Consultants to Support the Development of a Project Identification Form (PIF) on Addressing Land Degradation in Imatong Mountain (South Sudan)

South Sudan is a landlocked country that falls almost entirely (96 percent) within the Nile River Basin in East-Central Africa. It is covered by extensive grasslands, wetlands, and tropical forests. Its natural assets include significant agricultural, mineral, water, wildlife, timber, and energy resources. Endowed with oil wealth, it is the richest country, in terms of GDP per capita, in East Africa. Oil exports accounted for 70% and 64% of GDP in 2010 and 2011, respectively, and provided 97% of government revenue. Over 95% of South Sudan’s total area is considered suitable for agriculture, of which 50% is prime agricultural land. Yet, the country remains one of the least developed in the world and faces formidable challenges. While most of the population is dependent on subsistence farming and pastoralism as sources of livelihoods, a considerable number of people continue to rely on relief assistance to meet their needs. With the signing of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement in 2005 that ended the five decades of war, South Sudan experienced relative peace between 2005 and when the country became an independent state in 2011 and up to the start of 2013 when armed conflict re-emerged in the form of civil conflict between different armed factions and the Central Government.

The Imatong Mountains located in Torit State in the southeastern part of South Sudan are covered by deciduous woodland, wooded grassland, and bamboo thickets to the north and west. The mountains have rich diversity of flora, with hundreds of species that are found nowhere else in South Sudan. Their diversity is due to their position between the West African rain forest, the Ethiopian plateau, and the East African mountains, coupled with their relative isolation for long periods during which new species emerge. The mountains support abundant wildlife, including healthy populations of colobus and blue monkey, bush-pig, and a local sub-species of bushbuck. The forest contains many birds found in no other part of South Sudan and is a resting place for European songbirds en route to their overwintering places in East Africa. The Imatong forests are also a major biodiversity hotspot supporting over 2,000 vascular plants and 500 bird species and is one of the largest intact Podocarpus forest in Africa.

Threats, Root Causes, and Impacts

Since the mid-20th century,  the rich ecology of the Imatong Mountains Landscape has increasingly been severely degraded by native forest clearance and subsistence farming, causing extensive erosion of the slopes. In 1972 an effort was made to rehabilitate the softwood tree plantations, with a new road built from Torit, a hydro-electric scheme developed to power sawmills, and other changes. By 1984, only the steepest slopes had natural forest and only the Acholi mountains sub-range in the west, and the inaccessible area south east of Mount Kinyeti were still relatively unaffected (Van Noordwijk, Meine, 1984). Farming continued causing erosion, and in 1984 was evident by muddiness of the Kinyeti River in the rainy season downstream from a potato project. A tea project was launched at Upper Talinga in 1975, opening a route for people to move into the mountains through the Ateppi valley. The result was an increase in hunting, hillside farming, and erosion (Van Noordwijk, Meine, 1984). The Second Sudanese Civil War (1983–2005) caused further ecological disruption and decline of habitats. Erosion was very visible on farms established on steep hillsides by people who had moved into the mountains after the 1940s. Finger-millet was the last crop, grown on what soil remained among the rocks and giving a scanty yield. Erosion could have been greatly reduced by agricultural terraces but the needed construction efforts were not undertaken.

The direct drivers of deforestation, and forest and land degradation include the unsustainable large scale extraction of timber; illegal clearing of land and biomass for charcoal to feed urban markets primarily in Juba; land clearing for agriculture and grazing; poaching; fire damage as a result of escaped fires from their use to open up grazing and agricultural lands and by poachers; and use of wood fuel for cooking and lighting. The root causes are linked to poverty, political and civil strife. The civil war and continuing insecurity have seen a proliferation of firearms among the communities in the region. This has facilitated illegal indiscriminate hunting, contributing to the depletion of wildlife populations. It has also meant that conflicts over access to land and water have become appallingly violent and lethal. Lack of livelihood options for internally displaced people (IDP) and returning refugees has resulted in an overdependence on natural resources as a source of income, causing a rapid spread of unsustainable trade in game meat.

Climate change is a significant root cause of environmental change in South Sudan. Available data show rising temperatures and drier weather in South Sudan (Richardson, 2011; USAID, 2016) as a result of global climate change. Despite the fact that South Sudan contributes very little to global greenhouse gas emissions, it ranks among the five countries in the world most vulnerable to the impacts of climate change (2017 Climate Change Vulnerability Index), as  agriculture remains essentially rain-fed and pastoralists depend on pasture for their animal. The assessment of forestry resources in the Equatorias (Adkins 2015) noted that key informants identified climate change as a potential threat to the forests. Maystadt et al., (2014) studied the links between temperature variation and the likelihood of conflict in South Sudan and found that one standard deviation of temperature increased the likelihood of conflict by as much as 32 per cent in South Sudan. It is further concluded that 26 per cent of violent conflict episodes in greater Sudan can be attributed to warming temperatures associated with climate change between 1997 and 2009 (Maystadt et al., 2014). The role that forests play in climate regulation, is well understood and equally, the loss of forest cover also has been correlated with global rising temperatures (Jackson et al., 2008; Bonan, 2008).  With climate change and increasing rainfall variability, increasing incidences of fire, drought and flood will be a likely occurrence and aggravating already existing threats to the Imatong Mountain and its ecosystems and outlying communities.

