Mid-Term Review of the UNEP project “Strengthening institutional capacity for environmentally sound management of chemicals in Brazil” Project ID: 515.2

Result of ServiceIn line with the UNEP Evaluation Policy and the UNEP Programme and Project Management Manual , the Mid-Term Review (MTR) is undertaken approximately half-way through project implementation to analyse whether the project is on-track, what problems or challenges the project is encountering, and what corrective actions are required. Key Review Principles: Mid-Term review findings and judgements will be based on sound evidence and analysis, clearly documented in the Review Report. Information will be triangulated (i.e. verified from different sources) as far as possible, and when verification is not possible, the single source will be mentioned (whilst anonymity is still protected). Analysis leading to evaluative judgements should always be clearly spelled out. Possible questions to be considered include, (MTR Review Framework Questions available from UNEP Project Manager): • Does the TOC properly reflect the project’s intended change process? • Is the stakeholder analysis still appropriate and adequate to support the project’s ambitions? • Are results statements in keeping with UNEP definitions (e.g. outcomes are expressed as the uptake or use of outputs) • Are roles and responsibilities commonly understood and playing out effectively? • Is there an effective monitoring mechanism for the project’s implementation (this is separate from, and supports, reporting)? • Is the rate of expenditure appropriate for the midpoint? • Have plans for inclusivity, equality and/or equity been implemented as planned, or does more need to be done? • Are safeguard identification and mitigation plans being monitored and steps taken to minimize negative effects? • Is there an exit strategy in place and are the elements needed for the project’s benefits to be sustained after the project end being incorporated in the project implementation? • (Where relevant) Have recommendations from previous learning exercises/performance assessments been appropriately addressed A Mid-Term Review is a formative assessment, which requires that the consultant(s) go beyond the assessment of “what” the project performance is and make a serious effort to provide a deeper understanding of “why” the performance is as it is. Attribution, Contribution and Credible Association: In order to attribute any outcomes and impacts to a project intervention, one needs to consider the difference between what has happened with, and what would have happened without, the project (i.e. take account of changes over time and between contexts in order to isolate the effects of an intervention). This requires appropriate baseline data and the identification of a relevant counterfactual, both of which are frequently not available for reviews. Establishing the contribution made by a project in a complex change process relies heavily on prior intentionality (e.g. approved project design documentation, logical framework) and the articulation of causality (e.g. narrative and/or illustration of the Theory of Change). Robust evidence that a project was delivered as designed and that the expected causal pathways developed supports claims of contribution and this is strengthened where an alternative theory of change can be excluded. A credible association between the implementation of a project and observed positive effects can be made where a strong causal narrative, although not explicitly articulated, can be inferred by the chronological sequence of events, active involvement of key actors and engagement in critical processes. Partners and Key Project Stakeholders. A key aim of the Mid-Term Review is to encourage reflection and learning by UNEP staff, the implementing partners and key project stakeholders The Review Consultant should consider how reflection and learning can be promoted, both through the review process and in the communication of review findings and key lessons. The Review Consultant will work under the overall supervision of UNEP Brazil Office Representative. The consultant will liaise with the Project Analyst on any procedural and methodological matters related to the Review. It is, however, the consultant’s individual responsibility (where applicable) to arrange for their travel, visa, obtain documentary evidence, plan meetings with stakeholders (with assistance from the Partners), organize online surveys, and any other logistical matters related to the assignment. The Project Analyst and project team will, where possible, provide logistical guidance (introductions, meetings etc.) allowing the Review Consultants to conduct the review as efficiently and independently as possible. REVIEW APPROACH, METHODS AND DELIVERABLES The Mid-Term Review will use a participatory approach whereby key stakeholders are kept informed and consulted throughout the review process. Both quantitative and qualitative review methods will be used as appropriate to determine project achievements against the expected outputs, outcomes and impacts. It is highly recommended that the Review Consultant maintains close communication with the project team and promotes information exchange throughout the review implementation phase in order to increase their (and other stakeholder) ownership of the review findings. The findings of the Review will be based on the following: (a) A desk review of: • Relevant background documentation, inter alia: history of negotiations, objectives and needs to each output, memory of budget construction, and other documentation. • Project Document and Appendices • Project design documents (including minutes of the project design review meeting at approval); Annual Work Plans and Budgets or equivalent, revisions to the project (Project Document Supplement), the logical framework and its budget; • Project reports such as six-monthly progress and financial reports, progress reports from collaborating partners, meeting minutes, relevant correspondence etc.; • Evaluations/Reviews of similar projects. (b) Interviews (individual or in group) with: • UNEP Project Analyst , MMA director of environnemental quality and team members; • Representatives of Implementing Agencies and National Governments etc • UNEP Fund Management Officer (FMO); • Representatives from civil society and specialist groups (such as women’s, farmers and trade associations etc). (c) Other data collection tools: If needed, to be decided by the Review Consultant at the inception phase. . The Review Consultant will prepare: • Inception Report: containing confirmation of the results framework and Theory of Change of the project, project stakeholder analysis, review framework and a tentative review schedule. • Preliminary Findings Note: typically, in the form of a PowerPoint