BACKGROUND
Transparency International (TI) is the global civil society organisation leading the fight against corruption. Through more than 100 chapters worldwide and an international secretariat in Berlin, Germany, TI raises awareness of the damaging effects of corruption and works with partners in government, business, and civil society to develop and implement effective measures to tackle it.
The Transparency International Secretariat (TI-S) in Berlin is seeking a team of evaluators (including regionally-based data and research consultants) for an independent final evaluation of our global Climate Governance Integrity Project (CGIP),1 (“the Project”) funded by the Waverley Street Foundation. TI-S has been leading the Project implementation, since January 2023 and until December 2026, co-implemented with 33 TI national chapters around the world.
Although Project funding continues until the end of December 2026 with a no-cost extension, the majority of activity implementation at national level will end as planned at the end of 2025. Project activities at global level and a maximum of ten of TI national chapters will continue Project implementation for 3-9 months in 2026. The final evaluation is therefore planned for Q2-Q3 2026, after the consolidation of the Year 3 annual reporting (due by 31 March 2026) and while this limited number of ongoing chapter initiatives are still in their final stages of implementation.
TI’s CGIP aims to enhance the transparency, inclusivity and accountability of climate policy and governance frameworks so that climate efforts are shielded from corruption, and their impacts reach groups most vulnerable to climate change.
Under the CGIP’s theory of change and results framework, the Project has been working towards:
1. Climate Policy – Ensuring that policy-making processes relating to climate action are more transparent, accountable and inclusive.
2. Climate Action – Ensuring the accountability, integrity, and oversight of climate-related action globally and locally.
3. Climate Justice – Seeking improved justice outcomes for victims of environmental crime and corruption.
The Project’s outcomes contribute to several of TI’s strategic objectives (SO), with particular relevance to SO1 on ‘protecting public resources’. In line with TI’s approach to fighting corruption through a holistic approach, the CGIP advocates for reform through multiple channels ranging from international forums to local governments, and diverse stakeholders, including government officials, business representatives, academics, journalists and citizens.
The CGIP seeks to generate policy and behaviour changes by working at various levels, including:
• At local and national levels, through initiatives implemented by TI chapters to achieve policy and behaviour change that will ultimately benefit people, including marginalised communities, affected by the impacts of climate change; The 33 national chapters have identified results areas relevant to their specific contexts and prioritised impactful intervention activities.
• At the global level, through opportunities for collaborative and coordinated thematic action, knowledge exchanges and cooperation between chapters, and by leading global research and advocacy efforts that advance the programme’s overall objectives.
SCOPE AND OBJECTIVES OF THE FINAL EVALUATION
This final evaluation will examine the relevance, coherence, effectiveness, efficiency, impact, and sustainability of the Project. It shall also provide an external and independent assessment, prioritising the Project’s impact, sustainability and overall performance.
The overall objectives of the evaluation are the following:
• Provide an independent, systematic and objective assessment of the impact and sustainability, evaluating the Project implementation, the outcomes of the Project against the Project’s theory of change/intervention logic, the extent to which the Project has contributed to its objectives, and the extent to which the net benefits of the Project are sustainable over time. This would include an assessment of whether the theory of change was sufficiently comprehensive or missing any critical thematic areas or gaps.
• Examine how the Project influenced key stakeholders, and the extent to which it contributed to shifts in stakeholder behaviour, institutional practices and climate policies.
• Identify internal and external factors that shaped the Project’s outcomes, including strengths, including any innovative and other good practice, limitations and challenges encountered during implementation.
• Document lessons learned and good practices to generate clear forward-looking and actionable recommendations to support sustainability and enhance future programme design and developing strategies for future related work at national, multicounty and global levels.
This final evaluation will need ensure a balance of assessing both breadth and depth of this Project, which recognises the 33-country global ambition and implementation, but also incorporates more detailed assessment of the national implementation of the Project in at least four countries covered through the Project, one in each region (Latin America and the Caribbean, Sub-Saharan Africa, Europe & the US, and Asia Pacific). We therefore have a strong preference for the evaluation team to include relevant regional representation who can cover these data ‘deep dive’ aspects of the evaluation consultancy.
