Consultancy For The Evaluation Of The Co-Management Agreement In The Dzanga-Sangha Protected Areas At World Wide Fund For Nature

CALL FOR APPLICATIONS FOR THE RECRUITMENT OF CONSULTANTS OR A REGIONAL FIRM FOR THE EVALUATION OF THE CO-MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT IN THE DZANGA-SANGHA PROTECTED AREAS IN THE CENTRAL AFRICAN REPUBLIC

1. Context and Objectives

The Dzanga-Sangha Protected Areas (APDS), located in the southwest of the Central African Republic, are an exceptional UNESCO World Heritage site, home to unique biodiversity and indigenous communities who depend on natural resources for their livelihoods.

Since 1990, WWF has been working with the Ministry of Water, Forests, Hunting and Fishing (MEFCP) to promote conservation and sustainable development in this region. In 2019, a co-management agreement was officially established, structured around several pillars with a view to:

• To contribute to the preservation of the ecosystems of the APDS and the Tri National de la Sangha;
• To raise APDS management standards to align them with international standards;
• To strengthen community conservation programs;
• To enhance the resources of the APDS through research and ecotourism among others;
• And to strengthen staff capacities.

As part of this agreement, an independent evaluation by an expert is planned. It will focus on the effectiveness of the implementation and on the respect of the commitments of each party, to ensure that the objectives of conservation and sustainable development are achieved.

Mission objectives:

The evaluation of the APDS co-management agreement will have the following objectives:

• Assess progress made in implementing the respective commitments of the stakeholders of the co-management agreement.
• Analyze the performance of the APDS Management Unit , examining the quality of governance, the effectiveness of management processes, team coordination, and compliance with international standards for protected area management.
• Identify the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats of the initiatives planned in the five-year APDS management plan, and propose avenues for improvement for each area of ​​intervention.
• Evaluate and analyze the impacts of community rights and development programs, research, ecotourism, conservation and renewable energy**.**
• Formulate strategic recommendations to adjust actions and strengthen future phases of the co-management agreement.

Key stakeholders:

• WWF RCA,
• MEFCP,
• Ministry of Arts and Culture and Tourism Development,
• Local communities and indigenous peoples, represented by community associations and national civil society organizations;
• Technical and financial partners, such as the European Union, FTNS, etc.

2. Methodology and Tasks of the Consultant(s)/Firm

The joint evaluation of the co-management agreement will be based on a participatory and mixed approach, integrating qualitative and quantitative methods. It will include the following steps:

• Literature review : Analysis of documents relevant to the project, such as the co-management agreement, the development plan, previous evaluations, activity reports, case studies and scientific publications.
• Field data collection : Conducting direct observations, semi-structured interviews, focus groups and questionnaire surveys with relevant stakeholders to gather information on experiences and perceptions related to the co-management agreement.
• Interviews with external stakeholders : Interviews with the Monitoring Committee, the WWF network, and other key partners to obtain an overview of the impacts and challenges encountered.
• Data analysis : Processing, synthesis, triangulation and interpretation of the information collected, aimed at assessing the progress made, strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats related to the agreement.
• Report writing : Presentation of the results, conclusions, recommendations and lessons learned during the evaluation, ensuring that the views of all stakeholders are reflected and a participatory approach is followed.

The evaluation will follow relevant guidelines, rules and procedures established by WWF, while respecting ethical guidelines. It will provide evidence-based information, in an independent, transparent and ethical manner. The evaluator will be impartial and without conflict of interest with the project, ensuring close engagement with stakeholders, including government representatives, focal points of technical and financial partners (EU, FTNS, …), the Project Management Unit and other key partners.

The evaluation criteria for this joint evaluation of the co-management agreement will include:

1. Effectiveness : Assessment of the degree to which the specific objectives of the agreement have been achieved, as well as the changes observed in ecological, social and economic terms. This will allow the results obtained to be analysed in relation to initial expectations.
2. Efficiency : Analysis of the relationship between the resources mobilized and the results obtained, taking into account the costs, the time invested and the quality of the results. This will give an overview of the management of resources and the optimization of means.
3. Sustainability : Assessment of the likelihood that the benefits of the project will be maintained in the long term, taking into account environmental, institutional, financial and socio-cultural factors. This analysis will identify potential levers and obstacles to the sustainability of results.
4. Relevance : Analysis of the project’s relevance to stakeholders’ needs and expectations, as well as to national and international conservation priorities. This includes an assessment of the links between project objectives and local and global issues.
5. Impact : Measurement of the direct and indirect, positive and negative, expected and unexpected effects of the implementation of this agreement on beneficiaries and the environment. This evaluation will aim to understand the broader implications of the project on communities and ecosystems.

