Open to External Candidates

Reference No. : CFCV/ID10/2024/030
Position Title : Consultant – Final Evaluation of Migration Governance for Sustainable Development in Indonesia Project
Duty Station : Jakarta
Duration of Contract : 3 months
Type of Appointment : Consultancy
Estimated Start Date : As soon as possible
Closing Date : 17 May 2024

 

1.      Evaluation context

Country Context

Since the early 1980s, Indonesian migrant workers have been playing an increasingly important role in Indonesia’s labour market. With a population of 279 million, Indonesia has become a prominent labour migration origin nation. Approximately nine million Indonesians, or nearly 7% of the workforce, are currently employed abroad.[1] Malaysia, Saudi Arabia, Taiwan, and Hong Kong account for 84 percent of this number as the destination countries for Indonesian migrants,[2] while women made up 88 percent of regular migrants in 2021[3] and 61 percent in 2022.[4] Approximately 47% of this labor force is made up of undocumented migrants, the majority of them are men who work as laborers in Malaysia.[5]  Research shows how labour migration contributes directly to improve people’s lives. In 2016, Indonesian migrant workers sent over IDR 118 trillion back to Indonesia in remittances,[6] which were mainly used to pay for daily needs. The remittances from women are more likely to be spent on health, education, family and community development.

Most Indonesian women migrant workers come from poor rural areas where there is a lack of alternative job opportunities for prospective migrant workers. The data shows that there are 49 percent of women migrant workers, especially from village or rural areas fall out of the labour force after returning home (World Bank Survey 2017). Women are also more likely than men to experience multiple forms of discrimination, exploitation and abuse. Whether migrating through regular or irregular channels, women migrants may face violence and abuse from intermediaries and employers, as well as from partners and others. Violence against women migrant workers and trafficking are part of the broader spectrum of violence against women and are driven by cultural and gendered norms. Such cultural and gendered norms – including the use of gender specific bans that prohibit the migration of women – also impact the migration opportunities available to women, restricting their ability to access regular migration into skilled, safe and well-paid employment.

The Indonesian Government has made progress including through Parliament passing Law No. 18/2017 on the Protection of Indonesian Migrant Workers. The provisions of Law 18/17 mandate the government to enhance legal protections of workers throughout each phase of the migration cycle. The law lays out the roles and responsibilities of national and sub-national level duty bearers and calls them to strengthen service delivery and improve coordination.

Participating UN Organisations (PUNOs)

The International Organization for Migration (IOM), established in 1951, is the leading intergovernmental organization in the field of migration and has been operating in Indonesia for more than 40 years. IOM Indonesia works on a wide range of partnerships with the Government of Indonesia, civil society, private sector actors, migrants and communities. As the UN Migration Agency, IOM Indonesia facilitates the attainment of migration-related goals of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), which is bolstered by the implementation of the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration (GCM) as well as the IOM Migration Governance Framework (MiGOF). IOM Indonesia has localized the GCM in at least two major sending regions and one transit region, as well as conducted collaborative Migration Governance Indicators assessments with the governments both at the national and local levels to assist the stocktaking, foster dialogue on migration, and enable lessons learned and knowledge sharing.

 

United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), established in 1965, is the lead agency on international development. In Indonesia, UNDP focuses to support fighting against poverty, promoting inclusive economic growth, reducing inequalities between groups and regions, and helping to achieve the SDGs by 2030 across the country. UNDP is dedicated to fostering transformative change in developing nations by engaging with communities at the grassroots, enhancing institutional capacities, and offering policy advice to partner governments. This approach, linking policy with practice, aims to generate tangible impact for the people of Indonesia.

 

UN Women, established in 2010, is the UN organization that delivers programmes, policies, and standards to safeguard the human rights of women and ensures that every woman and girl lives up to their full potential. In Indonesia, UN Women collaborates with the governments, civil society organizations, academia, the media, as well as public and private sectors addressing the country’s gender equality and empowerment priorities. At the core of UN Women’s work, UN Women Indonesia focuses on ending violence against women; women, peace, and security; and women’s economic empowerment.

 

Joint-Programme Background

IOM Indonesia, alongside UNDP and UN Women and in close coordination with UN RCO, has been working in collaboration with the Government of Indonesia to implement a joint programme entitled “Migration Governance for Sustainable Development in Indonesia”. This joint programme is funded by the  Migration Migration Multi-Partner Trust Fund (the Fund) for a duration of 30-months  from December 2021 to June 2024.