presentation, the sharing of preliminary findings is intended to bolster the participation of the project team, act as a means to ensure all information sources have been accessed and provide an opportunity to verify emerging findings. • Draft and Final Review Reports: (see Annex 4 for guidance on structure and content) containing an Executive Summary that can act as a stand-alone document; detailed analysis of the review findings organized by review criteria and supported with evidence; lessons learned and recommendations and an annotated ratings table. The Review Consultant will submit a draft report to the Special Programme Project Analyst and revise the draft in response to their comments and suggestions. Once a draft of adequate quality has been peer-reviewed and accepted, the Project Analyst will share the cleared draft report with key project stakeholders for their review and comments. Stakeholders may provide feedback on any errors of fact and may highlight the significance of such errors in any conclusions as well as providing feedback on the proposed recommendations and lessons. Any comments or responses to draft reports will be sent to the Project Analyst for consolidation. The Project Analyst will provide all comments to the Review Consultant for consideration in preparing the final report, along with guidance on areas of contradiction or issues requiring an institutional response. At the end of the review process and based on the findings in the Review Report, the Special Programme Project Analyst will prepare a Recommendations Implementation Plan in the format of a table, to be completed and updated at regular intervals, and circulate Lessons Learned. Work LocationHome-based Expected duration2 months Duties and ResponsibilitiesThe United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) is the United Nations system's designated entity for addressing environmental issues at the global and regional level. Its mandate is to coordinate the development of environmental policy consensus by keeping the global environment under review and bringing emerging issues to the attention of governments and the international community for action. The UNEP Latin America and the Caribbean Office (LACO), located in Panama City, Panama, works closely with the 33 countries of the region and its activities are integrated into the Medium- Term Strategy and the Programme of Work approved by the United Nations Environment Assembly (UNEA). The project “Strengthening institutional capacity for Environmentally Sound Chemicals Management in Brazil” (Special Programme Project) aims to strengthen institutional capacity for Environmentally Sound Chemicals Management in Brazil, in order to promote the effective implementation of chemical risk management at the national level, and consequently improve the implementation of the Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs) on chemicals and waste and the Global Chemicals Framework (GFC), taking into account national needs and priorities and emerging new issues. Developing institutional capacity requires legal frameworks with defined responsibilities and administrative tools in place to safely manage chemicals. Collection and sharing of relevant data and comprehensive information throughout the supply chain are necessary for decision-making processes. Additionally, this information, when not protected by legal secrecy, must be available to all stakeholders, such as public managers, workers, manufacturers or suppliers of chemical substances, downstream users of chemical substances, purchasers, retailers and professional users of products containing chemical substances, and individual users of consumer products. Gathering information on production, import, export, use of chemical substances, storage, transport and accidents allows the development of a national inventory of chemical substances that will serve as a basis for planning risk management measures. It will also enable a better assessment of the national situation and conditions of chemical substances placed on the national market and the collection of more accurate information for submission to the Secretariats of the Rotterdam, Stockholm and Minamata Conventions, contributing to the implementation of these AAM and GFC. It will also contribute to monitoring activities and the prevention of accidents with chemical substances, aiming to reduce the environmental impacts caused by them. The objective will be achieved through the establishment of a coordination mechanism with key stakeholders; the development of a computerized chemicals management system, comprising a chemicals registry and inventory, a chemicals import/export registry, a transportation of hazardous materials registry and a chemical accidents registry, to ensure the transmission of more accurate information and improve reporting on obligations under the Basel, Stockholm, Rotterdam and Minamata Convention; and development and delivery of training course for the use of the computerized chemicals management system for relevant stakeholders. The Review Consultant will be responsible, under the overall supervision of the UNEP Brazil Office Representative, for management of the Review and timely delivery of its outputs, described above in Section 10 “Review Deliverables”, above. The Review Consultant will ensure that all review criteria and questions are adequately covered. The work will be home-based. Qualifications/special skillsACADEMIC: - A bachelor degree in environmental sciences, international development, administration, economics, public policy, international relations, political or social sciences or a closely related area is required. -Masters degree in environmental sciences, international development, administration, economics, public policy, international relations, political or social sciences or a closely related areas is desirable. - Specialisation in environmental sciences, international development, administration, economics, public policy, international relations, political or social sciences or a closely related areas is desirable. PROFESSIONAL: -Four (04) years experience of technical / evaluation including evaluating local, regional or global programmes is required. - Usage of a Theory of Change approach Is desirable. - A good understanding of project management is desirable. -Working knowledge of the UN system and specifically the work of UNEP is desirable. Languages-Fluency in both English and Portuguese is required across all four modalities (written, spoken, understanding, and reading). Additional InformationNot available. No FeeTHE UNITED NATIONS DOES NOT CHARGE A FEE AT ANY STAGE OF THE RECRUITMENT PROCESS (APPLICATION, INTERVIEW MEETING, PROCESSING, OR TRAINING). THE UNITED NATIONS DOES NOT CONCERN ITSELF WITH INFORMATION ON APPLICANTS’ BANK ACCOUNTS.