The following terms of reference (TOR) sets out the expectations for the interim evaluation (IE) for the project: FP050: Bhutan for Life, hereafter referred to as the “Project.” The technical consultant selected to conduct this evaluation will hereafter be referred to as “evaluator.”

The Kingdom of Bhutan is a small, landlocked, developing country with a total area of 38,394 km2, characterized by rugged mountainous terrain with elevations ranging from 160 meters to more than 7,000 meters above sea level. The Royal Government of Bhutan (RGoB) has always considered environmental conservation a centerpiece of the country’s development strategy and strives to mainstream environmental concerns into its overall development planning. The country’s first modern legislation was the Forest Act of 1969, specifically aimed at protecting forests. Similarly, the National Forest Policy of 1974 was the first formal policy in the country, and helped establish a policy framework for conservation. This has been further strengthened through the formal adoption of the country’s development philosophy of pursuing Gross National Happiness, which includes environmental conservation as one of its four pillars. Bhutan is one of the very few countries in the world to feature environmental conservation explicitly in its constitution. Due to its developing economy, low population and extensive forests (forests cover approximately 69.71% of the land area as of 2022), and also due to the country’s strong commitment to sustainable development, Bhutan is unique world-wide in that it is carbon negative, a net sink for greenhouse gases.

The Royal Government of Bhutan has thus made clear its commitment to following an environmentally and socially sustainable path to development. The country’s 2^nd NDC under the Paris Agreement reiterates the carbon neutrality pledge, and outlines low emission development strategies (LEDS), and roadmaps. Maintaining a minimum of 60 percent of its land under forest cover for all time, in accordance with the country’s Constitution, is central to both its mitigation and adaptation strategies, with the Bhutan for Life project serving as the cornerstone for this effort.

The Project aims to employ an innovative financial model built around the creation of a sinking fund to support improved management of the country’s PAs while providing the time and resources to allow the Government to identify and secure long-term revenues sufficient to maintain these management improvements. The Project was organized into the following components:

• Component 1: Mitigation – Increasing forestry and land use climate mitigation
• Component 2: Adaptation I – Ecosystem-based adaptation to improve natural resource management and livelihoods
• Component 3: Adaptation II – Ecosystem-based adaptation to enhance PAs biodiversity
• Component 4: Protected Area sustainable management
• Component 5: BFL Management and safeguards

Scope and Objective For The Evaluation

WWF-US is seeking an independent consultant to undertake an Interim Evaluation (IE) of the Project, as required by WWF and GCF Policies and Procedures. The scope of the IE will cover both GCF and co-financed portions of the project.

The purpose of this evaluation is to support accountability, transparency, and adaptive management of the project. Based on this assessment, it is expected that the evaluator will provide feasible recommendations that could be applied for the remaining duration of the project. The interim evaluation’s specific objective would be to assess project implementation, its progress, overall management, credibility of results/reporting and achievement of results and/ or contributions towards expected results, including behavioral changes necessary to achieve the expected results. The evaluation will apply the GCF Evaluation Criteria set out in the GCF Evaluation Policy[1] and further defined in the Evaluation Guidelines.[2]

[1] GCF Evaluation Policy for the GCF. B.BM-2021/07. (May 2021)

[2] GCF Evaluation Guidelines: Evaluation Operational Procedures and Guidelines for Accredited Entity-led Evaluations V.1 (March 2023)

Position Details

• Location of Consultant: Flexible, but must travel to Bhutan
• Reporting To: Amelia Kissick, Technical Director for Consultancy
• Preferred Timeframe of Consultancy: August 2025 – February 2026
• Period To Be Evaluated: 10/5/2018 – time of contract
• Maximum Budget Available: $80,000

Project Data

• Project/Program Title: Bhutan for Life
• Funding Proposal Reference Number: FP050
• Accredited Entity: World Wildlife Fund (WWF-US)
• Executing Entities: Ministry of Energy and Natural Resources (MoENR) (previously the Ministry of Agriculture and Forests) of the Royal Government of Bhutan (RGoB);Bhutan for Life Fund
• Partners: Tarayana Foundation, One Gewog One Product (OGOP) Department of Forests and Park Services, Department of Energy, National Centre of Hydrology and Meteorology, Ministry of Energy and Natural Resources, Department of Agriculture, Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock
• Countries: Bhutan
• Results Areas: Mitigation (Energy access and power generation, Forestry and land use), Adaptation (Most vulnerable people and communities, Health and well-being, food and water security, Ecosystem and ecosystem services)
• Total Project Budget: $118.2M
• Total GCF Proceeds Approved: $26.6M
• Total Co-financing Committed: $91.7M

RELEVANT DATES

• Board Approval date: 10/2/2017
• Signature of FAA: 7/11/2018
• Implementation Start: 10/5/2018
• Review period: 10/5/2018 – time of contract
• Project Completion Date: 10/05/2032

Evaluation Approach and Methods

The evaluation will adhere to the relevant guidance, rules and procedures established by WWF[1] and the Green Climate Fund. 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. Additionally, the evaluation should be utilization-focused and gender and human rights responsive. There should be close engagement with government counterparts, the GCF National Designated Authority (NDA), the Executing Entity project management unit (PMU), partners and key stakeholders. Contact information will be provided.

The Evaluation should include multiple methods of data collection for triangulation purposes, preferably with analysis of both quantitative and qualitative data and a diverse and sufficient sampling of stakeholders. Ideally, the methods would use a quasi-experimental design to better understand project additionality.