 

The overarching objective of the joint programme is to enhance migration governance in Indonesia by supporting the Government of Indonesia’s capacities in evidence-based migration management, with the appropriate gender consideration and responsiveness, at the national and sub-national levels and to support improved cooperation at the global level. This objective is achieved through the two main outcomes which are:

• strengthened migration governance and national priorities in line with the GCM, ensuring contributing to sustainable development outcomes; and
• enhanced government stakeholders’ capacity at sub-national level to maximize migration’s development potential.

 

To that end, the joint programme includes the following intended outputs:

• Government has a better understanding of national migration governance needs and how to respond to these within the framework of the implementation of the GCM;
• Government inter-institutional coordination mechanisms and processes to apply a whole-of-government and whole-of-society approach to migration governance are strengthened, including through the establishment of an appropriate inter-ministerial forum on migration;
• A comprehensive, government-led National Action Plan for GCM implementation, follow-up and review, incorporating rights-based approach, gender and child-sensitivity, is produced;

 

• Sub-national government stakeholders identify and articulate localized migration governance priorities in line with national GCM action plan and SDGs;
• Sub-national governments design, implement, and monitor migration interventions, including

through leveraging innovative financing;

• Platforms for sub-national governments to exchange best practices on migration policies and

programmes, in particular on the protection and empowerment of Indonesian migrant workers, are in place.

 

The key stakeholder of the joint programme includes: Government of Indonesia: Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA), National Development Planning Agency (Bappenas), Ministry of Manpower, Coordinating Ministry for Human Development and Cultural Affairs, Ministry of Women Empowerment and Child Protection, Ministry of Law and Human Rights, Ministry of Villages, Development of Disadvantage Region and Transnational Migration, Ministry of Home Affairs, Ministry of State Secretariat, Ministry of Finance, The Indonesian Migrant Workers Protection Agency (BP2MI), National Commission for Ending Violence against Women (NCVAW), National Statistics Agency (BPS); Provincial/District Level Departments for Development Planning, Placement of Migrant Workers, Manpower, Women Empowerment, and Child Protection, Social Affairs; Civil Society Organizations (Migrant Care, JBM, SBMI), women CSOs.

 

This joint programme aligns with the migration-related priority areas outlined in the Government of Indonesia’s Mid-Term National Development Plan 2020-2024. The priority areas include targets to increase the number of bilateral agreements for labour migration and to elevate the percentage of migrant workers who find work through regular pathways, ensuring access to formal employment with legal entities. Additionally, this joint programme aligns with the UN system in Indonesia that is guided by the UN Sustainable Development Cooperation Framework (UNSDCF) 2021-2025, particularly Priority Area 1 on Inclusive Human Development that includes the SDG indicator 10.7.2 on migration governance.

 

For the results and implementation of activities at the sub-national level (under Outcome 2), the target districts of West Nusa Tenggara (NTB), Central Java, and South Sulawesi Province were selected and consulted further with the stakeholders at the sub-national level. The consideration for these target areas is made based on the relevant migration context. NTB and Central Java Province are both among the highest overseas migrant workers sending areas, while South Sulawesi Province is a sending and transit area of migrant workers, especially those who intend to go towards Malaysia, through the island of Borneo.

 

2.      Evaluation purpose and objective

This evaluation serves a multifaceted purpose, encompassing the promotion of accountability, the generation of knowledge and learning opportunities, the improvement of future performance, as well as insight provision to inform decision-makers. This final evaluation aligns with the Fund’s requirement that the joint-programme is subject to a joint final independent evaluation within six months of joint-programme completion. And in accordance with the manual of the Fund, the evaluation should assess the extent to which the joint-programme has integrated the GCM guiding principles, notably human rights, gender-responsive, and child sensitive (markers); as well as the whole-of-government, whole-of-society, and people-centred approaches.

 

The final evaluation will be looking at the joint programme performance against each output and outcome indicator by considering the identified assumptions and risks. It will additionally appraise the joint programme’s relevance, coherence, efficiency, effectiveness, impact, and sustainability drawing insights from lessons learned in management, planning, coordination, and implementation.