While the Transitional Constitution of the Republic of South Sudan, 2011, Article 41, showcases the important place that South Sudan’s environment has in the lives of its citizens, there is currently limited institutional and technical capacity, appropriate technologies and financial resources to support the implementation of interventions for adaptation to climate change.  However, the government of South Sudan has put in place some relevant legislative and policies to guide to ensure the sustainability of South Sudanese natural resources once operationalized.  The lead Government Institutions for Climate Change include Ministry of Environment and Forestry, Ministry of Wildlife Conservation and Tourism, Wildlife Service, Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security, Ministry for Electricity and Dams, Ministry of Water Resources and Irrigation, Ministry of Animal Resources and Fisheries, Ministry of Petroleum and Mining.

To address these negative impacts of climate change and human activity, and secure ecological and livelihood security in the Imatong Mountains, a community-driven approach centered on the conservation of the Imatong Central Forest Reserve is needed. There is also need to integrate a sustainable land and forest management practices that take into account climate change into agriculture and forestry activities in the landscape surrounding the ICFR. Cognizant of the need to collaborate and partner in bringing about this desired transformation and raise the productive capacity of Imatong Mountain, the Ministry of Environment and Forestry (MoEF) is collaborating with UNDP South Sudan is seeking the services of two (2) National Experts/Consultants to support the Government of South Sudan, through the MoEF, in developing a programme concept note that address the aspect of land degradation in the Imatong Mountains for submission to the Global Environmental Facility (GEF). It is envisaged that the proposed programme will be funded through the country’s STAR allocation and become a key element of the implementation of the NAPA and contribute to the realization of South Sudan’s Nationally Determined Contribution commitment to the Climate Change Paris Agreement.

 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-14069082

 South Sudan National Bureau of Statistics (NBS). 2012. Release of new South Sudan Gross Domestic Product (GDP) estimates for 2011, and revised figures for 2008-2010. Press release 02 October 2012. Juba: NBS 

South Sudan has a five-tier decentralized system of government namely, national, state, county, payam and boma. Torit State consists of six counties – Torit, Pageri, Magwi, Ayachi, Lopa and Ikotos. A list of 32 states was decreed in January 2017, before which Torit state was a part of Eastern Equatoria state before the reorganization of states. This was confirmed during the PIF development meeting with Ministry of Environment and Forestry on Wednesday 9th October 2019.

Scope and objective of the assignment:

The two National Consultants will collaborate closely with the GEF Operational Focal Point (OFP), relevant South Sudan Government institutions, and other stakeholders (e.g. UN agencies, INGOs, NGOs, CSOs, academia, etc. ),  the UNDP Country  Office Team as well as Regional Technical Advisor (RTA), Senior Programme Advisor, and Team Leader at the UNDP Country Office  to ensure timely delivery of a PIF and supporting documentation including draft Core Indicators, Project Taxonomy Sheet, and an initial Environmental & Social Risk Screening Report, in line with UNDP and GEF requirements and quality standards.  

Deliverables:

The PIF will be developed through a broad and inclusive consultation process, agreed by relevant stakeholders, guided by country priorities as well as relevant MEAs, and in line with GEF requirements. The following lists the key responsibilities and deliverables that will be expected from the consultant. Note that the UNDP GEF PIF template and GEF7 Programming Directions provide further guidance.

 Desktop Review

1. Review national strategies and plans, reports and assessments under relevant conventions.
2. Compile baseline information and conduct a situational analysis including a precise definition of relevant past/ongoing projects, activities, budgets, goals and (potential) co-financing links to GEF outcomes. 
3. Extract lessons learned and good practices from previous projects that can inform the design of the proposed GEF7 project.
4. Identify issues, threats, root causes and barriers (based on causal chain analysis), and conduct an analysis leading to development of proposed outcomes, outputs, and activities that could be further developed into a full-sized project proposal.
5. With support from the UNDP Country Office, conduct an initial project stakeholder analysis, including identification of key institutions, organisations and individuals and determination of capacity for consultations during PIF development.