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

1. Desk review consisting of, but not limited to:
   • Full Funding Proposal, including Annexes 1) No-objection Letter, 5) Detailed Budget, 8) ESMF, 9) Gender Assessment and Action Plan (GAAP), and 12) Implementation Plan
   • Relevant Sections of Funded Activity Agreement
   • Relevant Sections of Subsidiary Agreements
   • Notice of Effectiveness
   • Relevant safeguards and stakeholder engagement documents (e.g. Stakeholder Engagement Plan, Annual Safeguards Implementation Independent Evaluation Reports);
   • Annual Work Plans (AWP) and Budgets;
   • Restructuring proposal
   • Inception Report
   • Annual Performance Reports (APRs) and midyear reports
   • Internal evaluation reports;
   • Monitoring reports and data collection (baselines, surveys, etc.)
   • GCF Accredited Entity Documents, such as PrISM reports, change requests, etc.
   • Gender Strategies and relevant documents (e.g. internal GAP Implementation Evaluation Reports);
   • Relevant financial documents, including financial reports; co-financing letters and reports;
   • Meeting minutes (e.g. BFL Fund Board of Trustees); and
   • Other relevant documents provided by the Accredited Entity, Executing Entities and partners.
2. Draft and Final Inception report with agreed upon evaluation methodology and workplan*;
3. Field visits with PMU and project partners, as necessary and feasible to conduct focus groups, interviews (See Annex A for Site Visit Suggestions);
4. Interviews and consultations and surveys at local levels, national and international levels, including executing partners, GCF NDA, BFL Fund Board of Trustees members and beneficiaries (See Annex B for additional details);
5. Post-field visit debrief and presentation* of initial findings to project management team and other partners as feasible;
6. Draft report* not to exceed 60 pages (excluding annexes) for review and feedback from AE, EE and partners. A sample outline will be provided; and
7. Final IE report* (both tracked changes and clean copy) that has incorporated feedback and comments. Please see next section and Annexes for expected report content. The deliverable package should also include feedback log and data collected during the IE.
8. Inputs to the Management Response and Action Plan.

Expected Content of The Report

The Interim Evaluation report will include:

• Executive Summary (2—3 pages) summarizing project, findings, and recommendations, by criteria (marked in *) if possible;
• 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 project design, including Relevance* and description/analysis of theory of change;
• Assessment of project Effectiveness,* including evaluation/verification of reduced GHG emissions/increased carbon sequestration and adaptation beneficiaries (including scorecards);
• Assessment of project financial management, Efficiency*, and co-financing;
• Assessment of potential for Impact, * including evaluation/verification of Paradigm Shift (including scorecard);
• Assessment of Sustainability* and Enabling Environment (including scorecard);
• Assessment of Coherence* in climate finance delivery with other multilateral entities;
• Assessment of Gender equity* and gender-responsive measures;
• Assessment of Innovativeness* in results areas;
• Assessment of Replication* and catalytic effects of the project;
• Assessment of Scalability*;
• Assessment of Unexpected Results*, positive and negative;
• Assessment of stakeholder engagement;
• Assessment of monitoring and evaluation design, implementation and Adaptive Capacity*;
• Assessment of knowledge management approach, including activities and products;
• Assessment of any environmental and social impacts and safeguards used for the project. A review of risk category classification and mitigation measures; assessment of the RGM design its dissemination approaches to partners and stakeholders;
• Assessment of AE implementation, EE execution, coordination, integration and governance arrangements;
• Dissemination and knowledge management plan for the evaluation report;
• Summary table of key findings by core criteria,[2] including justification and/or indicators for their determination;
• Key lessons tied to identified strengths or issues;
• Recommendations that include: practical and corrective actions by evaluation criterion to address issues and findings; and best practices towards achieving project outcomes, and knowledge sharing / replication for other projects/programs of similar scope.

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

[2] See annex C

Required Qualifications and Experience

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

Preferred Qualifications and Experience

• Recent experience conducting evaluations (for GCF or GEF financed projects is an advantage);
• Relevant technical knowledge (e.g. adaptation, mitigation, biodiversity, nature conservation, community-based natural resource management, climate/conservation finance, nature/wildlife-based tourism, etc.)
• Knowledge of GCF Monitoring and Evaluation Policies;
• Experience with WWF Project and Program Management Standards or Conservation Standards;
• Experience with social assessments, participatory techniques, and gender mainstreaming;
• Knowledge and experience in implementing or reviewing application of social and environmental safeguards policies in GCF (or similar) projects;
• Fluent Dzongkha (Budgeting translation services may be helpful alternative); and
• Regional experience an asset.

Proposal Process

Interested consultants are invited to submit a technical and financial proposal with their curriculum vitae, two relevant writing samples (e.g. evaluation reports) and three professional referees with their contact information. Only complete proposals received by the deadline will be considered. The financial proposal should be inclusive of all costs covering team member fees, travel, communications, quality assurance, translation services, taxes, and any others, if applicable. The budget shall not exceed $80,000. Individuals, teams, firms, or partnerships of firms may present proposals.

Interested consultants are requested to send their proposals to [email protected] by January 31, 2025. All questions about the requirements or process should be submitted to this e-mail address by January 24, 2025. Responses to frequent and submitted questions will be available to all interested consultants until the proposal deadline at the end of the following live document: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1BDY6c87rQ1amULiviyBXknFchKesHP0x/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=101431196757707270045&rtpof=true&sd=true.

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 GCF 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.

To see the full terms of reference complete with annexes, please visit: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1BDY6c87rQ1amULiviyBXknFchKesHP0x/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=101431196757707270045&rtpof=true&sd=true