 

The overall objectives of the evaluation are the following:

• Assess the effectiveness and efficiency of the joint-programme in progressing towards the achievement of migration governance.
• Assess the relevance and coherence of the joint-programme, including the added value of PUNOs as One UN and identify contributions to Indonesia migration governance.
• Analyze how human rights approach, gender-equality and Leave No One Behind (LNOB) principles are integrated in the joint-programme design and implementation and contribute to transformative change and sustainability efforts.
• Provide lessons learned and actionable recommendations to support strategic positioning as One UN.

 

This final evaluation is conducted for the use of different intended audience below:

Intended Audience	Purpose of Use
Donor	Assess the results and value for money of the funded joint-programme
Steering Committee	Assess the relevance and sustainability of the joint-programme
PUNOs (Project team and Management)	Document lessons learned and best practices and increase the visibility and recommendations from the joint-programme and utilize them to inform the design of ongoing and future interventions (activities/project/programme); as well as assess the organizational effectiveness in implementing their strategy and mandate.
Government	Assess if the programme has supported to achieve policy coherence, GCM Socialization and/or GCM implementation.
Beneficiaries	Comprehend the results, lessons learned, and best practices generated in their populations throughout the joint-programme.
Other joint-programme stakeholders	Understand the results, lessons learned, and best practices generated throughout the joint-programme and accountability of a project to intended beneficiaries.

 

 

 

3     Evaluation scope

The evaluation will encompass the entire implementation period from December 2021 until June 2024. As the joint-programme’s nature is conducted both at the national and sub-national level, the evaluation field visit will be carried out in Jakarta as well as other three provinces, which are Central Java, South Sulawesi, and West Nusa Tenggara. It is necessary to engage with both national and local government counterparts, implementing partners, as well as the migrant communities affected by the joint-programme. It is important to note that, although the joint programme does not have children as direct beneficiaries, the inclusion of child sensitivity in National GCM Action Plan are considered, along with the involvement of youth communities (such as university students) in the programme.

Potential sampling area are as below:

• National level – DK Jakarta
• Subnational level:

1. Central Java Province: Semarang, Cilacap, and Wonosobo
2. West Nusa Tenggara: Mataram, Lombok Barat/Lombok Tengah, and Lombok Timur.
3. South Sulawesi: Makassar and Maros.

4     Evaluation criteria

The evaluation criteria are aligned with those of MMPTF Operations Manual, UNEG and OECD/DAC,. This final evaluation will cover the criteria of relevance, coherence, efficiency, effectiveness, impact, and sustainability.

 

The evaluation should also address the consolidation of relevant GCM guiding principles throughout the joint-programme cycle (people-centred, human rights, gender-responsive, child sensitive, whole-of-government, and whole-of-society approach). The evaluation will also assess leave no one behind (LNOB) principles as a cross-cutting theme.

• People-centred: promotes the well-being of migrants and the members of communities.
• Human rights: ensure effective respect for and protection and fulfilment of the human rights of all migrants, regardless of their migration status, across all stages of the migration cycle as well as to eliminate all forms of discrimination, including racism, xenophobia, and intolerance, against migrants and their families.
• Gender-responsive: mainstreams a gender perspective and promotes gender equality and the empowerment of all women and girls, recognizing their independence, agency, and leadership to move away from addressing migrant women primarily through a lens of victimhood.
• Child-sensitive: upholds the principle of the best interests of the child at all times, as a primary consideration in all situations concerning children in the context of international migration, including unaccompanied and separated children.
• Whole-of-government collaborates with multi governments to ensure horizontal and vertical policy coherence across all sectors and levels of government.
• Whole-of-society collaborates with broad and relevant multi-stakeholder partnerships to address migration in all its dimensions.
• Leave no one behind: eradicate poverty in all its forms, end discrimination and exclusion (include disability inclusion), and reduce the inequalities and vulnerabilities that leave people behind and undermine the potential of individuals and of humanity as a whole.

 

5     Evaluation questions

The following key indicative questions will guide the evaluation and will be further refined  by  the appointed evaluator during the inception phase.

