Result of Service

Evaluations at ESCWA strive to demonstrate the difference made by its work and its impact on member States and their citizens. This evaluation will aim to determine how the work undertaken in debt swap project contributed to achieving its intended results, the pathway to these results, and the elements that contributed most significantly to their achievement. It will also consider any unintended results — positive or negative — that emerged during implementation.

Work Location

Remotely

Expected duration

4 Months

Duties and Responsibilities

1. Background and Objective Fiscal stress is high for most of the Arab Middle-Income Countries (MICs) that are suffering from high debt burdens and for the Arab Least Developed Countries (LDCs) that rely heavily on aid and external debt finance. While increasing revenue, mobilization remains a challenge for most countries in the region, the high share of revenues being spent on debt servicing further limits fiscal space for expenditures on development needs, especially for addressing vulnerabilities to climate risks, economic shocks and progressing on the SDGs for the poorest and the most vulnerable populations. This is particularly concerning since the region faces a dual challenge in climate finance flows: the quantity and the quality (composition) of climate finance received does not meet the region’s needs and priorities.2 Existing financing flows are also unequally distributed among Arab countries. In addition, climate finance mobilization is more difficult for countries that face high fiscal stress and require greater concessionally and grant finance. The adverse impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, recent interest rate hikes, inflationary pressures and the war in Ukraine add to the pressure on public budgets, especially for those middle-income countries who are honoring debt service payments and are ineligible to benefit from the G20 debt service suspension initiative or the common framework of debt treatment.3 Given this background, member States need to consider innovative instruments of financing, such as ESCWA’s “Climate/SDGs Debt Swap – Donor Nexus Initiative4”. Launched in December 2020, the ESCWA’s “Climate/SDGs Debt Swap – Donor Nexus Initiative” aims to help countries reduce external debt service burdens and generate fiscal space for investing in climate action while accelerating the implementation of the Paris Agreement and the 2030 Agenda. The Initiative in particular focuses on the region’s middle-income countries who do not face unsustainable debt burdens, but who have high debt service burdens that limit fiscal space to finance climate action and SDGs. A debt swap converts national debt-serving payments on foreign debt into domestic investment for implementing climate-resilient projects through collaborative arrangements between debtors, creditors and donors. For debtor countries, it provides relief from the payment of debt service, while increasing sustainable public investment in climate/SDGs-debt-swap programme that advances the SDGs and the Paris Agreement. For creditors, the amount of the debt swap allocated for climate-resilient projects advances meeting climate finance pledges/official development assistance disbursement, while also ensures debtor’s expenditure commitment to climate action/ SDGs through public budgets. While debt swaps are not a novel concept, the ESCWA’s Initiative looks beyond traditional approaches to debt-for-nature swap5. The Initiative has the potential to achieve a transformational impact as it employs a pioneering approach that (a) links the Initiative to a Key Performance Indicators (KPI) Framework for selection, monitoring and evaluation of climate/SDGs programme; (b) establishes an inter-ministerial Task Force to develop the nationally owned Climate/SDGs Debt Swap Programmes; and (c) brings in the CSO perspective by ensuring their participation throughout the process. The goal of the project is to enhance the operationalization of “Debt Swap – Donor Nexus Initiative” towards improving climate action and economic justice to accelerate the implementation of the Paris Agreement and the 2030 Agenda. To achieve this goal, the project has articulated three Specific Objectives: 1. National and international development actors in selected Arab States are better able to mobilize finance for Climate/SDGs Debt Swap Programmes 2. National actors have enhanced capacity to monitor and evaluate Climate/SDGs Debt Swap Programmes in accordance with a KPI Framework 3. Governments across the region and elsewhere have increased awareness to develop and monitor Climate/SDGs Debt Swap Programmes 2. Duties and Responsibilities Purpose of the Evaluation Evaluations at ESCWA strive to demonstrate the difference made by its work and its impact on member States and their citizens. This evaluation will aim to determine how the work undertaken in debt swap project contributed to achieving its intended results, the pathway to these results, and the elements that contributed most significantly to their achievement. It will also consider any unintended results — positive or negative — that emerged during implementation. The evaluation will serve three main purposes:

Evidence-based decision-making: Provide a foundation for strategic planning and risk management.
Accountability: Demonstrate performance and results to ESCWA’s Executive and member States, in line with the Commission’s mandate.
Organizational learning: Identify lessons learned and actionable recommendations to strengthen future ESCWA projects in debt swap and innovative financing instruments. The evaluation will be conducted in accordance with ESCWA’s Evaluation Policy (2025) and the UNEG Norms and Standards for Evaluation. Scope of the Evaluation The evaluation will be forward-looking and will objectively and systematically assess the performance of the project in terms of its relevance, coherence, effectiveness, efficiency, impact, and sustainability. Furthermore, the evaluation will assess the extent to which gender, human rights, disability inclusion, environmental concerns, and other cross-cutting issues were incorporated or mainstreamed into the project. The evaluation will cover the period from 1 April 2023 to 31 December 2026, and will capture any project activities conducted in Q1 2027. Evaluation Criteria The following key evaluation questions per criteria will guide the evaluation. The evaluator is expected to refine evaluation questions where necessary and to include the refinement in the Inception Report. Relevance
How did the project team determine the strategic needs and priorities of member States in its project design?
How were the intended results of the project aligned with the strategic needs and priorities of member States, the sustainable development goals, and national and regional development agendas?
How were the identified results aligned with other stakeholders’ strategic needs and priorities?
How was the log frame translated to ensure that the activities carried out were relevant and contributed to achievement of the intended result(s)?
How were planned and implemented activities designed and sequenced to ensure a conscious consideration of the intended result? Effectiveness
What evidence is available to support the achievement of the results identified?
Which of the activities undertaken by the project team directly contributed to the identified results? How did these activities contribute to the results?
To what degree can the achievement of results be attributed to the intervention?
How did the work of stakeholders contribute to the achievement of the identified results?
Which other factors have contributed to the achievement of the identified results?
Would the results have been achieved regardless of the project being implemented?
How were key partnerships integrated in the delivery of the project to maximise the achievement of results? Efficiency
Were the planned activities considered and delivered with the end results in mind? How did this shape the process?
What, if any, adjustments were made during the project to optimize the achievement of results?
What, if any, considerations were made in terms of the most efficient way of delivering activities (choice of modality, expertise available, etc.)
To what extent were partnerships leveraged and/or enhanced to utilize additional strategic expertise? Impact
What, if any, high-level effects did the project cause (such as changes in norms or systems)?
How did the project ensure that all the intended target groups, including the most disadvantaged and vulnerable, benefitted equally from the intervention?
How transformative was the project – did it create enduring changes in norms – including gender norms – and systems, whether intended or not?
To what extent did the intervention lead to other changes, including “scalable” or “replicable” results? Sustainability
Given a similar context, could the identified results of the project be replicated?
Which of the activities identified as contributing to the identified results of the project provided ongoing benefits for stakeholders?
What evidence is available to indicate that the results of the project can be maintained by stakeholders? Gender, Human Rights, Disability Inclusion, and Environmental Issues
To what extent were issues of gender, human rights, disability inclusion, and the environment incorporated into the design, planning, implementation, and monitoring and evaluation practices of the project, as well as the results achieved? Evaluation Methodology The evaluator is expected to identify the main results achieved through the project, as established by both the project team and key stakeholders, and develop a Theory of Change (ToC) for these results. The causal links postulated in the ToC should then be used to theorise a plausible causal mechanism, which should be tested using all available evidence, to evaluate the influence of ESCWA’s work on results achieved through the project. The evaluator is expected to ensure a mixed method (qualitative and quantitative), inclusive and participatory approach, with adequate triangulation across methods, to arrive at credible, reliable, and unbiased findings. The evaluator will also ensure that all aspects of the evaluation are gender and human rights sensitive (including a special focus on the rights with person with disabilities). In addition, the evaluator must ensure that they always comply with the UNEG Ethical Guidelines for Evaluation during the conduct of the evaluation. The above methodology is indicative. The evaluator is expected to build upon it and present a robust evaluation methodology within the inception report, including addressing and refining the evaluation questions. Management and Governance Arrangements SPARK will oversee management of the evaluation through an evaluation officer/s, who will act as the evaluation manager/s. This role will include recruiting the evaluator/s; serving as the main port-of-call for the evaluator/s and for internal and external stakeholders; recording the feedback of the project team and effectively integrating it into the evaluation exercise; monitoring the budget and the correct implementation of the work-plan; ensuring quality assurance; etc. The support of the organization and project’s senior management is key for the success of the evaluation, particularly during the recruitment of the evaluator/s, collection of documents for desk review, identification of stakeholders and arrangement of interviews, focus groups or surveys. Quality Assurance Mechanism The evaluator will employ a quality assurance mechanism of her/his preference (either an internal or an external system can be used), which will provide quality checks throughout the evaluation process. This quality assurance mechanism will be indicated in the Inception Report and in the Final Evaluation Report. In addition, ESCWA will review the evaluation report prior to finalization to ensure that it aligns with the UNEG Quality Checklist for Evaluation Reports , particularly with reference to the quality of recommendations. Evaluation Ethics The evaluation will be conducted in accordance with the principles outlined in the UNEG Ethical Guidelines for Evaluation; and all rights and confidentiality of information providers will be prioritized and safeguarded as per UNEG Ethical Guidelines for Evaluation.

Qualifications/special skills

A Master's degree in management, evaluation, or related area is required. All candidates must submit a copy of the required educational degree. Incomplete applications will not be reviewed. A minimum of five years’ experience undertaking impact evaluations, including of projects and/or evaluations working with Arab governmental bodies, is required. Work experience in debt policy, finance issues is desirable. Excellent oral and written communication skills and the ability to effectively convey complex information in a clear and concise manner to both governmental and UN audiences is desirable.

Proven competency in quantitative and qualitative research methods, particularly self-administered surveys, document analysis, and informal and semi-structured interviews is required.
Advanced university degree (master’s degree or equivalent) in social sciences, development studies, management, international relations, economics or any other related field.

Languages

English and French are the working languages of the United Nations Secretariat; and Arabic is a working language of ESCWA. For this position, fluency in English is required. Fluency in Arabic is desirable. Note: “Fluency” equals a rating of ‘fluent’ in all four areas (speak, read, write, and understand) and “Knowledge of” equals a rating of ‘confident’ in two of the four areas.

No Fee

THE UNITED NATIONS DOES NOT CHARGE A FEE AT ANY STAGE OF THE RECRUITMENT PROCESS (APPLICATION, INTERVIEW MEETING, PROCESSING, OR TRAINING). THE UNITED NATIONS DOES NOT CONCERN ITSELF WITH INFORMATION ON APPLICANTS’ BANK ACCOUNTS.

Evaluation of Extra Budget Project – To enhance the operationalization of the “Climate/SDGs Debt Swap – Donor Nexus Initiative”