Post Monitoring and Evaluation Consultant IFC

International Finance Corporation (IFC), a member of the World Bank Group, fosters sustainable economic growth in developing countries by financing private sector investment, mobilizing private capital in local and international financial markets, and providing advisory services to businesses and governments. Our purpose is to create opportunity for people to escape poverty and improve their lives.

IFC in Indonesia aims to: reduce the impact of climate change, improve rural incomes, and promote sustainable urbanization. To achieve these objectives, IFC in Indonesia combines investment and advisory services to expand access to finance, extend the reach of infrastructure, strengthen commodity-based supply chains, and improve the business environment.

IFC Office in Jakarta now is seeking to recruit:

Short Term Consultant – Post Monitoring and Evaluation Consultant
National OSS M&E Assessment

As an element of the Advisory Services, the Business Enabling Environment Program focuses on developing the private sector in Indonesia through improving the business environments and investment climates. A key component of the program is: to provide technical assistance and support quality implementation of the central government’s initiatives for establishing sub-national One-Stop-Shops (OSS) as a primary contact for licenses and business registration issuance.

To achieve the above objectives, IFC will work with both national (Ministry of Home Affairs for OSS and Bappenas-The National Development Planning Agency- for RIA) and some sub-national governments as pilot provinces. There will be three phases in this project, which are:

Phase I – Dissemination of a National Decree on OSS establishment

Phase I of the project is the socialization phase: Where the primary design objective is to disseminate the concept of streamlined licensing procedures by introducing the One-Stop-Shop (OSS) idea.

Phase II – Development of a National Guideline on OSS
In Phase II of this project, the Provincial governments are mandated by the Ministerial Decree to draft an operational guideline, which will be enforced as local regulations to establish the OSS at district levels. The national principle guideline would then act to ensure the quality of the operational decree. In this phase, IFC will also collaborate with The Asia Foundation (TAF) in order to provide an extensive support and facilitation for the development of the National Guidelines, which is endorsed in the MOHA Ministerial circular letter (No.188.32/498/V/Bangda/2007). The Guideline will provide standards for the regional governments, when complying with the Ministerial Decree (No. 24/2006), to establish their own OSS.

Phase III – Development and delivery of OSS Training Modules for the Province-level audience
In the last phase, the project will focus on producing a monitoring and evaluation framework for a effective reporting mechanism on the OSS development, along with the OSS National Curriculum and Training Modules. This is done to aspire a better and improve the capacity of OSS operators at the national and subnational levels. A national RIA manual will also be produced in collaboration with Bappenas, to better create a systematic RIA process at the provincial level, to ensure that the benefits of the proposed regulations will
outweight their costs.

Collaboration with the Decentralization Support Facility (DSF) in Phase III will provide the project with the opportunity to give a broader audience reach, from an impact that was previously only in 9 districts (Bali province) to become 22 districts in total (15 districts in North Sulawesi).

Scope of Work/ Responsibility
The Consultant will be hired for 50 days and will be mainly responsible for delivering post monitoring and evaluation activities that will address the following key assessment issues:


The assessment must address the issues of “Relevance and Rationale”, in the context of, the extent to which the development intervention conforms to the needs and priorities of the targeted groups and the policies of the recipient countries and donors. Key questions to be answered include:

  • Is the underlying program theory still valid within the Indonesian context? Does it address the market needs and what opportunities exist for its improvement?
  • Did the projects play a unique role for the private sector development, compared to similar activities/programs delivered by other development agencies or international organizations? Did it crowd out existing private sector providers of similar services?
  • Was the activity really necessary and likely to have high impact?
  • What would have happened if the activity had not been undertaken?
  • Was the approach the best alternative?
  • Was the activity based on sound analysis and learning? If not, what more could have been done, either during preparation or implementation of the activity, to ensure a sound knowledge base for design and ongoing learning and improvement?
  • To what extent have program activities helped to meet IFC’s strategic objectives?
  • At the program level, have the projects been developed to meet country specific PSD strategies, regional/sector (finance, infrastructure) strategies or to satisfy IFC’s, partner(s) or donor funding requirements.
  • How well the activities been coordinated with other private sector development (PSD) activities (of WBG, IFC, etc.), programs initiated by other key stakeholders’ industry/specialized departments, and/or World Bank PSD programs?


The assessment must address the issues of “Efficiency and Accountability”, in the context of, the extent to which the development intervention can be justified by its results, taking alternatives into account. Key questions to be answered include:

  • Was the level of funding, staff and other resources appropriate, given the objectives used?
  • Was delivery achieved within stated and agreed timeframes?
  • Is the operational model and programmatic approach ideal for achieving its objectives, with emphasis on: (a) the program cycle, (b) use of locally hired professionals, and (c) use of external partners/consultants to implement the projects
  • How efficiently have the projects been developed and implemented with regards to the organizational set-up, recruiting, human resource utilization, operational efficiency, systems, data collection analysis, and etc.
  • To what extent has the replication of the projects taken advantage of the program reach? How well have the lessons learnt from previous programs been applied to the replication of similar programs in other countries/regions?
  • Has the program been successful in leveraging IFC’S funds towards targeted (a) levels of donor investment? (b) Level of IFC’s Investments mobilization?
  • How well has the program been able to apply the IFC’s pricing policy? Have programs/projects been priced properly? Have recipients and beneficiaries been required to contribute to the costs of advisory services?
  • The Consultant(s) should review and assess the relationships between the cost of programs and the benefits achieved (cost/benefit analysis) and thus determine whether key stakeholders (including IFC) are receiving the intended impact.