Criteria	Questions
Relevance The extent to which the intervention objectives and design respond to beneficiaries, global, country, and partner/institution needs, policies, and priorities, and continue to do so if circumstances change.	·       To what extent has the joint-programme been adjusted to respond to an evolving context? ·       Are the joint-programme activities, outputs, and outcomes relevant to the objectives and to the needs of the beneficiaries? ·       How well did the programme meet the needs of its target beneficiaries/population? ·       Is the joint-programme aligned with national (RPJMN 2020-2024), global (SDGs, GCM) and sub-national/local priorities? ·       To what extent does the joint-programme contribute to the UNSDCF, particularly priority area 1?
Coherence The compatibility of the intervention with other interventions in a country, sector, or institution.	·       To what extent has the joint-programme been complementary and synergised to other relevant interventions carried out by the PUNOs, government, or other national and international entities? ·       To what extent is the joint-programme coordinated with other relevant interventions? ·       What other synergies with partners and other stakeholders could be made in future interventions? ·       What were the strengths and weaknesses of the programme design compared to the needs of the beneficiaries in the field?
Efficiency The extent to which the intervention delivers, or is likely to deliver, results in an economic and timely way.	·       How well are resources (funds/financial, human, technical) utilised to achieve the results of joint programme? How well are resources disbursed for activities according to the initial implementation plan? ·       Does the joint-programme have the necessary coordination mechanisms, including among PUNOs, to ensure that the allocated resources are efficiently converted into the expected outputs? What have been the challenges and benefits of working together among interagency involved in a joint program? ·       Do the outcomes of the programme represent value for money? Are there alternative approaches that could have resulted in the same outcomes with less cost? ·       What were the key barriers or challenges to programme implementation and how were they addressed? ·       How well was the programme monitored and evaluated throughout its implementation?
Effectiveness The extent to which the intervention achieved, or is expected to achieve, its objectives, and its results, including any differential results across groups.	·       Were the joint-programme outputs achieved in accordance with the initial proposal? ·       To what extent has the joint-programme contributed to the expected outcomes to strengthen the migration governance and enhance the stakeholder’s capacity? How effective were the programme’s strategies and activities in achieving its objective? ·       To what extent does the joint programme contribute to the migration governance of Indonesia? To what extent can changes be noticed in terms of the government stakeholders’ capacity at sub-national level? ·       To what extent has the joint-programme adapted to the external conditions to ensure joint-programme’s results?
Impact The extent to which the intervention has generated or is expected to generate significant positive or negative, intended or unintended, higher-level effects.	·       How did the programme impact the government or community in the targeted area? ·       What is the likely long-term impact of the joint programme in migration governance in the country? What are the intended, unintended, both positive and negative impacts can be noted from the implementation at national and sub-national levels? Are the impacts originated from the joint-programme, from external factors or both? ·       Does the joint-programme take timely measures mitigating any unplanned negative impacts?
Sustainability The extent to which the net benefits of the intervention continue or are likely to continue.	·       Are the benefits generated likely to continue once the supports from the joint-programme end? ·       Do the activities supported or initiated by the joint programme have structures, resources, and processes in place to continue? ·       Do the partners of the joint programme have the capacity and commitment to maintaining the benefits generated from the joint-programme? ·       Do stakeholders have sufficient knowledge and capacity from the joint-programme to continue the benefit? ·       Does the joint programme have an exit strategy? To what extent have the key stakeholders and beneficiaries have been consulted about the exit strategy and joint-programme sustainability? ·       Will the Programme Steering Committee, or an equivalent platform for coordinating on migration issues, continue to operate after the conclusion of the project? ·       What lessons were learned from programme implementation that could inform future programmes or initiatives?
Cross-cutting theme	·       To what extent did the programme address issues of equity and inclusion (including disability inclusion); the enjoyment of human rights by impacted rights-holders; the advancement of gender equality and empowerment of women and girls; and the advancement of children’s rights and meeting their needs? ·       To what extent does GCM guiding principles (notably human rights, gender-responsive, and child sensitive (markers); as well as the whole-of-government, whole-of-society and people-centred approaches) considered in implementing programme activities? ·       To what extent is the principle of leave no one behind incorporated into the joint-programme cycle (design, implementation, monitoring and reporting)? ·       How has the project supported vertical and horizontal integration of migration issues and coherent policy processes?

