INTERNATIONAL FINANCE CORPORATION - THE WORLD BANK GROUP TERMS OF REFERENCE Western Balkans Manufacturing Value Chains (November 2019 – December 2024) FINAL Independent Project Evaluation   Assignment: Senior Evaluation Expert– Western Balkans Manufacturing Value Chains Duration: 35 days (February to May 2025) Location: Home-based/Belgrade/ Pristina /Skopje Type: International     A. PROJECT BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES   BACKGROUND The International Finance Corporation (IFC), a member of the World Bank Group (WBG), is the largest global development institution focused on the private sector in developing countries. It is committed to financing private sector businesses in emerging markets, mobilizing capital in the international financial markets, helping clients improve social and environmental sustainability and providing advisory services to businesses and governments. In 2019[1] the IFC has launched, in partnership with SECO, the Western Balkans Manufacturing value chains program, which covers Kosovo, North Macedonia, and Serbia.[2] The overall objective of the project is to improve the competitiveness of the manufacturing value chain in the region. This is achieved by a) building and strengthening local manufacturing companies’ competitive advantages in fast delivery of small batch, high-quality components and sub-assemblies to the Eurozone, and b) strengthening interregional collaboration between manufacturing firms and governments in the South-East Europe (SEE) region. By enabling more competitive, integrated, and value-added manufacturing, with increased product complexity, the project will contribute to economic growth and support jobs in the SEE region. Project works across manufacturing value chains covering automotive, appliances construction machinery, infrastructure machinery, agri and transportation machinery and focusing on achieving scale on the SEE sub-regional basis, as follows:[3] Component 1. Improving connectedness (Platform). The project helps establish a match-making platform that will link local SMEs to local and global off-takers to enable not only matching of demand and supply, but also ensuring linkage of services that cover required essential flows: i) movement of goods, ii) financial flows, and iii) contractual flows. Component 2. Improving capabilities of local firms. The project works with a) anchor FDIs (portfolio and pipeline IFC investment clients) in the Western Balkans region to upgrade and deepen their local supply chains and b) with governmental agencies that design or pursue supplier development initiatives (SDPs). Specifically, the project works with the Serbian Government agency RAS, that designed and implemented a first round of SDP under World Bank Group Competitiveness and Jobs project (now completed) to strengthen the backward linkages component and with Directorate of Industrial Zones in North Macedonia building on World Bank previous initiatives in SDP (also completed). In Kosovo IFC did not implement public SDP, given the lack of institutional capacity of the country and focused on private initiatives. Component 3. Enabling environment. This component includes targeted small-scale initiatives that aid to removing regulatory bottlenecks related to manufacturing value chains and explore potential access to finance instruments that can be developed to aid manufacturing firms.   The overall objective of the final evaluation is to demonstrate accountability to IFC, SECO and other stakeholders on the performance in achieving expected development results, the approach and on invested resources by conducting an independent assessment which is primarily focused on effectiveness, and in addition also on relevance, efficiency and sustainability. Focusing on four DAC criterion, while two are prioritized, allows a rigorous in depth, analysis. The assessment should also contain a set of recommendations and generate actionable insights for future improvements, while taking beneficiaries’, the donor’s, IFC’s and external stakeholders’ experiences into account.   B. SCOPE OF WORK Geographic Scope: The evaluation will cover the project activities implemented in three countries: Kosovo, North Macedonia and Serbia. Serbia is one of the priority countries of Switzerland in the Balkan region. Type of Evaluation: Performance evaluation using a theory-based approach: A theory-based evaluation approach is grounded in a clearly defined theory of change, which outlines how the interventions supported by the project are expected to lead to a series of results (outputs and outcomes), ultimately contributing to the overall impact. This approach focuses on analyzing the causal relationships between changes at different levels of the results chain described in the theory of change. The analysis of this theory will provide the foundation for evaluators to assess the relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, and sustainability of the project's support. Performance evaluation enables evaluators to track progress toward outcomes and draw credible conclusions about the project's contribution to the observed results. It will also guide evaluators in understanding how and why the project interventions have made a difference — or not — and identify who has benefited from these changes.   Evaluation Criteria: The evaluation will examine the following four OECD/DAC evaluation criteria: effectiveness, relevance, efficiency and sustainability. The evaluation will address the following key evaluation questions that are listed below based on each evaluation criteria:   Effectiveness To what extent have the intended outputs (including beneficiaries’ skills development and capacity enhancements), outcomes (i.e. use of the learnings/tools provided by the project and their effects on competitiveness improvement of targeted businesses) and impacts (such as jobs supported) been achieved? What is the causal contribution of the project interventions in achievement of main outcomes/ impact? How did country contexts and other external factors influence outcome/ impact achievement? What factors contributed or hindered outcome/ impact achievement?     Relevance To what extent are the project interventions aligned with and respond to the needs of the targeted clients (i.e. private manufacturing firms aim to better integrate intra-regional and EU value chains as well as public clients that aim to support such integration? To what extent are the project interventions relevant to the regional (i.e. Western Balkans) context now and at the time the Project was developed, and by the end of its implementation?   Efficiency To what extent have resources been well used in achieving the project’s outputs and outcomes considering the relationship between resources invested and the results achieved – both at the program level, by components, and within each country? Could the same results have been achieved with fewer resources without compromising the quality and quantity of results? How well did the Project coordinate, engage and communicate with SECO, including SCOs, other donors and stakeholders?     Sustainability What are the main risks that could affect the sustainability of project outcomes and impacts after project completion? What mitigation measures to be taken? To what extent has the Project fostered client buy-in and recipient ownership? Did the Project engage with the appropriate partners and was the engagement appropriate?  