World Wildlife Fund, Inc. (WWF) and GEF require a terminal evaluation (TE) for all full and medium-sized projects. The following terms of reference (TOR) set out the expectations for the TE for the project “Investment Readiness for the Landscape Resilience Fund,” hereafter referred to as the “Project”. The technical consultant(s) selected to conduct this evaluation will be referred to as “evaluator” throughout this TOR.

The Project seeks to unlock private sector investments in SMEs developing climate-resilient practices. The Project was organized into the following components and outcomes:

• Component 1: Establishing systems to support climate resilience-focused SMEs’ access to private investments for climate resilience-focused initiatives
  • Outcome 1.1. Sustainable processes for provision of pre-investment services to SMEs to make their climate-resilient practices investment-ready
• Component 2: Pre-investment services to make climate resilience-focused SMEs investment ready
  • Outcome 2.1. SMEs have increased technical, operational and financial capacity to structure their climate-resilient practices and make them investment-ready
• Component 3: establishing match-making support for climate resilience-focused SMEs to match with potential private investors
  • Outcome 3.1. Increased capacity of selected SMEs to match with private investors
• Component 4: Knowledge management and effective project monitoring and evaluation
  • Outcome 4.1. M&E to inform adaptive management of project
  • Outcome 4.2. Knowledge management increases awareness of SMEs with climate-resilient practices and private investors on successful approaches on preparing, implementing and financing climate-resilient practices

See the WWF GEF project website for additional details and project documents: https://www.worldwildlife.org/projects/investment-readiness-for-the-landscape-resilience-fund

Scope and Objectives for the Evaluation

WWF is seeking an independent consultant to undertake a Terminal Evaluation of the GEF-financed Project. Only the materialization of the co-financing will be assessed – not the co-financing activities or associated results.

The objectives of this evaluation are to examine the extent, magnitude and sustainability of any project impacts to date; identify concerns as well as best practices; assess progress towards project outcomes and outputs; and draw lessons learned that can both improve the sustainability of benefits and scalability from this project and aid in the enhancement of future related projects. The evaluator is expected to frame the evaluation effort using the seven (7) core criteria of relevance, coherence, effectiveness, efficiency, results/impact, sustainability and adaptive capacity. Particular emphasis will be placed on effectiveness, efficiency, results/impact and sustainability. Definitions of each of these criterion will be provided as well as summary table templates, additional assessment areas, and a sample report outline (See annexes A – E).

Evaluation Approach and Method

The evaluation will adhere to the guidance, rules and procedures established by WWF[1] and the GEF Terminal 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 WWF GEF Implementing Agency (IA), the Executing Agency/ project management unit (PMU), / government counterparts, the GEF operational focal point, partners and key stakeholders. Contact information will be provided.

The Evaluation process will include the following, with deliverables marked by “*”[4]:

1. Kickoff for introductions to project and teams;
2. Desk review including, but not limited to:
   • Project Document and CEO Endorsement Letter;
   • Project governance documents;
   • Annual Work Plan and Budget (AWP&B) documents;
   • Project Progress Reports (PPR) including Results Framework and AWP Tracking tool;
   • Project Closure Report (PCR) (if available);
   • GEF Agency reports, including Project Implementation Reports (PIRs), Back to the Office Reports (BTORs) and Support Mission Reports;
   • Relevant financial documents, including financial progress reports; co-financing monitoring tables and letters, and audits;
   • Relevant safeguards documents, including WWF GEF Agency Categorization and Compliance memo, Stakeholder Engagement Plan, sub-project safeguards screens, if applicable;
   • Gender Action Plan and/or other gender-related documents;
   • Meeting minutes from Project Steering Committee (PSC), WWF- GEF AMU and support team; and others;
   • Other relevant documents provided by the Executing Agency and partners.
3. Inception meeting to gather input from select project stakeholders on evaluation approach, to agree on methodology, and to inform the draft inception report;
4. Inception report (Draft and Final) * that outlines evaluation methodology, including how ratings/findings will be assessed (indicators to be used, key questions), sample questionnaires, stakeholders, workplan, etc.;
5. Site visits with suggested project partners;
6. Interviews, discussions and consultations with executing partners, Project Steering Committee (PSC) members, beneficiaries, WWF-GEF Agency and extended team; Project Management Unit, and others;
7. Debrief and presentation* of initial findings to Executing partners and WWF-GEF extended team for feedback and final data collection. Feedback log requested to record responses to comments received;
8. Draft report* (50-page suggested limit excluding annexes) in English shared with WWF-GEF, PMU, PSC and others indicated for review and approval. Subsequent draft reports shall include both a tracked changes and clean version of the report. A sample outline will be provided; and
9. Final TE report* (50-page suggested limit excluding annexes) that has addressed any inaccuracies, responded to requests for additional means of verification and taken into consideration any feedback. Report should be in English. Final deliverable package shall include a tracked changes and clean version of the report, should annex a feedback log showing actions taken/responses to all reviewer comments, and include all data collected from the evaluation.