 

6     Evaluation methodology

The evaluation methodology will include the qualitative approach to gain the understanding of the joint programme performance against each output and outcome indicator by considering the identified assumptions and risks. The project Theory of Change will be used as the basis for contribution analysis. This final evaluation should combine a variety of data collection methods and sources. The evaluation process will be participatory, encompassing the active involvement of all relevant programme stakeholders and partners. A noteworthy recommendation underscores the importance of actively engaging and including civil society, migrants, communities throughout the evaluation process, as well as the established Project Steering Committee. Furthermore, data collection methods and processes should be gender-responsive and data should be systematically disaggregated by sex and, to the extent possible, disaggregated by age, geographical region, ethnicity, disability, migratory status and other contextually relevant markers of equity. Specific guidelines should be observed, namely the UNEG guidance on Integrating Human Right and Gender Equality in Evaluations (2014) and UN Disability Inclusion Strategy Evaluation Accountability (2022).

 

The methods will also include a range of data sources will include a wide range of data sources, including documents, field visits and observation, institutional information systems, financial records, beneficiaries, staff, funders, experts, government officials, and community groups. Source and methods of information will be triangulated to ensure robust findings that can be used with confidence. IOM, UNDP and UN Women will provide the necessary documentation while the additional data collection will be done through in-person/online interviews. The proposed evaluation incorporates a combination of data collection methods, which will be utilized pending discussions with the chosen evaluators and a review of their inception report:

• A desk review of all relevant documents including such as: joint programme proposal, progress reports, activity reports, etc.
• Semi-structured interviews with IOM, UNDP, UN Women, and UNRCO staff involved in the joint programme implementation.
• Interviews and/or focus group discussions with government counterparts, other relevant stakeholders, partners, and beneficiaries of the joint programme.

 

7        Ethics, norms and standards for evaluation

IOM, UNDP, and UN Women abide by the Norms and Standards of UNEG. IOM Indonesia expects the consultant to be familiar and compliant with ethical conduct guidelines, codes of conduct of UNEG, and the “UNEG, Resource Pack on Joint Evaluations, 2014”. The evaluation must be conducted in accordance with IOM Data Protection Principles. It should also be guided by IOM’s Evaluation Policy, M&E guidelines, quality management guidance and refer to IOM guidelines for evaluators as well as IOM Evaluation Portal.

 

8        Evaluation deliverables

An inception report will be prepared by the consultant and shared with the Evaluation Manager. This inception report consists of  an evaluation matrix, theory of change, methodology, work plan, and other data collection tools to describe the consultant’s understanding of the TOR. This document will be for the Evaluation Management Group (EMG consists of IOM, UNDP, UN Women, and UN RCO) to discuss and provide feedback prior to the finalization for the data collection phase.

 

Following the data collection phase, the consultant should prepare a brief PowerPoint presentation of the initial findings and tentative conclusions and recommendations. This will be used to debrief the Evaluation Manager and EMG to identify and dress any misinterpretations or gaps.

 

Building on the debrief and initial feedback received, a draft report will be prepared by the consultant utilizing the agreed outline. The Evaluation Manager and EMG will review and provide feedback on the draft report to be incorporated by the consultant.

 

A final report, around 20-25 pages without annexes, will be submitted to Evaluation Manager in line with the agreed outline. The report will follow the logic and information described in the IOM Project Handbook template for evaluation report. Annexes should include the TOR, inception report, the lists of documents reviewed, the list of people interviewed or consulted, and the data collection instruments.

 

The consultant should develop a two-page evaluation brief to summarize the key findings, conclusions, and recommendations. IOM will provide template of the brief.

 

Once the final report and two-page evaluation brief have been finalized by the Evaluation Manager, the consultant should fill in a draft Management Response Matrix. The consultant should elaborate the recommendations and tentative timeframe or deadline of the key actions. The Evaluation Manager will be responsible for finalizing the matrix in coordination with the EMG.

 

A presentation of findings should be conducted by the consultant upon report finalization to disseminate the key findings and recommendations to the relevant stakeholders.

 

All deliverables are to be written in English and follow the project branding.

 

9     Specifications of roles

As the convening organization, IOM will take the primary role to coordinate and manage the evaluation of the joint programme. IOM will work with the consultant, Evaluation Manager, Evaluation Management Group, and Evaluation Reference Group in which roles are described as follows:

Consultant:

• Develop the evaluation methodology and data collection tools.
• With the support from the Evaluation Manager coordinate with the stakeholders for the data collection.
• Provide periodic feedback, if necessary, to the EMG on the progress and challenges encountered.
• Prepare and conduct the data collection and analysis, as well as reporting activities of the final evaluation.
• Partially fill in the management response matrix.
• Prepare and deliver the inception report, brief PowerPoint presentation, draft report, final report, two-pager evaluation brief, and presentation of findings and recommendations.