The evaluation should therefore include a high-level analysis of the most significant outcomes reported across the breadth of the programme, recognising the diversity in previous experience of working on climate governance integrity (with some chapters continuing from previous experience/capacity and others using this opportunity to initiate new programmes of work in this thematic area) – based on the Project’s ‘outcome bank’ (see below). Candidates should suggest their proposed approach for a representative sampling of the results reported from all the countries involved in the Project, but we also expect that the final evaluators will carry out some independent triangulation exercises, to validate reported outcomes with external sources and stakeholders, particularly with the regionally-based data ‘deep dive’ consultants delivering validation with national stakeholders in the relevant selected countries. The approach will be confirmed with TI during inception.
The evaluation should broadly assess the validity of any outcomes achieved from the global scope of the Project, and should also test the validity of the local-to-global and Movement value-add of the theory of change. This may be done by assessing the impact of the Project under the three strategic pillars of the results framework:
- Climate Policy
- Climate Action
- Climate Justice
As part of the evaluation, we would like the evaluators to develop at least three case studies assessing the local-to-global connectivity under these three pillars, which may also incorporate analysis of country components and contributions in the selected ‘deep dive’ locations. If deemed useful and necessary, further opportunities for other relevant case studies can also be proposed and confirmed with TI during the inception phase. The results of the evaluation will be shared with the donor (the Waverley Street Foundation) and with participating Chapters and external partner and stakeholder organisations by TI and will be published on our website, with the accompanying management response.
BACKGROUND TO THE MONITORING APPROACH ADOPTED BY THE PROJECT
At the start of the Project, a learning review from our previous climate programme, along with a theory of change, internal logframe and country selection criteria, were commissioned from an external consultant and adopted in the design of the new global Project. These documents form the baseline from which to assess subsequent developments and achievements for CGIP.
The CGI Project was the first at TI-S to pilot a new comprehensive outcome-focused monitoring and reporting tool – aligned to our organisational impact monitoring approach – with our co-implementing chapters for their national-level advocacy, and for TI-S’ global advocacy. We have recently undergone an exercise to better streamline consistency and quality of results reported, and supporting evidence to substantiate the significance of and contribution towards achieved outcomes from 33 chapters (national advocacy) and TI-S (global advocacy). This has resulted in a consolidated ‘outcome bank’ for the Project, which aims to include at least one significant result per country, and will be a key input to this final evaluation.
KEY ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED BY THE EVALUATION
The following questions could be addressed during the programme evaluation but are subject to discussion and agreement with TI-S during the period of designing the evaluation approach. Within the scope parameters highlighted above, the evaluators are free to further prioritize these questions in the proposal and suggest others they deem necessary.
However, the overall evaluation should be based on the six OECD DAC criteria, with an emphasis on impact, effectiveness and sustainability. These criteria should be contextualised and applied in consultation with TI-S staff and TI Chapters.
RELEVANCE & COHERENCE
• To what extent did the Project’s (and Programme’s) Theory of Change hold true in practice? Which assumptions proved valid or not, and why?
• To what extent did the Project align with and complement the TI Movement’s strategy?
• How did the Project complement other ongoing initiatives and partnerships, and discourse, in the climate governance integrity and anti-corruption space, nationally and globally?
In particular, responding to the following recommendations from the learning review at the closure of the last multi-year climate governance Project, how coherent and relevant has this Project been in:
• Leveraging opportunities to strengthen vertical linkages between the national and global work.
• Using the National Chapter experience and knowledge to inform and provide evidence for global work, and feeding global decisions and country commitments back down to National Chapters so they can track these.
• Promoting stronger linkages between global and national agendas.
• Designing and piloting some approaches for trans-boundary work.
