali language. 9. BUDGET The consultant should submit a financial proposal that includes detailed breakdown of total budget proposed including: fee, travel cost, communication costs, consultative meeting and reproduction of documents in Nepali Rupees. The payment is subject to tax deduction as per prevailing government rules. 10. MODE OF PAYMENT The proposal should include the detail budget breakdown including travel and remuneration of the experts and other associated costs. The payment will be made as per WWF norms. 11. MANDATE The evaluator is entitled and expected to discuss matters relevant to this assessment with pertinent persons and organizations. However, it is not authorized to make any commitments on behalf of WWF Nepal or WWF US. 12. SELECTION PROCESS WWF Nepal/US will select the evaluation team based on proposals from interested consultants. The expression of the interest, detailed workplan and Curriculum Vitae of the evaluation team should be submitted to WWF Nepal by 17:00, 9 January