Consultancy: Final evaluation of UPR Info’s 2020-22 In-country Programme

Consultancy: Final evaluation of UPR Info’s 2020-22 In-country Programme

La date limite pour postuler est passée.


UPR Info

  • Location: Home-based with travel to Geneva, Switzerland and possibly to one or more of the target countries of the programme
  • Timeframe of the consultancy: Between August- September 2022
  • Amount of working days: 25 days

UPR Info is an international NGO, headquartered in Geneva, Switzerland founded in 2008 since the inception of the Universal Periodic Review mechanism. The organization role is to promote all human rights for everyone by strengthening multi-stakeholder engagement in the UPR process. This means that we seek to work with all UPR actors where possible, including the government, civil society, journalists, NHRIs, parliamentarians, and international organisations. A defining feature of our engagement with partners is that we seek to amplify national voices and efforts with technical expertise on the UPR, as well as sharing good practices that we have learnt from over a decade of experience in this area. UPR Info is now seeking qualified applicants to conduct the final evaluation of UPR Info’s 2020-2022 In-country Programme in 2022.

Programme Background

UPR Info has been implementing the “2020-2022 In-country Programme” hereafter ‘the project’ over three years. The overall objective of the project is to utilize the UPR to effectively implement human rights obligations and commitments through building the capacity of in-country stakeholders to effectively engage in human rights through the mechanism and creating cooperation between various stakeholders. To support all stakeholders to continue their work on the promotion and protection of human rights in the most effective way, UPR Info has identified five entry points in the UPR process. In the first step, stakeholders are supported through a technical workshop to submit reports on the human rights situation in the country to the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR). In the second step, the in-country pre-sessions, a national advocacy platform, provides space for civil society and the National Human Rights Institution to share first-hand information on the human rights situation with local embassies to enable them to formulate context-based recommendations. In the third step a strategy workshop is organised to debrief with civil society and National Human Rights Institution on the adoption and identify how they can contribute to and monitor the implementation of received recommendations. The fourth step has a multi-stakeholder approach. The activities within this step contribute to strengthen the coordination of different national actors’, including the government, parliamentarians, NHRI and CSOs, to engage effectively in the implementation of UPR recommendations. And finally, the fifth step, civil society, NHRI and the government are offered with the opportunity to attend a technical session on how to draft a mid-term report taking stock of the implementation rate and present solutions to overcome implementation obstacles. The programme has been implemented in the following countries:  DRC, Guinea, Ivory Coast, Madagascar, South Africa, Togo, Bangladesh, Cambodia, Georgia, Kyrgyzstan, and Nepal.

Evaluation Overview

The primary users of the evaluation report will be UPR Info’s staff and the donors of the programme who will use the findings, and recommendations, of the evaluation to assess the results achieved by the programme and inform the design of the next phase of the In-Country Programme. As the final programme evaluation, this exercise primarily aims to take stock of the results through the relevance, effectiveness and efficiency of the activities implemented under the umbrella of the programme. This includes reviewing whether the activities were delivered; presenting the results achieved; identifying successful strategies and obstacles; and proving recommendations to feed into the organization learning and decision-making process. The evaluation should have a strong learning objective in that it should reflect on what has worked and what has not worked so well, and identify lessons and ways to enhance the relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, impact and sustainability of the subsequent stages of UPR Info’s in-country engagements.

Evaluation criteria and lines of inquiry

A meeting will be organized with the consultant on more specific focus questions assessing the programme.


  1. To what extent were programme activities relevant to meet the objectives of the programme?
  2. To what extent did the programme activities serve the needs of civil society organisations?
  3. To what extent did participants in project activities enhance their understanding of the UPR process?
  4. To what extent did participants in programme activities improve their capacity to engage with the UPR to achieve their advocacy goals? To what extent were they able to apply newly gained knowledge from programme activities in their work?
  5. How, if at all, did UPR Info’s partner organisations benefit from taking part in the programme and co-organising programme activities?


  1. To what extent did participants in the training enhance their engagement in the UPR (drafting of reports, advocacy)?
  2. What were the major factors that influenced the achievements?
  3. What challenges did UPR Info face in the implementation of activities?
  4. Give advice on how the expected accomplishments of the project could have been more effectively achieved.
  5. To what extent did the partnerships developed contributed to the realization of the planned activities? 


  1. Were the human and financial resources allocated to the programme appropriate to its scale?
  2. Were the human and financial resources allocated to the project used efficiently and commensurate to the project results?
  3. Were the activities implemented in a cost-efficient manner?
  4. Were the activities delivered in accordance with the initial timeline?
  5. Could a different approach have produced better results?