Are there any significant challenges that have hindered the commitment of counterparts to participle in the project and implement recommendations? To what extent are the results achieved in all components through the Project likely to be sustained after Project support is withdrawn? What elements of the exit strategy are likely to contribute to sustaining achieved results? What elements of the exit strategy should be improved? In case it is decided to replicate or scale this project, what are the most important considerations to be considered (especially based on the findings related to the question before on contextual and other external factors influencing the project)?   Methodological Approach: The evaluation approach should be theory-based, i.e. working along the ToC to assess if the different assumptions and casual links hold. The Consultant shall employ solid way of assessing (causal) program contribution to outcomes (e.g. Contribution Analysis) (DAC Effectiveness criteria). The evaluation approach should also be case-based, applying a comparative (or cross-) case perspective. Country case studies should be compared to elaborate the factors (contextual and related to IFC) which facilitated or hindered change. The different causal links along the ToC should be assessed in each country and then compared across countries. To apply this approach, the consultant is expected to: Conduct analysis / desk study of program documentation, semi-annual project reports, individual project Concept Notes, Implementation Plans, Supervision Reports and Completion Reports, and the yearly Client Surveys. The evaluation will also draw on project working/output papers; advocacy/training materials; news mentions; completed questionnaires with clients and other relevant data sources. The desk-study will allow to establish a first assessment on what was planned and achieved. Suggest purposive sampling strategy for qualitative data collection: the sampling must strategically select interview partners which are expected to provide valuable information. The sample should also include external stakeholders who can give a neutral opinion about the project. The sampling should consider the expected bias by respective interview partners and declare those. Conduct qualitative data collection: semi-structured interviews of key internal and external stakeholders (IFC staff, SECO, SCOs, other donors, project counterparts, client companies and other stakeholders e.g. Serbian Development Agency.). The goal is to get in-depth feedback from involved partner institutions. The Consultant is expected tp conduct fieldwork in 3 countries (priority should be given to Serbia, followed by North Macedonia and Kosovo) for a maximum of 15 days. Perform data analysis: Data analysis procedures must be transparent and appropriate for the collected data. Triangulation and Evidence Quality: Evaluation findings must be based on several data sources, possibly using different data collection methods. The different evidences gathered must be valued transparently taking into account their inherent biases. The consultant is expecting to utilize the Evaluation matrix linking evaluation questions with data sources, data collection methods, data analysis procedures and main findings. Findings are to be based on several data sources (source triangulation). The Consultant is expected to propose the detailed methodology (incl. to be used evaluation matrix, sample, data collection tools and methods, data analysis procedures etc.) in the inception report.   C. DELIVERABLES/SPECIFIC OUTPUTS EXPECTED FROM CONSULTANT (in English) Inception Report: to be completed within 20 work days of the signature of the contract covering the evaluation objectives, theory of change and log-frame, the proposed approach/ methodology, an evaluation matrix, realistic timeline and a list of interviews. Field Mission Schedule: to be completed at least three weeks prior to commencement so that the Project team can make necessary arrangements. The schedules must include for all external interviews, a summary including: purpose, key questions/areas, data requested, expected duration, interviewees. This will be essential for IFC to arrange external meetings with partners and clients. SECO as donor shall be informed as well. Draft Report: to be shared with IFC by April 31, 2025. The Evaluation Report shall comprise a maximum of 30 pages (excl. annexes) and will include an executive summary, the evaluation objectives, the theory of change, the methodology, the findings for each of the evaluation criterion, conclusions, recommendations and lessons learnt. Annexes should include the approved programme description, TOR, a completed evaluation matrix, and a list of interviews and sources of evidence. The draft report will be reviewed by IFC and SECO.  Power Point Presentation: A presentation of the final results of the Evaluation to be made to the Project team by end-April 2025. Final Report: To be submitted by mid-May 2025. In addition to the main evaluation report, to be shared with IFC and SECO, the Consultant will produce a draft of an Executive Summary for Public Disclosure. This document should not disclose information of a commercially sensitive nature or operational deliberations conducted by IFC staff.   All deliverables must meet the OECD-DAC Quality Standards for Development Evaluation and the SEVAL standards. D. SPECIFIC INPUTS TO BE PRESENTED BY IFC Donor reports and comments shared. Project documents (Implementation Plans, PSRs, and supporting evidence upon request). SECO will complement with the internal project approval documents (concept note, OPK note). Completed questionnaires from clients. Other survey and reports, if applicable. Key project deliverables. IFC Advisory Project Governance. Standard Operating Procedures for Performance Evaluation. Introduction to IFC Clients and interview scheduling. Executive Summary for Public Disclosure template. Financial information about the program.   E. SPECIAL TERMS & CONDITIONS / SPECIFIC CRITERIA The Consultant should have: Extensive knowledge and experience in the manufacturing sector, supply chain management, and value chains development, preferably in Western Balkans. General knowledge about private sector development, legal and regulatory reforms, and business enabling environment. A strong track record in evaluating donor-funded programs related to private sector development, trade promotion/ value chains. Practical understanding of modern manufacturing operations and global value chains building. An international perspective, familiar with the Western Balkans market environment and familiar with the development operations of the donor agencies Excellent communication skills and a proven ability to structure issues and write well in English. Knowledge of local languages spoken in Western Balkans (especially Albanian and/or Macedonian/Serbian) would be an advantage.     [1] Project phases: 2019-2020 – pre-implementation; 2021-2024: implementation. [2] Activities in Serbia and North Macedonia are funded by SECO and field monitoring is done by Swiss Cooperation Offices in these countries. Serbia is a priority country of SECO. [3] Program restructuring approved by SECO and IFC on 6/9/2023. (number of components reduced from 4 to 3); capacity building remains as cross-cutting issue in all components.