 

Evaluation Manager:

• Provide consultant with access to all relevant documents, facilitating the initial preparations especially identifying and contacting relevant stakeholders and beneficiaries.
• Arrange consultant logistics including access to IOM email address and SharePoint.
• Assist in addressing challenges encountered by the consultants in coordination with the EMG.
• Final quality control including the use of IOM quality control tools for both inception and evaluation reports.

 

Evaluation Management Group:

• Reviewing and ensuring the quality of evaluation process and deliverables in accordance with UNEG ethics, norms, and standards, as well as the policies and guidance of each respective agency.
• Assist the Evaluation Manager in addressing the challenges encountered by the consultant.

 

Evaluation Reference Group[7]:

• Follow a preliminary inception meeting with the EM and EMG regarding the evaluation plans.
• Provide feedback to EM and EMG throughout the evaluation process, as necessary.
• Participate in the brief PowerPoint presentation and participate in the presentation of findings.

 

10      Time schedule

The final evaluation is expected to take 45 working days, including preparation, data collection, analysis, and report writing. The consultancy will start per 3 June 2024 and must be completed by 7 August 2024. The precise dates will be confirmed with the appointed consultant. Under the overall supervision of the EM and EMG, the consultant will perform the following actions:

 

Activity	Responsible party	Number of days	Timing
Inception phase: ·       Kick-off meeting. ·       Exchange of and review relevant project documents. ·       Preparation of a detailed inception report, including the evaluation matrix, methodology, work plan, and other data collection tools. ·       Review and approval of the inception report.	·       EM and EMG ·       Consultant and EM ·       Consultant ·       EM, EMG, and ERG	10 days	Inception report submission: 14 June 2024
Data collection phase: ·       Conduct desk review, interview, focus group discussion with relevant partners, stakeholders, and beneficiaries. ·       Regular updates to EM.	·       Consultant, in coordination with EM   ·       Consultant	15 days	18-8 July 2024
Reporting phase: ·       Initial data analysis and present a brief PowerPoint presentation. ·       Drafting the evaluation report. ·       Review of the draft evaluation report ·       Incorporation of feedback on the final report ·       Submit a two-page evaluation brief ·       Fill out draft management response matrix ·       Presentation of findings	·       Consultant   ·       Consultant ·       EM and EMG   ·       Consultant   ·       Consultant ·       Consultant and EM ·       Consultant, attended by EM, EMG, and ERG	20 days	·     Draft Report: 26 July 2024 ·     Brief PowerPoint presentation: 29 July 2024 ·     Final Report: two-page evaluation brief, and draft management matrix: 7 August 2024

 

11      Evaluation budget

IOM will cover the external evaluator’s fee. Budgets for duty travel, including accommodation, logistics for field travel, and translation, are included and will be the responsibility of each PUNO relevant to the evaluation activities at the national and sub-national levels.

 

12      Qualifications or Specialized Knowledge/experiences required:

Education, experience, and/or skills required.

• Indonesian National with good knowledge and understanding of migration topic in Indonesia.
• At least a master’s degree in relevant discipline (social science, political science, international relations, economics, sociology, public policy, international development) or a bachelor’s degree in combination with two additional years of qualifying experience.
• Minimum of five years of experience conducting evaluations, preferably for migration related context.
• Demonstrated understanding of migration topics, including GCM, migration governance, trafficking-in-persons, labour migration as well as other cross cutting topic as human rights-based programming, results-based management, gender analysis.
• Strong background and expertise in conducting qualitative data analysis.
• Knowledge of evaluation norms, standards, and ethical principles.
• Experience working with IOM and/or UN agencies is an advantage.
• Excellent analytical, oral, and written communication skills in English.

 

13      Reporting Lines (Type of supervision that will be provided)

The Consultant will work under the direct supervision of the IOM Indonesia’s National Programme Officer, with the overall supervision of the Programme Support Officer . The NPO will ensure to provide timely comments on the consultant’s work and address any consultant’s request (i.e., additional information, government contacts, etc.)