Stakeholder Assessments & Consultations:

1. Hold in-depth consultations with a broad range of stakeholders, including the GEF national Operational Focal Point (OFP), representatives from relevant institutions, NGOs, CSOs, academia, private sector, development partners, etc. to inform the development of the PIF.
2. Engage in individual and group discussions to further assess the identified issues, threats, root causes and barriers, and discuss proposed outcomes, outputs, and activities, ensuring that they are relevant to the present context and stakeholder priorities.
3. Conduct a preliminary gender gap assessment.
4. Conduct risk assessments as per UNDP Environmental & Social Screening Procedure (SESP).
5. Conduct initial capacity development needs assessments for key stakeholder groups and institutions, and propose strategies for addressing project-related capacity gaps.
6. Identify which institution(s) would be best placed to lead project implementation, based on mandate and capacity.
7. Conduct consultations regarding financial planning and co-financing commitments.
8. Oversee the identification of sites targeted for project interventions, with documentation of selection criteria.

Formulation of the PIF and annexes:

1. Develop, present and articulate the PIF, as per requirements outlined in the template and GEF7 Programming Directions, including;   

• Theory of change.
• Results framework with SMART, gender-sensitive indicators (including GEF Core Indicators), baseline data, and targets.
• Stakeholder analysis; annexing documented evidence of stakeholder consultations (lists of people consulted, with names, positions, contact details and signatures).
• Preliminary gender gap analysis; ensure meaningful integration of activities aimed at addressing gender-related issues in project design.
• M&E plan and budget.

1. Completed SESP report including a realistic assessment of potential risks and recommended mitigation measures.
2. Facilitate the completion of required official endorsement letter(s), with support from UNDP.

Validation meeting:

1. Lead a meeting to present, discuss and validate the draft PIF and SESP report.
2. Ensure that any necessary revisions arising from the meeting are addressed.

1. Final Deliverables:

1. Well-written and concise PIF, in line with UNDP and GEF requirements, incorporating feedback from the validation meeting.
2. Environmental & Social Risk Screening report.
3. Evidence of stakeholder consultations (names, contact details, signatures – as outlined above).
4. All relevant documentation collected to inform PIF design (background docs, technical reports, policy papers etc.), deposited in dedicated Dropbox folder.

NB: The consultant will be expected to remain available for addressing of comments from UNDP and/or GEF Secretariat or Council (if any) during the PIF submission and approval process.

Proposed Time Schedule for Deliverables and Payments:
It is estimated that the tasks will require a total of 40 working days over a period of 2 months. The work should commence no later than 3 May 2021 and be completed by 31 Julye 2021.

Deliverable

• Detailed work plan based on the deliverables outlined above, including availability and expected mission travel dates, as well as target dates for delivering outputs; to be submitted to UNDP CO and RTA for review within 3 days of contract signature.
• Preparation of assignment inception and approach 
• PIF outline, including identification of key issues, root causes and barriers to be addressed by the project (based on the initial desktop review).
• Stakeholder validation meeting report following consultations and field missions.
• Draft PIF and ESRS report submitted to UNDP CO and MoEF.
• Final PIF, SES, and other accompanying documents submitted to MoEF, UNDP CO, and RTA
• Final documents submitted to GEF Secretariat to consider for inclusion in June 2020 WP
• Addressing of comments received from GEF Secretariat and/or Council members (if any)

Working Arrangements:

• The consultants will work from home with mission travel to relevant states.
• The consultants will report to, and be directly supervised by the UNDP Regional Technical Advisor (based in Addis Ababa) and UNDP CO Environment Focal Point, with the overall guidance, of the GEF and UNFCC focal points in the Ministry of Environment and Forestry.
• The consultants will be given access to relevant information necessary for execution of the tasks under this assignment by the UNDP RTA, UNDP Country Office, and the MoEF.
• The consultants will be responsible for providing her/his own work station (i.e. laptop, internet, phone, scanner/printer, etc.) and must have access to reliable internet connection.
• Given the consultations to be undertaken during this assignment, the consultants are expected to be reasonably flexible with their availability for such consultations taking into consideration different time zones.
• Payments will be made upon approval of deliverables by UNDP CO (as per above schedule), submission of a detailed time sheet and certification of payment form, and acceptance and confirmation by the UNDP CO on outputs delivered. If the quality does not meet standards or requirements, the consultants will be asked to rewrite or revise (as necessary) the deliverable before proceeding to payment. 

