Consultancy Midterm Review (two phases) for WWF GEF Seaweed project Viet Nam & Philippines

Organization: World Wide Fund For Nature Closing date: 12 Oct 2026 POSITION DETAILS Project Title: Blue Horizon: Ocean Relief through Seaweed Aquaculture Location: Flexible Preferred time frame: Two phased approach is proposed (see Scope section for details): • Phase 1: Inception period, desktop review, and initial recommendations. To begin as early as late October 2026 and end by late January 2027. • Phase 2: Continued data collection, site visits and delivery of remaining deliverables commence June 2027 and end July/August 2027. Potential site visits: Seaweed farms in Philippines and Viet Nam INTRODUCTION World Wildlife Fund, Inc. (WWF) policies and procedures for all GEF financed full-sized projects require a midterm evaluation (MTE). The following terms of reference (TOR) sets out the expectations for the MTE for the project: Blue Horizon: Ocean Relief through Seaweed Aquaculture hereafter referred to as the “project.” The technical consultant selected to conduct this evaluation will hereafter be referred to as “evaluator.” The project is funded by the Global Environment Facility (GEF) and implemented through WWF-US as the GEF Agency. The project is executed by three partners, namely: 1) SEAFDEC Project Management Unit (PMU); 2) Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (BFAR) of the Philippines; and 3) Department of Fisheries and Surveillance (DFiS) of Viet Nam. The project aims to enhance environmental, social, and economic benefits by developing sustainable seaweed value chains. Seaweed captures carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorus, which helps mitigate ocean eutrophication and acidification, as well as improves habitat for marine life. This project is delivered through four key components. Under Component 1: Regional Approach and Capacity for Seaweed Value Chains in Southeast Asia, the project is developing plans, tools, and training to build capacity and support a regional enabling environment for seaweed aquaculture. Component 2 supports the enabling environment for seaweed aquaculture at the national level in the Philippines and Viet Nam. This includes mapping to ensure proper siting of sustainable seaweed farms, national-level planning, and regulatory frameworks. Component 3 targets barriers faced in seaweed value chains, including production, processing, and marketing. The project will work with farmers and cooperatives to pilot seaweed farms in novel and innovative areas, including offshore seaweed farms, which will serve as proof of concept for seaweed production. The project will integrate standards for safe seaweed production into these seaweed farms. The project will also support new processing initiatives to increase the value of raw seaweed for local farmers. Finally, under Component 4: Knowledge Management, Monitoring and Evaluation, and IW:LEARN, the project is undertaking knowledge sharing, communications, and monitoring and evaluation. As an International Waters project, project activities are monitored and communicated through multiple channels, including IW:LEARN. Regional activities (under Components 1 and 4) commenced on June 30, 2024 by SEAFDEC, while Components 2 and 3 have not yet started. In the Philippines, start-up activities commenced with BFAR, whereas in Viet Nam, a grant agreement with DFiS has not yet been signed. The project was initially intended to be a four-year initiative from 2024 to 2028. However, the implementation timelines for Components 2 and 3 are based on national approval processes and are commencing later than originally anticipated. As a result, additional time is required to ensure the full delivery of project outputs and outcomes, and the project is now expected to conclude in 2030. For more information on the project, please visit: https://www.worldwildlife.org/our-work/funds/wwf-gef/projects/blue-horizon-ocean-relief-through-seaweed-aquaculture/ SCOPE AND OBJECTIVES WWF is seeking an independent consultant to undertake a Midterm Evaluation (MTE) of the Project. The scope of the MTE will cover the WWF GEF financed components. The primary objective of this evaluation is to assess the project’s progress midway through implementation to determine whether it is on track to achieve its intended end-of-project results. The MTE report should contain findings related to the criteria and cross-cutting areas described in Annex A and should result in lessons learned and actionable recommendations that can be applied during the remaining project period. Given the different stages of implementation across the project components, with national-level work under Components 2 and 3 commencing later than the regional and coordination work under Components 1 and 4, the Midterm Evaluation (MTE) will be undertaken in two phases. Phase 1 should provide recommendations focused on Components 1 and 4, as well as strengthening alignment of implementation timelines (at national PMUs), milestones, and reporting processes across the project, while identifying measures to support effective delivery of planned results. Phase 2 will complete the full MTE once Components 2 and 3 have sufficient implementation experience to assess. This phased approach seeks to balance the need for Components 1 and 4 to benefit from timely evaluative feedback with the need for Components 2 and 3 to reach a sufficient level of implementation maturity to generate meaningful evidence and lessons. EVALUATION APPROACH AND METHODS The evaluation will adhere to the relevant guidance, rules and procedures established by WWF and align with guidance from the GEF Terminal Evaluation and Ethical Guidelines. The evaluation must provide evidence‐based information that is independent, participatory, transparent, and ethical. The evaluator must be unbiased and free of any conflicts of interest with