Expected content of the evaluation report of the APDS co-management agreement

1. Executive Summary :
   • Presentation of the main results, conclusions and recommendations of the evaluation.
2. Introduction :
   • Context, objectives, methodology and limits of the evaluation.
3. Analysis of the results :
   • Evaluation according to the following criteria:
     • Evaluation process : Details on the process, dates, sites visited, participants, methodology, and feedback on comments.
     • Relevance and coherence : Analysis in relation to the priorities of the MEFCP and WWF.
     • Effectiveness and impact : Rating of objectives and results, as well as analysis of effects on beneficiaries and the environment.
     • Sustainability and risks : Analysis of factors affecting the sustainability of results and associated risks.
     • Monitoring, evaluation and knowledge management : Assessment of existing systems and knowledge management activities.
     • Stakeholder engagement : Analysis of the participation and collaboration of different stakeholders.
     • Environmental, social and gender aspects : Assessment of safeguard measures and integration of gender considerations.
     • Efficiency and financial management : Summary of financial management and co-financing, as well as the effectiveness of implementation mechanisms.
4. Summary of conclusions :
   • Presentation of the project’s strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats.
5. Recommendations :
   • List of actions to be undertaken to improve the performance and impact of the co-management agreement.
6. Lessons learned :
   • Identification of good practices and lessons learned from the experience of the agreement.
7. Annexes :
   • Bibliographic references, data collection tools, tables and graphs.

Submission deadline

The final report must be submitted to the APDS Monitoring Committee no later than March 1, 2025.

3. Profile of the Consultant(s)/Firm and Composition of the Team

The team of experts will be composed of two people, with the following skills:

• Expertise in biodiversity protection, with proven experience in the management of protected areas, conservation of endangered species, ecosystem assessment, etc.
• Expertise in local development, with proven experience in supporting income-generating activities, eco-tourism, community participation, etc.
• Expertise in project evaluation, with proven experience in designing and implementing participatory and mixed evaluation methods, writing evaluation reports, etc.

4. Duration of the Mission and Estimated Schedule

The mission will take place over a maximum period of 30 working days, between January 15, 2025 and March 1, 2025, according to the following stages:

1. Start-up and documentary phase :
2. Field phase in Bangui and in the APDS
3. Final evaluation report drafting phase

Deliverable 1 = Drafting of an inception report to clarify and share a common vision of the evaluation approach in order to mark out the development of the mission in terms of both methodology and organization.

Maximum duration 6 working days.

Deliverable 2 = Pre-report to share the preliminary results of the consultations and surveys carried out in the field.

Maximum duration 10 working days.

Deliverable 3 = The final report must be submitted to the Monitoring Committee, allow time for reading and feedback, once the comments have been received, these will be integrated into the final report.

Maximum duration 14 working days.

5. Composition and Submission of the Application File

The application file will consist of a technical offer and a financial offer.

5.1. Content of the technical offer

The technical offer will include:

• A motivation note addressed to the National Director of WWF-RCA;
• Detailed CVs of the members of the consultant/firm team who will conduct the evaluation (Principal Consultant and Assistant Consultant);
• The detailed methodology and timetable for carrying out the service.

5.2. Content of the financial offer

The financial offer will include the fees of the Consultant(s)/Regional Firm and the costs related to the organization of the field evaluation (travel, accommodation, etc.).

6. Evaluation criteria

The evaluation of application files will focus on the essential criteria below out of 100 points.

Evaluation criteria will take into account:

• General presentation of the consultant(s)/firm /10
• General experience of the consultant(s)/firm (similar services)/20
• Quality of technical offer/50
• Quality of the financial offer/20

Only candidates who obtain the majority of points during the technical assessment will be shortlisted for an interview.