91�鶹������Ʒ����

Call for proposals for the review and evaluation of the

Asia Pacific Centre of Education for International Understanding (APCEIU)

UNESCO Category 2 Centre

1.Background

Category 2 Institutes and centres under the auspices of UNESCO are a global network of institutions of excellence in the Organization’s domain of competence. Given their expertise, these institutes and centres contribute in a meaningful way to the implementation of UNESCO’s priorities, programmes and global development agendas during a defined period, through international and regional cooperation, research, knowledge production, policy advice, and capacity development. Although independent of UNESCO, category 2 institutes and centres are privileged partners of the Organization with access to UNESCO’s logo, international and intergovernmental bodies and networks, and may leverage UNESCO’s international reach and convening powers. 

Following  adopted by UNESCO’s General Conference at its 30th session, the Asia Pacific Centre of Education for International Understanding (APCEIU) in the Republic of Korea was established as a Category 2 Centre under the auspices of UNESCO through an agreement between the Organization and the Government of the Republic of Korea in August 2000. The agreement was subsequently renewed in August 2005, in August 2010, August 2011 and October 2019 for a period of six years until December 2025. The latest evaluation of APCEIU was conducted in 2017, covering the period from 2010 to 2016. 

In order to renew the agreement, an evaluation of the centre must be carried out in conformity with the , and presented to UNESCO’s Intersectoral Review Committee, followed by the Executive Board for consideration for decision making in view of a renewal.

Located in Seoul, ROK, the Asia Pacific Centre of Education for International Understanding (APCEIU) aims to support: 

• Capacity development for Education for International Understanding and Global Citizenship Education (GCED) in the Asia and Pacific region as well as globally,

• Promote and develop education for international understanding and global citizenship, with a view to promoting a culture of peace in the Asia Pacific region,

• Strengthen international, regional, and sub-regional capacities in planning and implementing a broad range of practices in education for international understanding and global citizenship education,

• Encourage and facilitate collaborative links between Asia-Pacific initiatives and other regional, international and global efforts in education,

• Carry out research and development related to the philosophy, teaching methods, and curricula in the field of education for international understanding and global citizenship,

• Organize training workshops, conferences and seminars on education for international understanding and global citizenship education; 

• Produce and disseminate teaching/learning materials and other publication on education for international understanding and global citizenship education

• Promote the 1974 Recommendation concerning education for International Understanding, Co-operation and Peace and education relating to Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms; 

• Facilitate information-sharing and exchange on education for international understanding and GCED and disseminate relevant information to education authorities in the region and make readily available such material to the trainees of the Centre in English and UN working languages,

• Foster collaborative initiatives and maintain links with key stakeholders in education for international understanding and GCED nationally, regionally and internationally, with a view to support the implementation of the Sustainable Development Goal 4 and specifically target 4.7 on GCED and undertake any other activities necessary to strengthen Education for International Understanding and Global Citizenship Education regionally and internationally. ​

Within this background, the UNESCO Regional Office for East Asia, located in Beijing, People’s Republic of China, is seeking an individual consultant to evaluate the Centre with the intention of renewing the agreement.

2.Purpose and Scope of the Evaluation 

The objective of the evaluation is to examine the status and achievements of APCEIU as a category 2 Centre under the auspices of UNESCO (2019-2025) and provide recommendations on the renewal of the agreement between UNESCO and the government of the Republic of Korea in relation to APCEIU. The evaluation is part of the statutory process as required by the . 

In particular, the independent external evaluation should consider the following parameters: 

1. The extent to which the centre’s objectives as set out in the agreement signed with UNESCO were achieved;

2. The relevance of the contribution of the centre’s programmes and activities to the achievement of UNESCO’s prevailing Approved Programme and Budget (40- 42 C/5) at the time in which it was designated, including global strategies (C4) and action plans as well as sectoral programme priorities, as defined in the agreement; 

3. The relevance of the contribution of the activities of the centre to global development agendas, including the Agenda 2030 and LNOB with a focus on education for international understanding and GCED to achieve progress on SDG Target 4.7;  

4. The quality of coordination and interaction with UNESCO, both at Headquarters and in the field, as well as with National Commissions, other thematically-related category 1 and 2 institutes and centres with regard to planning and implementation of programmes; 

5. The quality of delivery of projects, outputs and outcomes to meet the basic minimum requirements and standards; 

6. How effective were the partnerships developed and maintained with government agencies, public or private partners, UN Agencies, universities and public and private donors of the centre; 

7. The nature and efficiency of the centre’s governance, including organizational arrangements, management, structure, network, human resources and accountability mechanisms; 

8. The financial resources available for ensuring sustainable institutional capacity and viability ;

9. The extent to which the centre enjoys within its territory the autonomy necessary for the execution of its activities and legal capacity to contract, institute legal proceedings, and to acquire and dispose of movable and immovable property; 

10. To what extent the Centre contributes to gender equality and inclusion in education and what monitoring and reporting systems are in place. 