 

14      Required documents

The consultant will need to submit a technical and financial proposal in ENGLISH. Each submission must include the following:

• Technical Proposal with a detailed profile of consultant (education, certification, previous work experience), methodology, proposed work plan/module outlines, sample of output used in each phase and processes of implementation, sample of previous work (report/training module).
• Financial Proposal listing all costs associated with the assignment in local currency (IDR). In particular, the financial proposal should itemize the following:
  • Consultancy fees including additional supporting resources person per day/activity.

 

 

15      General Terms and Conditions

Consultants should not assign, transfer, pledge, sub-contract or make other disposition of the consultancy contract or any part thereof, or of any of the Consultant’s rights, claims or obligations under the consultancy contract except with the prior written consent of the Organization, in conjunction with HRM. Therefore, only in limited circumstances, when approved in advance.

 

16      Evaluation

The technical proposals of Individual consultant shall be evaluated based on the following criteria and sub-criteria:

(i) Specific experience of the Service Providers/ Consulting Firms relevant to the assignment:
	Points
a)      Candidate qualification & competence (education, certification)	(5)
b)      Experience (previous experience & sample of previous work)	(10)
c)      Knowledge of the candidate on the project (relevancy of the proposal)	(5)
Total points for criterion (ii):	(20)

 

(ii) Adequacy of the proposed methodology and work plan in response to the Vacancy Notice

	Points
a)   Methodology and Framework	(15)
b)   Work plan	(5)
Total points for criterion (ii):	(20)

 

Only candidate whose proposal having minimum score of technical proposal 25 (point (i) and (ii)) will be invited to present & clarify the proposal in an interview.

(iii) Interview

• methodology & time frame                (25)
• consultant experiences & background                (20)
• presentation & clarification to the submitted proposal                (15)

Total point of Technical Proposal & Presentation (points (i), (ii) and (iii))                      (100)

 

The final assessment will be considered based on the following points:

• Technical Proposal & Presentation – 80 %
• Financial – 20 %

Combine Score

:

(Technical Proposal & Presentation x 80%)

+  {

100 X the lowest financial proposal amongst the candidates the Price of the Financial Proposal under consideration

X 20%}

 

The consultant achieving the highest combined technical and financial score will be invited for negotiations.

[1] World Bank. (2017). Indonesia’s Global Workers: Juggling Opportunities and Risks. Jakarta. Available at https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/28937

[2] Ibid, World Bank, Indonesia’s Global Workers: Juggling Opportunities and Risk (Jakarta, 2017).

[3] BP2MI, “Data pekerja migran Indonesia – periode tahun 2021a“ [Data on Indonesian migrant workers – 2021 reporting period], report (Jakarta, 2021). Available at www.bp2mi.go.id/uploads/statistik/images/data_11-04-2022_Laporan_Publikasi_Tahun_2021_Final_23022022. pdf.

[4] https://bp2mi.go.id/uploads/statistik/images/data_20-03-2023_Laporan_Publikasi_Tahun_2022_-_FIX_.pdf

[5] World Bank, Indonesia’s Global Workers: Juggling Opportunities and Risk (Jakarta, 2017). Available at https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/ handle/10986/28937.

[6]Ibid

[7] Stakeholder engagement and reference groups are recommended for complex evaluations, multi-country and multi programme with wide range of stakeholders. ERG refers to the relevant stakeholders and partners, including civil society, migrants, and communities. This group is established to promote participative approach.

17. How to apply

Interested candidates are invited to submit their applications in ENGLISH, with:

1. Cover letter, clearly specify suitability and availability date, followed by your updated curriculum vitae / resume.
2. Complete the Personal History Form which can be downloaded at the following link: https://indonesia.iom.int/sites/g/files/tmzbdl1491/files/Personal%20History%20Form.xls
3. Detailed curriculum vitae and minimum three referees (preferably direct supervisors).
4. Please submit other required document as mentioned in point 11 and please find below template of technical proposal.

Please submit your application through email to [email protected] indicating the reference code above CFCV/ID10/2024/030 as subject or this link. The deadline for applications is 17 May 2024. Candidates applying for this vacancy are required to declare whether they have relatives already working for IOM.

Only applicant who meet the above qualification will be considered