Download as PDF.

Background

The U4 Anti-Corruption Resource Centre (U4) was established at the Chr. Michelsen Institute (CMI) in 2002 as a result of the then-called ‘Utstein partnership’ which began in 1999 with an initiative taken by the ministers of international development from the Netherlands, Germany, Norway and the United Kingdom (UK) to formalise their cooperation. High on the priority list was a need to address a perceived information gap for development practitioners in the new and increasingly important area of anti-corruption.

Twenty years later, U4 continues to use its knowledge, evidence, practical experience, and strategic partnerships to power global efforts against corruption.

We are proud to collaborate with our eight partners: Canada (Global Affairs), Denmark (Danida/MoFA), Finland (MFA), Germany (BMZ/GIZ), Norway (Norad), Sweden (Sida), Switzerland (SDC) and the United Kingdom (FCDO). At the same time, we make most of U4’s knowledge and resources accessible as a public good that increases global awareness on how to curb corruption – providing resources to many people beyond the U4 partnership.

Through U4’s 2022–2026 strategy, the centrerenews its mission and purpose through four goals:

1. Greater impact on the ground
   To respond to the challenging environments in many countries, and to ensure contextualised interventions, we will support our partners to achieve greater impact in countries where they run programmes by moving closer to local practice and challenges.
2. A coherent, global approach to anti-corruption
   To respond to rising powers and competing agendas, we will work with our partners to develop a coherent, global approach to anti-corruption by being a leading convener and trusted knowledge-broker.
3. Addressing the complexities of corruption
   To respond to the ever-increasing intricacy and transnational nature of corruption, we will equip our partners to address complex corruption issues by taking new perspectives.
4. Pushing anti-corruption up the agenda
   To respond to the uncertainty practitioners face, we will ensure that anti-corruption remains a top priority in our partners’ home countries by strengthening the U4 partnership and demonstrating the need to make anti-corruption a top priority.

To pursue these goals, U4 also committed in this strategy to (1) be a great place to work, (2) to keep on learning, (3) be a dynamic communicator also seeking audience outside the anti-corruption community, (4) continue to integrate gender and inclusion perspectives into our work, and (5) to be at the forefront of thinking and practice around how anti-corruption work should be conducted, ensuring that the highest ethical standards are set and maintained.

Operations and management

U4 is a permanent centre at the Chr. Michelsen Institute, and currently has a dedicated staff of 15 (14.5 FTE), supported by CMI managerial and technical staff with the CMI Board as its highest authority.

Key services of U4 to its partners include the provision of knowledge resources (research and publications in different formats in line with an annually agreed work plan), learning (self-paced and facilitated online courses, a Helpdesk operated in collaboration with Transparency International), and convening (in-country workshops, headquarter visits, and partner fora).

Oversight and direction of U4 are provided by a Steering Committee composed of representatives of each of the partner agencies and one representative of CMI. The Steering Committee approves U4’s annual work plan, including focus areas for thematic research, and locations for in-country engagements. One U4 partner is annually appointed as a lead donor (2024: FCDO UK). Although U4 has maintained the practice of executing a single work plan and unified budget under the direction of the Steering Committee (through core basket funding – where each U4 Partner contributes an equal annual amount of funds. U4’s total annual budget ranges between NOK 25-30 million) separate funding agreements are in place with each of the current eight partner agencies.

Mid-term review

Objective

The main objective of the mid-term review is to assist U4 and its partners in assessing to what extent U4, halfway into the strategy period, is on track to meet its strategic goals as outlined in the 2022-2026 Strategy. This entails measuring progress against set goals and identifying the current status of accomplishments. The review should also reflect on possible emerging external and internal developments, challenges, and opportunities, that might influence U4’s ability to reach our goals and/or require us to adjust them, as well as identify areas for improvement and produce related recommendations for (corrective) actions including possible strategy adjustment.

The review should answer the following questions with the six OECD/DAC criteria in mind:

1. Performance

Is U4 on track to meet the goals set out in the 2022 - 2026 Strategy? Is there a need for changes and adjustments in the remaining strategy period, considering the accomplishments so far and a changing external context?

• To what extent have goals been met so far? In cases where targets and objectives have not been met, were met marginally, or have been exceeded, what are the reasons?
• Does U4’s performance monitoring and quality assurance system sufficiently and accurately capture results and lead to internal learning and adjustments or improvements?
• What do the partners judge as U4’s main strength/added value in enabling impact in their anti-corruption policies/interventions?In what aspects do the partners see potential for improvement or for U4 to do less of?
• To what extent are U4’s thematic areas in line with U4 partners' and other stakeholders’ priorities? Are there thematic areas that should be given more or less focus, and/ or potential synergies between themes and/ or other activities that should be explored?
• To what extent is U4 able to meet the partners' expectations regarding the formats to build their capacities (resources, learning, convening)? In what regard is there potential for improvement?
• How should U4 balance anti-corruption research and knowledge products as a public good versus delivering services for its partners as part of the basket-funding and/or earmarked projects?