Travel:

• Consultant will be required to undertake missions to relevant states/field locations.
• Any necessary mission travel must be approved in advance and writing by the UNDP CO.
• The consultant must complete the online UN BSAFE  course before commencement of travel (proof of completion will be required).
• The consultant will be responsible for obtaining all appropriate vaccinations/inoculations, and ensure to bring a valid vaccination booklet on mission.
• Consultants are also required to comply with the UN security directives set forth under https://dss.un.org/dssweb 
• The consultant will be responsible for making his/her mission travel arrangements in line with UNDP travel policies. This will include visa arrangements (however, in some cases UNDP Country Offices may be able to assists in obtaining a landing visa for consultants).
• Travel expenses related to mission travels will be supported by the project travel fund and will be reimbursed as per UNDP rules and regulations for consultants. NB: Costs for mission airfares, terminal expenses, or living allowances should NOT be included in financial proposal

Corporate:

• Demonstrates integrity by modelling the UN’s values and ethical standards.
• Promotes the vision, mission, and strategic goals of UNDP.
• Displays cultural, gender, religion, race, nationality and age sensitivity and adaptability, treating all people fairly without favouritism.

Functional

• Demonstrated leadership, facilitation and coordination skills, with ability to manage technical teams, engage with stakeholders, design participatory processes and form strategic partnerships and alliances.
• Able to communicate effectively to a varied audience in a simple and concise manner.
• Capable of working in a high- pressure environment and managing multiple tasks while meeting strict deadlines with focus on quality results.
• Excellent analytical and organizational skills.
• Exercises the highest level of responsibility and be able to handle confidential and politically sensitive issues in a responsible and mature manner.

Education:

• Master’s degree or higher in a relevant field (e.g. natural sciences, biodiversity conservation, ecology, forestry); a relevant university degree in combination with qualifying experience in areas related to the project objectives will be accepted in lieu of the post-graduate degree.

Experience:

• Minimum 10 years of demonstrable experience in a technical area relevant to the proposed project (e.g. biodiversity conservation, protected area management), and in preparing high-quality donor-funded projects.
• Demonstrated experience working in developing country contexts, including in Africa.
• Previous working experience with GEF agencies (e.g. UNDP, WB), and familiarity with GEF and UNDP policies, procedures and practices would be an advantage.

Languages:

• Full proficiency in quality written and spoken English required (evidence of writing skills may be requested during the selection process).

Documentation to be submitted:

• A duly completed and signed UNDP Personal History form (P11) and CV including education and evidence of qualification for the assignment.
• A duly completed and signed Annex II Offeror´s letter to UNDP confirming interest and availability for the Individual Contractor (IC) assignment to be downloaded from the UNDP procurement site and confirmation you have read, understood and hereby accept UNDP’s General Conditions of Contract for the Services of the Individual Contractors

Links:

UNDP Personal History form (P11) required of all applicants:

www.undp.org/content/dam/undp/library/corporate/Careers/P11_Personal_history_form.doc 

General Conditions of Contract for the ICs:

www.undp.org/content/dam/undp/documents/procurement/documents/IC%20-%20General%20Conditions.pdf

Institutional arrangements
The consultant is expected to use his own computer/laptop and cell phone.

Technical proposal comprising of the following:

• Articulation of technical approach to the assignment/tasks, including the methodology and indicative workplan/timeline
• Letter of Confirmation of Interest and Availability using the template provided by UNDP
• Personal CV or P11, indicating all prior experience with similar projects, as well as the contact details (email and telephone number) of the Candidate and three (3) professional references
• Brief description (max. 1 page) of why you consider yourself as the most suitable for the assignment, and a methodology (max. 1 page) for how you will approach and complete the assignment

Financial proposal: Indicating the all-inclusive, fixed total contract price, supported by a breakdown of costs.
Consultancy Evaluation Criteria

Offers received will be evaluated using a Combined Scoring method, where the qualifications and Required Skills and Experience will be weighted 70%, and combined with the price offer, which will be weighted 30%.

Consultant technical evaluation criteria
Criteria to be used for rating the qualifications and Required Skills and Experience is outlined below:

• Qualifications of the candidate in the required area or course applied for: Master’s degree in natural sciences, biodiversity conservation, ecology, forestry or any related fields from recognized University or institution; PhD is an advantage (20%).
• At least 10 years of demonstrated professional experience related to occupational and health safety policy drafting and implementation and similar issues. (20%).
• Substantive and technical expertise in the areas mentioned in the criteria (20%).
• Extensive experience of providing policy advice (including report writing) at national  or international level (10%).

NOTE: Only candidates obtaining a minimum of 49 points (70%) in the Technical Evaluation will be considered for the Financial Evaluation.

Financial evaluation (total 30 points)
All technically qualified proposals will be scored up to 30 based on the formula provided below. The maximum points (30) will be assigned to the lowest financial proposal. All other proposals receive points according to the following formula: p y (/z)
Where:

• p = points for the financial proposal being evaluated
• y = maximum number of points for the financial proposal price of the lowest priced proposal
• z = price of the proposal being evaluated.

UNDP is committed to achieving workforce diversity in terms of gender, nationality and culture. Individuals from minority groups, indigenous groups and persons with disabilities are equally encouraged to apply. All applications will be treated with the strictest confidence.