• Targeting programme interventions to reach the most vulnerable countries and communities; including strengthening gender equality and social inclusion and linking to youth engagement.
IMPACT
• To what extent can the Project be said to have addressed the needs of groups most (and disproportionately) impacted by weaknesses in climate governance policy – and therefore the impacts of climate change – including climate-vulnerable communities?
• What impacts has the Project contributed to since 2023, at national and global levels? Were there unintended (positive or negative) impacts of the Project? What other factors have led to these impacts?
• Was the breadth vs. depth balance achieved effective, or would a more limited focus on fewer priority areas have had more impact potential?
EFFECTIVENESS
• How did Project interventions contribute (or not) to the intended outcomes, including expected pathways of change? Where were the most significant outcomes observed (across the whole global programme, and in the selected ‘deep dive’ countries)?
• To what extent has the work at the global level influenced or supported progress at the national level, and vice versa (especially in relation to Climate Policy)? What internal or external factors most strongly influenced the achievement of intended outcomes? What main barriers have been identified as well as strategies to mitigate their impact?
• What strategies, approaches, mechanisms and innovations have proven especially important to contribute or hinder Project outcomes, and what else could/should have been adopted for greater effectiveness?
• How adaptive has the Project been in responding to key contextual changes during implementation?
• What were the main internal and external factors that influenced the achievement or non-achievement of outcomes?
EFFICIENCY
• Were resources (financial, human, technical) used in a cost-effective, timely and strategic manner, at global and national levels?
• Were sufficient steps taken to the limit the carbon and environmental footprint generated by Project activities, given its thematic focus?
SUSTAINABILITY
• How significant and durable are the behaviour, policy and practice outcomes recorded at global and national levels?
• To what extent and in what ways have TI-S and Chapters institutionalized Project outcomes, tools, learnings, partnerships, etc. into their organizational strategies and operations (including creating linkages with other areas of work), and how well positioned are they to sustain and scale them beyond WSF funding?
• What are the main sustainability risks, and what mitigation actions were/could be implemented by TI-S and Chapters?
Lessons learned and future recommendations
• What lessons and models should be prioritised for the future Climate Governance Integrity Programme, including for the selected ‘deep dive’ countries and global levels?
• What remaining related gaps in knowledge or priority areas should TI’s future climate governance integrity work focus on (informed by feedback from key stakeholders?)
METHODOLOGY
The evaluators are ultimately responsible for the overall methodological approach and design of the evaluation and are expected to propose methodologies that they consider most appropriate to achieve the aims of this evaluation. Information and supporting documentation available from TI-S and Chapters will be discussed and confirmed with the evaluators during the inception phase.
However, the evaluators are encouraged to use impact assessment methodologies as well as participatory and GESI-sensitive approaches, engaging relevant staff at TI-S and Chapters, as well as those impacted by the Project activities, through structured methods. Both quantitative and qualitative data should be utilised to assess the Project.
The evaluators are encouraged to consider the following data collection methods: review of key documents, focus group discussions, key informant interviews, surveys, participatory validation of key findings with key relevant national and global stakeholders, which will be informed by and confirmed with TI during the inception period.
The evaluators are expected to refine the scope and methodology of this evaluation during the inception phase in cooperation with TI-S and provide a detailed inception report.
International travel should be limited only to what is essential to fully deliver the scope of this evaluation. A maximum of two international field trips will be approved by TI; instead, we have a strong preference for a diverse international team which includes relevant regional representation from Latin America and the Caribbean, Sub-Saharan Africa, Europe & the US, and Asia Pacific, who can cover the relevant national data ‘deep dive’ aspects and local evaluative research. To support the evaluation’s overall objectives.
EXPECTED DELIVERABLES AND TIMELINE
The evaluators are expected to deliver:
• An inception report for review and comments by TI-S, not exceeding 10 pages, outlining the proposed methodology, stakeholders for interviews and focus group discussions, data collection tools, limitations and timeframe of planned actions by 31 May 2026.