2. Internal structure, organisation, resources

To what extent do the current organization, staff capacity and financial resources correspond to the requirements of strategy and annual action plans implementation?

• Are the management and administration structure and processes adequate to ensure effective and efficient performance?
• Has U4 identified (operational/resource-related) risks and prepared a mitigation plan?
• Does U4 have the right human resources and technical capacity to implement the strategy incl. strategies in place for recruitment, capacity strengthening, career development and staff retention?
• How should U4 balance responsiveness to donor needs versus addressing emerging issues/trends and developing cutting edge knowledge, building in-house expertise versus outsourcing services?
• To what extent does U4 engage in partnerships and networks with others? Could this be done more strategically?
• Are U4’s governance structures well-functioning with regard to their steering, accountability, monitoring and supporting functions to U4, and how might they be made better use of?
• How can U4 and partner agencies consolidate U4’s funding for the current strategy period (and beyond)?

Approach and methodology

The assessment should conform to OECD/DAC´s Quality Standards for Development Cooperation and be usinga combination of methods including, but not necessarily limited to, the following:

• Review of relevant U4 and CMI documents and procedures, including U4 work plans, annual reports, strategy documents, theory of change, the previous mid-term review and management response and CMI strategy documents, minutes of the Steering committee meetings, management processes, personnel procedures.
• Stakeholder interviews, including:
  • Representatives and management of U4 partner agencies, including all U4 contact persons, but also selected users of U4 services (to be selected from such sources as training and country engagement participant lists and helpdesk users);
  • Representatives of organisations, or individuals, who have partnered with U4 in delivering training, preparing publications and/or conducting research;
  • CMI management;
  • Representatives of selected academic and non-governmental organisations working on corruption and development issues;
  • Representatives of other multi- and bi-lateral donors who work in the area of anti-corruption and development (UNDP, UNODC, USAID, OECD/DAC).
• Review of relevant partner agency documents, if any. U4 Partner Agencies may have conducted their own internal assessments regarding usage and perceptions of U4. Reports from these surveys should be reviewed where available.
• User survey: An electronic survey to be shared with a minimum of 2000 recipients, including the subscribers to U4’s newsletter, and participants in online courses and in-country engagements, to find out about the relevance and use of our resources, and the impact of our initiatives.
• Workshop/ Focus group discussion with U4 staff.

Deliverables and timeframe

The consultant(s) is expected to submit the following deliverables:

Detailed inception report based on a review of key documents outlining the initial findings and setting out the direction for the rest of the assessment work and structure of the final report. This should include a list of the actors to be interviewed, the time plan, and the methods to be used including the draft questionnaire for the user survey.

The draft final report will be shared with the members of the U4 Steering Committee for written comments by 23 October 2024. The final report will be presented by the consultant(s) in person on 13/14 November 2024 at the U4 Steering Committee meeting in London and the final version be submitted in writing to U4 by 6 December 2024.

The final report should be no longer than 25 pages (annexes additional). The assessment approach/methodology and methods for data collection used shall be clearly described and explained, and all limitations to the methodology and methods shall be made explicit and the consequence for these limitations discussed, that findings shall flow logically from the data, showing a clear line of evidence to support the conclusions, recommendations to be specific.

Qualifications of consultants

The review will be carried out by a team of consultants/experts, which might be a firm or an organization. The consultants must fulfil the following requirements:

• Substantial knowledge of and experience in anti-corruption and development work in the context of international aid and range of organisations involved in research, policy advice, information dissemination, strategic communication, and/or training related to this field.
• Relevant expertise in organisational management and development, particularly as related to academic institutions and think tanks, including an understanding of management issues and funding options for academic and policy-related research in the field of international development.
• Demonstrated ability to produce clearly written, focused analysis and well-substantiated recommendations based on that analysis in English.
• Lead consultant should have at least 10 years’ experience in conducting reviews/evaluations of organizations involved in research, policy advice, information dissemination, strategic communication, and/or training in this field.
• Should not have been involved in the drafting or implementation of the current strategy.

Scope of work and budget

Within the timetable specified above, it is expected that approximately 40 workdays (total) will be required. Travel costs will include, at minimum, one trip to Bergen for consultations with U4/CMI staff and one trip to present and discuss findings at the Steering Committee Meeting in London. Most other consultations should be done by phone and/or internet, but proposals may include additional modest travel costs as justified by the methodology. The maximum budget for this assignment is Euro 40,000 including all expenses.

Application process

Interested applicants should submit the following documents:

• Technical proposal (max 5 pages) outlining the proposed methodology, a timetable, and the qualifications of the proposed consultants and where relevant roles and division of labour.
• A budget for the assignment
• CV(s) of consultant(s)
• Example of previous relevant work (i.e. another mid-term review, evaluation)

Proposals (and questions) should be sent by e-mail to the address U4@cmi.no with the subject “U4 Mid-term review application” by 20 May 2024.

Download as PDF.