Expected Content of Evaluation Report

The Terminal Evaluation report should include:

• 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 Coherence;
• Assessment of Effectiveness, including review of project Results Framework and rating of project objective and outcomes (individual and overall);
• Validation of Core indicator measurements at project end;
• Assessment and ratings for Implementation and Execution;
• Assessment and rating of Risks to the Sustainability of project results and financial sustainability and scale-up after the life of the projects;
• Assessment and ratings for Monitoring and Evaluation Design and Implementation;
• Assessment of knowledge management approach, including activities and products;
• Assessment of replication, additionality and catalytic effects of the project;
• Assessment of stakeholder engagement;
• Assessment of gender-responsive measures;
• Assessment of any environmental and social impacts generated by the project’s activities as well as its safeguards stipulations, which includes (a) a review of the assigned environmental and social risk category classification; and (b) a review of the progress made in the implementation of the mitigation measures outlined in the project’s relevant documents or otherwise utilized to manage risks.
• Assessment of Efficiency, financial management and summary of co-financing materialized;
• Summary table of key findings by core criteria and GEF ratings, including justification and/or indicators for their determination;
• Key lessons tied to identified strengths, best practices or issues;
• Conclusions and recommendations that would be useful for project close and sustainability, and for other similar projects in order to improve on identified issues, replicate best practices or achieve better results.

Evaluation Team Qualifications

Required Qualifications and Experience

• Minimum 10 years of relevant professional experience (e.g. leading evaluations)
• Noted experience with evaluation methodologies
• Excellent written and oral communication in English

Preferred Qualifications and Experience

• Experience with GEF financed projects and knowledge of GEF Monitoring and Evaluation Policies;
• Experience with participatory evaluation, social assessments, and both quantitative and qualitative evaluation methods;
• Experience with project countries or familiarity with local context (Uganda in particular);
• Technical knowledge related to the project, climate change adaptation, technical assistance for impact investing in SMEs, agricultural value chains, sustainable agriculture and agroforestry, risk management, Environmental, Social, Governance (ESG) Investing, etc.;
• Experience with gender mainstreaming and inclusion;
• Familiarity with Conservation Standards or WWF Project and Programme Management Standards, including emphasis on theory of change; and
• Knowledge and experience implementing or reviewing application of social and environmental safeguards policies in GEF (or similar) projects.

Payment Modalities and Specifications

Payment, expense reimbursement, and other contractual terms and conditions will be outlined in the consultant agreement made between WWF and the evaluator. Contracts may be made with an individual or organization. Payments will be made following submitted and approved deliverables and once invoices are sent. Twenty-five percent of the fee will be paid after submission and approval of the Inception Report. Fifty percent of the fee will be paid following submission and approval of the debrief presentation, Draft Report and related documents. The final twenty-five percent will be paid following the submission and approval of the Final Report and related documents. Reimbursement for expenses, if separated from fee, will be paid separately. Evaluator should submit receipts for expenses over $25.

To see full terms of reference with annexes see: WWF Southpole Terminal Evaluation TOR _ Official.docx

[1] For additional information on evaluation methods adopted by WWF, see the WWF Evaluation Guidelines, published on our WWF Program Standards public website.

[2] For additional information on the GEF Terminal Evaluation Guidelines, see the GEF Terminal Evaluation Guidelines , published on the GEF Evaluation Office website.

[3] Please see the GEF Ethical Guidelines as published on GEF website.

[4] All deliverables and subsequent revisions should be sent directly to the Technical Director of the agreement who will determine whether the deliverable is satisfactory and ready for circulation.

How to Apply:

PROPOSAL PROCESS

Interested consultants are invited to submit a technical and financial proposal with their curriculum vitae, a relevant writing sample and three professional references*.* Please limit technical proposal to 30 pages please. Documents should be in English.Only complete proposals will be accepted.The financial proposal should include fee and reimbursable expenses, if applicable. The total budget shall not exceed USD $35,000. Individual, team or consulting firm proposals are welcome. Women and members of social minorities are encouraged to apply.

Interested consultants are requested to send their proposals to EvaluationsWWFGEF@wwfus.org by July 4, 2025. All questions about the requirements or process should be submitted to this e-mail address by June 27, 2025. Responses to frequent and submitted questions will be available until the proposal deadline in Annex F of the Terms of Reference.

The technical proposal and qualifications/experience of the individual or team will account for 90% of the weighted score of the proposal. The technical score will be based on how the proposal reflects an understanding of the work and adherence to the TOR and quality of the proposal (readability, depth/breadth and suitability of the methodology), as well as the degree to which the candidate meets desired and required qualifications/experience mentioned in the terms of reference above. The financial elements of the proposal will account for 10% of the weighted score of the application.

Once all proposals have been scored by the review committee, a shortlist of proposals will be determined, and the candidates notified. Shortlisted candidates will have their references contacted, proposal reviewed by project stakeholders and will participate in an interview. Shortlisted candidates who are not selected will be provided with information on relative strengths and weaknesses of their proposal, but specific scores and the identity of other candidates will not be shared.

The selection process will be in compliance with WWF and GEF requirements. Any questions or concerns about non-compliance or irregularities in the process can be raised through WWF’s mechanism for reporting concerns available here: https://wwfus.ethicspoint.com.