• A draft evaluation report for review and comments by TI-S, not exceeding 30 pages, along with its annexes, by 15 August 2026. While considering the comments provided on the draft, the evaluators shall use their independent and impartial judgment in preparing the final report.
• An online validation meeting with key stakeholders to discuss findings and feedback on draft report, with design, facilitation and documentation of a participatory workshop, incl. PowerPoint presentation, to discuss and validate the draft report, by 31 August 2026.
• A final evaluation report documenting the evaluation process and results following a clear structure (see structure below), not exceeding 40 pages (excluding the annexes and the executive summary), by 15 September 2026. It should be accompanied by a summary PowerPoint presentation. The evaluation report will contain the findings, conclusions, and recommendations as well as lessons learned with action-oriented recommendations. All presentations and reports should be submitted in English, in electronic form, in accordance with the deadlines stipulated above. The evaluators are responsible for editing and quality control of language. Annexes to the Final Report should be kept to an absolute minimum, only those annexes that serve to demonstrate or clarify an issue related to a significant finding should be included. Existing documents should be referenced but not necessarily annexed.
This timeline is indicative and will be confirmed during the inception phase with the evaluators.
Applicable guidance and quality standards:
• The findings should be referenced.
• The evaluators’ approach should be guided by/reference the TI’s Impact Matrix methodology, as a framework to assess domains of change when assessing the impact elements of the Project, and TI’s Data Quality Checklist for assessing the data available (or constraints/limitations thereof) available for the evidence base/evaluation.
• The research should abide by ethical protocols including participant confidentiality and privacy, and by data protection regulations. TI’s MEL guiding principles and ethical standards are contractual obligations which must be met by all our evaluators.
• TI’s Evaluations website: where we publish all our project evaluations and management responses. The TI Secretariat retains the sole rights with respect to all distribution, dissemination, and publication of the deliverables.
The TI Secretariat retains the sole rights with respect to all distribution, dissemination, and publication of the deliverables.
SELECTION CRITERIA
The successful team of evaluators for this Consultancy should possess the following qualifications and experience:
• Advanced university degree in social sciences, international development, public policy, or related field
• 5+ years of relevant professional experience in the field of Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning (MEL) in international development, with demonstrated expertise in evaluating complex multi-country projects and programmes and advocacy-based approaches AND in relevant thematic priority areas related to climate governance or integrity (both essential
• Deep understanding of good governance, anti-corruption and climate governance and integrity programming
• Relevant regional representation from Latin America and the Caribbean, Sub-Saharan Africa, Europe & the US, and Asia Pacific and direct experience working in/with some of the Project countries in each region on related issues
• Demonstrated track record in conducting rigorous evaluations using DAC criteria, impact assessment methodologies, participatory and gender-sensitive and inclusive approaches in MEL and results-based management
• Strong command of mixed-methods research, including advanced quantitative and qualitative data collection, analysis, and interpretation, including outcome-based approaches, impact monitoring approaches and results-based management
• Substantial knowledge and hands-on experience working with advocacy-oriented organisations, civil society networks, and multi-CSO (diverse capacity) implementation
• Strong commitment to principles of transparency, integrity, and ethical evaluation practice
• Strong interpersonal skills and ability to communicate and collaborate effectively with a wide range of stakeholders; strong facilitation and presentation skills
• Fluency in written and spoken English with proven ability to produce high-quality analytical reports for diverse stakeholder audiences; additional languages used in Project countries an advantage
• Commitment to the values and principles of TI and knowledge of, or considerable interest in, the work of TI and the field of anti-corruption
• Availability from May through September 2026
REMUNERATION AND COST
The evaluators should provide their estimated total fee as standard daily rates before any VAT or other charges. The total budget should cover for per diem for any potential field trips (3). The plane tickets and hotel accommodation for these trips will be organized and covered directly by TI-S.; local transportation and visa costs will also be reimbursed.
The indicative budget available for this evaluation (plane tickets and accommodation excluded) is in the region of EUR 30,000-35,000 (including VAT), but candidates should specify their own detailed estimates for the scope of work proposed.
For candidates based in the EU, EEA, UK, and Switzerland
Transparency International e.V. (Secretariat), (TI-S) is registered as a Business Entity in Germany with VAT identification number DE273612486. EU reverse charge applies. Service providers should issue invoices with zero VAT. Candidates who are based in Germany and do not charge German VAT must confirm their small entrepreneur status.
Data protection
When you respond to this tender and submit your application, you provide consent that Transparency International e. V. keeps your application materials for the period of ten years according to German legal requirements. Afterwards Transparency International will delete your application and any personal data included in it. If you have any questions, please reach out to dataprotection@transparency.org
Guidelines for handling overhead and travel expenses
Overhead
Regular overhead expenses associated with the Consultants maintaining their places of business, such as rent, telephone, utilities, or stationery, are included in the Consultants’ professional fees, except where explicitly agreed otherwise in the contract.
Travel
Travel and accommodation expenses will as far as possible, and where applicable, be recovered from the institutions and companies hosting events or using the outputs provided by the Consultants. Where such cost recovery is not possible, all travel is subject to prior approval by TI-S staff responsible for the financial management of the Project or TI Budget Line that will support the costs of travel. TI shall not issue travel advances to the Consultants. For accommodation or travel by air, rail, or coach, they will instead have to contact TI-S that will make travel arrangements on the Consultants’ behalf. All travel booked by TI-S will include travel health and accident insurance with worldwide coverage and Economy class only; accommodation will aim to achieve best value for money up to a 4-star category. Consultants shall be entitled to invoice TI-S only for local transportation and visa cost (if applicable). Subsistence allowance (per diems) and expenses for individual meals cannot be claimed. These are part of Consultants’ business expenses
For candidates based in the EU, EEA, UK, and Switzerland
Transparency International e.V. (Secretariat), (TI-S) is registered as a Business Entity in Germany with VAT identification number DE273612486. EU reverse charge applies. Service providers should issue invoices with zero VAT. Candidates who are based in Germany and do not charge German VAT must confirm their small entrepreneur status.
The Transparency International Secretariat is committed to creating an inclusive work environment where diversity is valued and where there is equality of opportunity. We actively seek a diverse applicant pool and therefore welcome applications from qualified candidates of all regions, countries, cultures, and backgrounds.
Selection of candidates is made on a competitive basis, and we do not discriminate based on national origin, race, colour or ethnic background, religious belief, sex, gender identity and expression or sexual orientation, marital or family status, age, or ability. We kindly ask applicants to refrain from including in their application information relating to the above as well as from attaching photos.
Link of ToR on Website: https://files.transparencycdn.org/images/Final-Evaluation-Climate-Governance-Integrity-Project-CGIP.pdf
How to apply
The application should include the following:
• Technical proposal including a detailed statement of the proposed review methods, principles and stakeholder engagement approach.
• Motivation letter and CV (for all team members, along with delineation of roles) highlighting: − relevant experience, especially any prior work on climate governance- or corruption related issues
− Proposed number of working days (working days of 8 hours) and daily fee rate (per team member)
− The countries/jurisdictions for the Consultancy
• One sample of a relevant previous evaluation work, as lead author (confidentiality guaranteed).
• Completed application form here
Interested applicants must complete the online form above and submit the other required documents listed above in English consolidated into a single PDF file in the same order.
Please indicate “Final project evaluation application: CGIP project” in the subject line of your email application. Applications should be sent in English by email to wsfproject@transparency.org by close of business of 5 December 2025.
Please note that only shortlisted applicants will be contacted and that it is unfortunately not possible to provide individual feedback on applications. The shortlisted applicants will be invited for interview either in late December 2025 or early January 2026, with aim of completing the selection process by the end of January 2026.