Indications on impact and sustainability

  1. To what extent did the target groups acknowledge the potential of using the UPR mechanism to promote human rights?
  2. Have the target groups enlarged their activities around the UPR as a result of participating in the programme?
  3. To what extent were capacities strengthened at the individual and organizational level within UPR Info and organisations participating in the programme?
  4. Did the collaboration with the national focal points contribute to making the programme more sustainable?
  5. Describe the main lessons that have emerged.

This exercise will highlight the positive and negative changes produced by the programme, directly or indirectly, intended or unintended. The evaluation will explore to what extend the capacity-building activities lead under the in-country programme contribute to strengthen the national partner at the institutional level. UPR Info will review the methodology proposed by the evaluator(s) at the preparation phase. Ideally, it will include (i) a desk review of project documents and records (including the project proposal, results from the framework, project progress reports, and various records containing monitoring data); and (ii) in-country data collection/field visits, as necessary and possible. The primary data should involve mixed quantitative and qualitative research methods, and include activities such as interviews with donors, staff from UPR Info and partner organisations under the programme. Additional sources of data may come from focus group discussions and key informant interviews. The evaluation will strive to use a participatory approach within its methodology and analysis.

Evaluation Implementation

UPR Info staff will provide technical and logistical support as appropriate throughout the evaluation process (compilation of project documents, assisting with scheduling meetings if desired, feedback on the methodology, etc.). A total of up to 25 working days between August and September 2022 will be available for:

  • Evaluation preparation (including finalising the evaluation methodology, performing the initial desk review of project materials, creating data collection tools, and drafting a brief inception note);
  • On-site and remote data collection (including travel to Geneva, Switzerland and to one or more of the target countries, as necessary and possible);
  • Data analysis and synthesis (including transcription, data aggregation, draft report, presenting findings to UPR Info, and incorporating UPR Info’s feedback into a final report).

The planned output for this final programme evaluation will include:

  • A brief inception note including an evaluation plan (due to UPR Info for approval within the first 5 working days);
  • A draft report detailing key findings, supporting evidence, and concrete recommendations (on an agreed date);
  • One brief oral presentation of key findings with relevant UPR Info staff (just after submitting the draft report); and,
  • A final report incorporating all relevant feedback, including a factsheet (due on 1st October 2022).

UPR Info will be providing a management response to the evaluation. The final report should provide brief, clear and pragmatic conclusions and recommendations, in response to the evaluation questions. A factsheet summarising the main findings and recommendations should accompany the final report, to feed discussions on current and future programming with all concerned stakeholders.

Application Guidelines

The selected consultant or team of consultants should have demonstrated experience in result-based programme evaluation and practical experience in human rights programming. Additional information about desired qualifications is listed below:

  • Strong ability to communicate effectively in English and French, both verbally and in writing;
  • Master’s degree in international law, international relations, human rights, social sciences, political sciences or related field;
  • Minimum 8 years of experience in designing, implementing and overseeing project evaluations or combination of education, training and experience;
  • Experience with qualitative and quantitative M&E data collection and analysis methods;
  • Experience in working in politically sensitive countries and ability to maintain security and confidentiality considerations throughout the evaluation process and beyond;
  • Inter-cultural communication skills;
  • Strong facilitation, presentation, and communication skills;
  • Team player with the ability to closely collaborate with staff at headquarters, local partners, and project stakeholders.

Interested applicants must provide their application by June 17th, 2022 to Interested applicants should provide a current CV and a maximum 3-page technical proposal. The proposal should clearly outline (i) the candidate’s key skills and experience that are relevant to this evaluation; (ii) a concise description of the desired evaluation approach and key principles that will inform her/his work; (iii) an identification of possible data limitations and ways to mitigate them (recognizing that the applicant is operating with only the limited information provided herein); (iv) a short cost justification – including daily rate; (v) the names and contact information for two recent references. Note that UPR Info may ask for examples of previous work after reviewing the application materials.

Budget Guidelines

The estimated budget for this evaluation should not exceed CHF 25,000. This figure includes all costs relevant to the evaluation, including the consultant’s daily rate, meals and incidentals expenses, travels (meeting in Geneva with UPR Info team and in-country where UPR Info has been active), accommodation, per diem, interpreters, communication expenses, etc. Please note that payment in full will not be made until all project deliverables have been received and verified as meeting UPR Info’s expectations. Value for money will be a consideration in the selection process.