the project. The evaluator is expected to reflect all stakeholder views and follow a participatory and consultative approach. There should be close engagement with government counterparts, the GEF operational focal points in each country, the Executing Agency project management unit (PMU), partners and key stakeholders. Contact information will be provided. The evaluation will use a mixed methods approach, drawing on both qualitative and quantitative evidence from secondary and primary sources. At a minimum, methods should include a desk review of project documents and available monitoring data, together with primary data collection in-country through key informant interviews, focus group discussions, and surveys. Please disclose any planned use of AI in the evaluation methodology and note that AI-generated report content is not permitted. The evaluator will refine the methodological design during the inception phase and present a clear evaluation matrix linking evaluation questions, indicators of inquiry, data sources, and data collection methods. The final methodology should ensure appropriate coverage of all major stakeholder groups, including the PMU, Executing Agency, executing partners, government counterparts, GEF Operational Focal Points, and relevant stakeholders across the project geographies. The sampling approach should be gender responsive, socially inclusive, and suited to the project’s multi country and multi-level nature. A full list of stakeholders with contact details will be provided at inception. The evaluation must triangulate findings across multiple methods and data sources. It should make systematic use of existing project documentation and monitoring information, while also assessing the quality and adequacy of that evidence. The evaluator should clearly identify and explain any methodological limitations, data gaps, or constraints affecting the analysis. The Evaluation process will include the following, with deliverables in English marked by “*”: Phase 1. Formative Review Timeline: October 2026 to January 2027. Purpose: Review progress and provide recommendations focused on Components 1 and 4, as well as on strengthening alignment of implementation timelines, milestones, and reporting processes across the project. • Kickoff meeting; • Desk review consisting of, but not limited to: Project Document and CEO Endorsement Letter; M&E Plan Knowledge Management and Communication Strategy Relevant safeguards documents, including the Safeguards Screen and Categorization memo, and the Stakeholder Engagement Plan; Annual Work Plans (AWP) and Budgets; Project Progress Reports (PPR) including Results Framework and AWP Tracking; Gender Action Plan GEF Agency reports, including Project Implementation Reports (PIRs) and Supervision Mission Reports (PrISM or BTORs); Relevant technical deliverables Relevant financial documents, including financial progress reports; co-financing monitoring tables and co-financing letters; Meeting minutes (Project Steering Committee (PSC) and relevant virtual meetings with the WWF- GEF Agency and support team; and Project Activities Reports (SEAFDEC PMU) Other relevant documents provided by the Executing Agency and partners. • Inception Workshop to agree on approach and methods used; • Inception report (draft and final version) that outlines evaluation methodology*, which shall include data sources and data collection procedure, initial list of partners and stakeholders to be contacted for visits and interviews, revised timeline, survey tools or questionnaires to be utilized, Evaluation Matrix with guiding questions, etc.; • Interviews and discussions with Project Steering Committee (PSC) Members, Seaweed Technical Working Group (STWG), PMU and AMU; and • Delivery of Initial Recommendations report* with emphasis on Components 1 and 4 and aspects pertaining to alignment of timelines/reporting across all components of the project and aligning implementation timelines. Reviewed by PMU and WWF-US/ GEF Agency Discussion and action plan to follow during PSC meeting in February. Phase II. Full Midterm Evaluation Phase 2 will commence once Components 2 and 3 have achieved sufficient implementation maturity to allow assessment of progress toward outcomes. The anticipated timing is June through July/August 2027, subject to confirmation by WWF GEF Agency. • Kickoff, review and methodological update of Inception Report. • Desktop Review of new and updated documents, especially those related to Components 2 and 3. • Site visits in Philippines (Palawan and Zamboanga) and Viet Nam (Khanh Hoa and area to be determined) to meet with project parties and observe progress; • Interviews, discussions and consultations (virtual and/or in-person, as preferred) with WWF GEF Agency, PMU and executing partners, GEF Operational Focal Points (OFP), Project Steering Committee (PSC) members, beneficiaries, ASEAN Seaweed Technical Working Group (STWG), SEAFDEC/AQD, Global Seaweed Coalition, IW/LEARN, and others to be specified. • Presentation* of initial findings to WWF-US (GEF), PMU and others as specified; • Draft report* not to exceed 50 pages (excluding annexes) shared with GEF AMU, PMU, PSC, BFAR, DFiS National Focal Points, and OFPs for review and feedback. Note: The evaluator is expected to author the report; the use of artificial intelligence to generate report content is not permitted. Feedback log required for subsequent revisions. A sample outline will be provided; and • Final MTE report* that has incorporated comments, feedback log and data collected from the evaluation. EXPECTED CONTENT OF EVALUATION REPORT The Midterm Evaluation report will include: • Information on the evaluation process, including when the evaluation took place, sites visited, participants, key questions, summary of methodology and rating rubric, and feedback log showing how comments on draft were incorporated; • Assessment of Relevance, including project design and theory of change; • Assessment of Coherence; • Assessment of Effectiveness, including validation of midterm indicator measurements, progress toward outcomes, likelihood of achieving end-of-project results, and potential for results and impact; • Rating of individual outcomes and overall rating based on relevance, coherence, effectiveness, progress toward outcomes, and likelihood of achievement by project completion; Assessment and rating of risks to the Sustainability of project outcomes; • Assessment and rating of Monitoring and Evaluation design and implementation, including the adequacy of adaptive management and use of evidence for course correction; Assessment of knowledge management approach, including activities and products; Assessment of replication and catalytic effects of the project; Assessment of stakeholder engagement and gender-responsive measures; Assessment of any environmental and social impacts and safeguards used for the project. A review of risk category classification and mitigation measures; Assessment of Efficiency, financial management and summary of co-financing delivered; Assessment of Implementation and Execution; Summary rating tables, including justification and/or indicators for their determination; Key lessons tied to identified strengths or issues; Recommendations that include practical and short-term corrective actions by evaluation criteria to address issues and findings; and best practices towards achieving project outcomes, and knowledge sharing / replication for other projects of similar scope. See under Scope and Process headings for the phasing of these recommendations. QUALIFICATIONS OF EVALUATOR(S) Required Qualifications and Experience • Minimum eight years of relevant professional experience related to project monitoring, evaluation and learning. • Previous experience with evaluation methodologies • Excellent written and oral communication in English. Preferred Qualifications and Experience • Recent experience conducting evaluations (for large/multilateral donors is an advantage); • Technical knowledge coastal/marine management, blue economy, fisheries or aquaculture value chains (especially seaweed value chains), or related field a plus; • Familiarity with GEF and related M&E policies. GEF project evaluation experience is an advantage over general GEF project development or implementation experience; • Experience with gender and social inclusion, participatory techniques, and review of gender policies; • Knowledge and experience in implementing or reviewing application of social and environmental safeguards policies in GEF (or similar) projects; • Regional experience an asset; • Experience with WWF/Conservation Standards, or theory of change approaches; and • Fluent Filipino/Tagalog and/or Vietnamese, OR translation services hired for interviews an advantage. • ^For additional information on evaluation methods adopted by WWF, see the WWF Evaluation Guidelines, published on our WWF Program Standards public website. • ^See GEF Terminal Evaluation Guidelines for additional information. • ^Please see the GEF Ethical Guidelines as published on GEF website. • ^Timeline to be revisited during evaluation based on progress in Philippines and Viet Nam. For more details: see BH Seaweed_WWF Midterm Evaluation TOR _official.docx How to apply Interested consultants are invited to submit a technical and financial proposal in English (maximum 20 pages). The package should also include a curriculum vitae for each team member, where applicable, and a relevant writing sample, such as an evaluation report. Three people and their contact information should serve as professional references for the lead evaluator and/or report author; these references will only be contacted during the shortlisting phase of recruitment. Only complete proposals will be accepted. The financial proposal should be all-inclusive, including taxes, fees, and reimbursable expenses, if applicable. The total budget shall not exceed USD $45,000 Individual, team, or consulting firm proposals are welcome. Women and members of social minorities are encouraged to apply. Interested consultants are requested to send their proposals to EvaluationsWWFGEF@wwfus.org by October 12, 2026. All questions about the requirements or process should be submitted to this email address by October 1, 2026. Responses to frequently asked and submitted questions will be available to all interested consultants at link (Annex G) until the application deadline. The technical proposal and qualifications/experience of the individual or team will account for 90% of the weighted score of the proposal. The technical score will be based on how the proposal reflects an understanding of the work and adherence to the TOR and quality of the proposal (readability, depth/breadth and suitability of the methodology), as well as the degree to which the candidate meets desired and required qualifications/experience mentioned in the terms of reference above. The financial elements of the proposal will account for 10% of the weighted score of the application. Once all proposals have been scored by the review committee, a shortlist of proposals will be determined, and the candidates notified. Please contact above email address if you have not received notification within two weeks of the deadline. In addition to having their referees contacted, shortlisted candidates will have their proposal reviewed by project stakeholders and will participate in an interview. The selection process will be in compliance with WWF and GEF requirements. Any questions or concerns about non-compliance or irregularities in the process can be raised through WWF’s mechanism for reporting concerns available here: https://wwfus.ethicspoint.com. To see full call for proposals with annexes, go to: BH Seaweed_WWF Midterm Evaluation TOR _official.docx