Consultancy for Midterm Review of WWF GEF TNFD Project

CONSULTANCY DETAILS

Location: Remote/virtual

Preferred time frame of consultancy: Mid- September to Mid-December 2023

Potential sites to visit: N/A – Virtual

Maximum budget: $20,000

PROJECT DATA

Project/Program Title: Establishing the Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures (TNFD)

GEF Project ID: 10755

WWF (Agency) Project ID: G0034

Implementing Agency(s): WWF-GEF

Executing Agency: UNEP Finance Initiative (UNEP FI)

Executing Partners: Global Canopy, World Conservation Monitoring Centre (WCMC)

Countries: Global

Focal Area: Biodiversity

GEF Operational Program: GEF 7

Total GEF Approved Budget: $1,698,829

Total Co-financing Approved: $ 4,312,858

RELEVANT DATES

CEO Endorsement/Approval : 5/17/2021

Agency Approval Date: 3/25/2022

Implementation Start: 4/1/2022

Project Completion Date (proposed or actual): 7/31/2026

Period to Be Evaluated: 5/17/21 – time of contract

INTRODUCTION AND PROJECT OVERVIEW

World Wildlife Fund and the WWF Global Environment Facility Agency highly recommends midterm reviews (MTRs) for innovative medium-sized projects. Therefore, the following terms of reference (TOR) sets out the expectations for the MTR for the project: “Establishing the Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures (TNFD)”, hereafter referred to as the “Project.” The consultant or team selected to conduct this review will hereafter be referred to as “evaluator.”

The Project seeks to support the establishment of a Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures (TNFD) to develop and disseminate a global framework for corporates and financial institutions to assess, manage and report on their dependencies and impacts on nature. The TNFD will address threats to the health and value of natural capital derived from the conduct of corporate activities that do not adequately consider the financial materiality and impacts of biodiversity loss. Initiatives such as TNFD will enable governments to better integrate knowledge of nature risk of those financial flows within their national policies and make the relevant strategic plans more effective in responding to emerging country priorities. A common, credible, and widely supported TNFD recommendations framework for reporting on nature-related risks and impacts can pave the way for companies and Financial Institutions (FIs) to better identify and address them in their supply chains and portfolios.

The Project was organized into the following components and outcomes:

Component 1: Build and catalyze the TNFD Network

• 1.1: Catalyzing support for TNFD and hand-over to TNFD Secretariat.

Component 2: Build and test the TNFD Framework

• 2.1: Increased understanding in the financial and corporate sector of nature-related risk and how to identify impacts and dependencies on nature.
• 2.2: A draft framework for companies to report to investors on their nature related risks, refined and agreed upon through a testing process.

Component 3: TNFD Framework consultation and dissemination of recommendations

• 3.1: Verification and broad support for the TNFD framework from FIs, companies, regulators and their stakeholders.
• 3.2 Increased awareness of nature-related impacts and financial risks among companies and financial institutions

Component 4: Knowledge management and M&E

• 4.1 Increased uptake of TNFD knowledge and communication amongst stakeholders
• 4.2: Monitoring and evaluation system in place to aid with adaptive management

SCOPE AND OBJECTIVE FOR THE EVALUATION

WWF- US is seeking an independent consultant to undertake a Midterm review (MTR) of the Project. The scope of the MTR will cover only GEF financed aspects of the project. The MTR will analyze the project for its design and implementation to date based on the following objective.

The objective of this evaluation is to examine the extent, magnitude and sustainability of and potential for project impacts to date; identify any project design issues; assess progress towards project outcomes and outputs; assess implementation/execution, and draw lessons learned that can improve the project effectiveness, efficiency and sustainability of project benefits. Based on this assessment, it is expected that the evaluator will provide actionable and useful recommendations that could be applied for the remaining duration of the project.

EVALUATION APPROACH AND METHOD

The evaluation will adhere to the relevant guidance, rules and procedures established by WWF[1] and align with guidance from 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 and will state so in their proposal. The evaluator is expected to reflect all stakeholder views and follow a participatory and consultative approach. There should be close engagement with the Project Management Unit (PMU) at the UNEP FI, the Executing Agency and project beneficiaries and partners, the TNFD Secretariat, Global Canopy and World Conservation Monitoring Centre (WCMC). Contact information will be provided by the PMU.

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

• Kickoff and inception meetings;
• Desk review consisting of, but not limited to:
  • Project Document and CEO Endorsement Letter;
  • Project grant agreements including the grant agreement between WWF GEF Agency and UNEP and Small-Scale Funding Agreements (SSFA) and its amendments between UNEP FI with WCMC and Global Canopy and individual consultants’ contracts with Bankers Without Boundaries (BwB);
  • Relevant safeguards documents, including WWF GEF Agency Categorization and Compliance memo, Stakeholder Engagement Plan and Gender Action Plan
  • Annual Work Plans (AWP) and Budgets and the Results Framework for project Year 1 and Year 2;
  • Project Progress Reports (PPR) including Results Framework and AWP Tracking; Risk registry; events and publications tracker;
  • TNFD Technical workplan;
  • GEF Agency reports, including Project Implementation Reports (PIRs) and Project Support Mission Reports (PrISM);
  • Relevant financial documents, including Quarterly Financial Reports (QFR); project cash flow; co-financing monitoring tables and co-financing commitment and reporting letters from the partners;
  • Meeting minutes of the Project Steering Committee (PSC) and other relevant virtual meetings with the WWF- GEF Agency and extended team;
  • All publications and knowledge management products by the project:
• UNEP FI led pilots in support of the TNFD – Initial materials
• TNFD monthly factsheets (UNEP FI internal)
• UNEP FI led pilots in support of the TNFD – Technical guidance note
• Article publication “One small step for finance, one giant leap for nature”
• Article publication “Nature-positive targets: What can financial institutions learn from their work on climate change?”
• UNEP FI news article on release of the beta v0.1
• UNEP FI news article on release of the beta v0.2
• UNEP FI article titled Nature risk – no longer ‘if’, but ‘how’ and ‘where’
• TNFD Financial Market Readiness Assessment
• Article by Romie Goedicke on Overview of existing nature-based initiatives “Catch me if you can!”
• COP 15 – A turning point for nature and the insurance sector
• What’s next for financial institutions and nature-related risk?
• The Global Biodiversity Framework – what’s next for financial policy and regulation?
• Unboxing Nature-related Risks
  Insights from the UNEP FI-led TNFD Piloting Programme
• Unboxing Nature-related Risks: Complementary report on main findings from sector and geographical pilot groups
  • Other relevant documents provided by the Executing Agency and partners:
• Interim progress reports by the partners, WCMC and Global Canopy;
• Monthly update for PSC chair;
• TORs of the PMU members.
• Inception report that outlines evaluation methodology, approach and timeline; *
• Debrief and presentation* of initial findings to project management team and WWF US;
• Draft report* not to exceed 40 pages (excluding annexes) shared with GEF AMU and PMU for review, feedback and approval. A sample outline will be provided; and
• Final approved MTR report* that has incorporated feedback and corrections and includes feedback log.

EXPECTED CONTENT OF THE REPORT

The Midterm review report will include (see Annexes for details):

• 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 project Results Framework plus rating of project objective and outcomes;
• Assessment of Effectiveness and ratings of Implementation and Execution;
• Assessment and rating of Monitoring and Evaluation design and implementation;
• Assessment of knowledge management and communication approach, including activities and products;
• Assessment of replication and catalytic effects of the project;
• Assessment of Gender Action Plan, gender- responsive measures and its mainstreaming into project activities;
• Assessment of Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) and its implementation. Plus, review of the Safeguards risk category classification and mitigation measures;
• Assessment of the Grievance Redress Mechanism including its socialization with stakeholders and their understanding of how it operates and their confidence in it;
• 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 or issues;
• Recommendations that include: practical and short-term corrective actions by evaluation criteria to address issues and findings; and reflect best practices towards achieving project outcomes, and knowledge sharing / replication for other projects of similar scope.
• Recommendations on next steps for TNFD and UNEP FI support.

EVALUATION TEAM OR INDIVIDUAL QUALIFICATIONS

Required Qualifications and Experience

• Master’s degree or equivalent in Development, Environmental Science, Economics, Public Policy, Social Sciences or other relevant field;
• Minimum 10 years of relevant professional experience;
• Technical knowledge in environmental economics, natural capital, risk management, financial regulation, market-led and multi-stakeholder initiatives like TNFD and UNEP-FI;
• Previous experience with evaluation methodologies;
• Excellent written and oral communication in English.

Preferred Qualifications and Experience

• Recent experience conducting evaluations (for GEF financed projects is an advantage);
• Knowledge of GEF 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 of participatory approach in biodiversity conservation and community based natural resource management;
• Experience with globally diverse, multi-stakeholder projects;
• Knowledge and experience in 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(s). Payments are according to deliverables submitted. Twenty-five percent of payment will correspond with completion and approval of Inception Report. Fifty percent of payment will correspond with submission and approval of the debrief presentation and the Draft Report. The final twenty-five percent will be delivered with the submission and approval of the Final Report.

[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.