The assessment must address the issues of “effectiveness”, in the context of, the extent to which the development intervention has achieved its objectives, taking their relative importance into account. Key questions to be answered include:

  • To what extent has the program achieved the desired results in: (i) the planned reach? (ii) The targeted outputs? (iii) The outcomes and initial impacts?
  • How effective has the program managed its strategic planning and knowledge management systems?
  • How effectively has the program managed risks related to its activities, including: financial risks, reputation risks, political risks, and etc
  • To what extent have the projects integrated gender imperatives into their design? Does the program’s operational structure and program design process support this integration?


The assessment must address the issues of “Impact”, in the context of, the total effect of the development intervention: positive and negative; intended and unintended. Key questions to be answered include:

  • Has the M&E strategy been appropriate in helping to measure performance at both the program and project level?
  • Did M&E systems generate useful data that supported effective implementation of the activity?
  • How robust was the M&E systems in measuring ongoing achievement of objectives and results?
  • What improvements might have been made?
  • To what extent have the main goals been attained?
  • Were the short and long-term outcomes for interventions positive or negative? To what extent did they meet the original expectations?
  • Have there been any unexpected outcomes and to what extent were they positive or detrimental to the community/ intended beneficiaries of the intervention?

The assessment must address the issues of “Sustainability”, in the context of, the extent to which projects have taken steps to ensure the continuation or longevity of the benefits from the development interventions, after the cessation of its development assistance. What systems were put in place to ensure that the benefits, if any, were sustained? List of the persons involved in the activity, specifically partner lead firms, their role(s), time engaged, contact details/position of these persons post-activity. Whether the results would have been achieved, delayed or would not have been achieved in absence of the program’s efforts. Key questions to be answered include:

  • How has sustainability been incorporated into the design of the projects and results or impact?
  • To what extent has the program implemented effective mechanisms to monitor the longevity and long-term effects of its interventions?

Alternatives / Improvements

The issues of “alternatives and/or improvements” should be addressed in the context of, the extent to which different methods or approaches could have been employed by the program with similar or better results/outcomes/timeliness, and at reduced costs or level-of-effort. Key questions to be answered include:

  • To what extent do alternatives exist in the project’s programmatic approaches and methodologies, and what are your recommendations for improving its performance?
  • What improvements or adjustments are suggested in the delivery of Advisory Services through the project?
  • What lessons can be drawn from the experience of the project, to inform future regulatory reform plans and strategies?

Questions to consider in the assessment include:

  • Did the activities integrate gender-sensitive practices; positively influencing outcomes on gender equality?
  • Were gender equality issues identified in the design/approval process addressed during implementation?

Approach and Methodology
This is a summative assessment. As such, it will assess program outcomes or impacts and relative costs associated with the program and its projects in order to determine whether the program can be said to have caused the desired outcomes/impacts and estimate the overall impact of the project beyond the immediate target outcomes.

The consultant shall be guided by the following:

1. Sources:
a. Data and information will need to be collected from:

  • Internal clients of the project ( projects documentations)
  • External clients reports of IFC (e.g.: project evaluation reports, project documentations)

2. Methods:
Data collection methods are expected to include:

  • Interviews (in-person and by telephone),
  • Literature Reviews and
  • Client / field visits.
  • Surveys

Experience and Qualifications
The successful Consultant shall be characterized by the following:

  1. Knowledge and understanding of private sector development and notably in Indonesia context and a deep understanding of the underlying socio-politico-economic relationships at play in Indonesia especially in regards to OSS issues.
  2. Key involvement/role in a recent (not more than five years ago) assessment of a donor-funded technical assistance (or advisory service) Program/Project and a solid track record of successfully conducting at least three similar assessments.
  3. Experience in private sector development.
  4. Considerable experience and a keen interest in regulatory reform areas
  5. Experience in working within a multicultural environment.
  6. Experience in assessment methods, data collection and analytical skills.
  7. Sound processing management skills in interviewing, facilitation and presentation.
  8. Extremely high proficiency in written and spoken English language.
  9. Have ability and willingness to work with limited supervision.
  10. Willing to travel as necessary to support data gathering process.
  11. Strong working knowledge of Word, Excel and PowerPoint.
  12. Proven ability to develop theory into practical applications.
  13. As a representative of the World Bank Group, all professional activities are expected to be consistent with our Core Values: personal honesty, integrity, commitment, working together in teams – with openness and trust; empowering others and respecting differences; encouraging risk-taking and responsibility; enjoying our work and our families.

Supervision and Management of the Assessment
The assessment shall be managed on a day-to-day basis and supervised by Sandra Pranoto, working in close collaboration with the IFC M&E officer, and the Investment Climate Advisory Services program team.

Enquiries, Questions or Communication in respect of the assessment or Terms of Reference should be submitted to: Annie Amalia Loppies – IFC Program Assistant. Email:

Terms and Conditions
The position is based in Jakarta, with the possibility of domestic travels.
Please submit your application to

Closing date for applications is January 15, 2010.

All applications will be treated in strict confidence and ONLY short-listed candidates will be contacted.

No telephone calls, faxes or letters will be accepted.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.