Based on the findings and conclusions, the evaluation shall also formulate recommendations, as appropriate, on how the Centre can reinforce its contribution to UNESCO’s programme. It shall also assess the extent to which the provisions of the current agreement need to be updated in order to be aligned with priorities addressed in SDG 4 – Education 2030 and the provisions of the model agreement in the Strategy for Category 2 Institutes and Centres (2019).  UNESCO is responsible for the overall preparation of the renewal agreement.

3.Roles and Responsibilities

UNESCO’s Education Sector, through its Regional Office for the East Asia, is responsible for the management of the evaluation and contracting of independent expert/s in accordance with its rules and regulations. In consultation with the UNESCO global coordination focal point, and in line with the requirements for renewal evaluation as specified , the Office responsible for developing the terms of reference and for the selection of an independent expert/s who will be contracted for conducting the evaluation and drafting the report. The category 2 centre or the Member State concerned shall cover all costs related to the evaluation.

The conclusions and recommendations of the evaluation will be shared with the category 2 centre and Member State concerned and the report will be made available on the UNESCO Education Sector’s website. The results of the evaluation should be considered by UNESCO’s Intersectoral Review Committee for Category 2 Institutes and serve as the basis for the Director-General’s recommendation to the Executive Board, as to whether the Agreement between UNESCO and the Republic of Korea should be renewed for a maximum period of eight years. It should be noted that once the renewal of the designation and the agreement are approved by the Executive Board, the terms of the draft agreement may no longer be modified.

4.Methodology

In line with  (2022-29), the evaluation will have to comply with the United Nations Evaluation Group (UNEG) , UNEG  and UNEG . The evaluation team will also have to ensure that ethical human rights including LNOB, gender equality and environmental principles are duly integrated at all stages of the evaluation process.

The evaluation methodology shall comprise but not be limited to the following tasks:

1. Conduct desk review of data and documentation, including activity and results reports that will be made available to the consultant by APCEIU and UNESCO. 

2. Conduct initial interviews, Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) and other meetings (remotely, if consultant is not based in the ROK) with the Centre’s stakeholders, including the Centre’s staff and management, implementing partners, strategic partners, beneficiaries, UNESCO staff, other relevant regional offices and institutions.

3. Conduct one on-site evaluation visit (5 working days) to collect data in person through individual interviews, Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) with relevant stakeholders and review of documentation at the Asia-Pacific Centre of Education for International Understanding in Seoul, ROK.  

4. The development/revision/fine-tuning of a Theory of Change will be taken as for the Institute's contribution to refine and improve its objective as related to the mission and goals of UNESCO's mandate

Present the findings of the evaluation and recommendation in the form of an evaluation report and a Power Point presentation. While the bidding evaluation team is free to propose their own methodologies, it is important that they be appropriate to answer the above-mentioned parameters. Preference will be given to proposals that suggest innovative methods and analytical approaches.

5. Deliverables

The evaluation is estimated to require an indicative amount of 20-25 professional working days and shall be completed by 30 August 2024. The independent evaluation consultant is expected to provide the following deliverables: 

     i. An inception report (max 5 pages)

An inception report should include a detailed description of the approach and methodology, as well as an evaluation matrix, draft theory of change and a detailed timetable for the assignment.   [Inception note needs to be validated by the evaluation reference group (the Director and Representative of the UNESCO Beijing Office for East Asia, the Programme Specialist for Education, a representative from APCEIU, Executive Officer of UNESCO HQ/ED, and a representative from UNESCO HQ/IOS).

     ii. Draft evaluation report (maximum 10-15 pages, excluding the executive summary and annexes) 

The draft report shall be structured as follows:

• Executive summary (to be drafted after feedback on the evaluation report), including the recommendations 
• Management response 
• Purpose of the review 
• Scope of the review 
• Methodology 
• Findings, recommendations and conclusions (core part of the report), including an assessment of the centre against each of the criteria of the Strategy and a formal recommendation on the continuation of the category 2 status. The findings, conclusions and recommendations should be structured by evaluation questions and supported by relevant evidence.
• Annexes (including interview list, key documents consulted, Terms of Reference, theory of change, interview protocols, some evidence may also be provided in an annex, bio data of consultant).

The process for preparing the draft evaluation report should allow sufficient time for discussion and validation of the findings and the recommendations with the relevant UNESCO programme sector and pertinent stakeholders, including the government(s) that proposed the designation of the Centre and the Centre itself.

     iii. Validation workshop with key stakeholders (online)

To present, discuss and validate/refine the findings and recommendations.  

     iv. Final evaluation report and executive summary (max. 10-15 pages excluding executive summary and annexes)

The final evaluation report should include the elements mentioned under point 5 ii, including comments from the Evaluation Reference Group. The final evaluation report also includes the Executive Summary. The Executive Summary should be 2 pages max and written in the style of the UNESCO Executive Board Document. 

A presentation for the communication of the findings and recommendations (Evaluation brief, infographics and or Power Point presentation) 

The language of the deliverables is English. 

6. Timeframe/duration

The expected duration of the consultancy is until 30^th August 2024. 

In particular: