Objectives and expected results

General objective

Recruit assessors to assist the contracting authority in selecting the best proposals received in response to the call for projects on ‘Sustainable Blue Economy in West Africa’ and carry out a comprehensive, consistent and high-quality project selection process in accordance with the criteria set out in the guidelines for applicants.

Results to be achieved by the contractor

• • Carry out the technical evaluation of the summary notes and full notes according to the WASOP grids.
  • Identify financial inconsistencies and budgetary anomalies.
  • Ensure the transparency and fairness of the process.
  • Submit completed grids within the specified deadlines.
• These evaluations will be used by the evaluation committee as part of the process of selecting the best proposals.

Scope of work

Role and mission of assessors

The main mission of the assessors recruited is to ensure an independent, methodical and rigorous evaluation of the proposals received in response to the SBE WASOP call for proposals.

Their main tasks include:

• • · Technical and financial evaluation of the summary presentation notes and complete applications, including verification of consistency, efficiency and budgetary relevance, with particular attention to anomalies or potentially overestimated budget lines.
  • · Participating, upon request, in coordination meetings with the evaluation committee to ensure good communication and smooth monitoring of the process.
  • · Submitting evaluation reports within the specified deadlines.
  • · Working closely with the lead assessor and the evaluation committee at each stage of the selection process.
  • · Strict compliance with a prior declaration of impartiality and confidentiality, ensuring an objective and confidential evaluation of applications.
  • · Immediate reporting of any potential conflict of interest to the contracting authority.

Evaluations are carried out in accordance with the guidelines and instructions established by the evaluation committee, based on the evaluation grids published for applicants. The overall evaluation is based on the sum of the scores obtained for each sub-section, aggregated by section, with a final score calculated as the arithmetic mean of the evaluations assigned by the assessors.

Each application must be evaluated on its own merits, without direct comparison with other proposals. Assessors are encouraged to draw on their personal experience of the sector and project implementation to enrich their analysis.

The evaluation committee may invite assessors to present and justify their evaluations in order to ensure the transparency and consistency of the process.

Finally, assessors are bound to absolute confidentiality at all stages of the evaluation process, thus ensuring the integrity of and confidence in the system.

Role and mission of the evaluation committee

The evaluation committee, appointed by the contracting authority, comprises a chairperson and a secretary who do not take part in the vote, and an odd number of members who do take part in the vote (at least three). Its role is to advise the contracting authority on the award of contracts in accordance with the criteria set in advance.

The chairperson coordinates the evaluation procedure in accordance with the procedures defined by the French rules of expertise and ensures its impartiality and transparency. The committee secretary performs all administrative tasks related to the evaluation procedure, including distributing and collecting declarations of impartiality and confidentiality, as well as drafting and filing the minutes and all other relevant data and documents.

Where the proposals received are particularly numerous or highly technical, assessors may carry out all or part of the detailed examination, so that the evaluation committee can deliberate on the basis of their analyses, including the opinion of the EU delegation in the country where the proposed project will take place.

The assessors work under the supervision of the lead assessor, who is the subject of these ToRs.

If the analyses do not meet the quality standards expected by the contracting authority, the latter may return the applications to the contractor and request a new evaluation by the same or another expert.

The process of evaluating summary notes and complete forms

Each proposal, whether a summary note or a complete form, is initially evaluated individually and independently by two designated experts (evaluator and/or assessor). Each expert assigns scores and provides comments for each of the evaluation criteria according to the specific grid provided, then submits their evaluation to the lead assessor for quality control.

The process of verifying each evaluation grid by the lead assessor is divided into two stages:

• • The lead assessor verifies the consistency, rigour and compliance of each evaluation grid with the criteria and procedures defined in the call for proposals guidelines.
  • Once this verification has been completed and the grid has been validated by the lead assessor, it is considered the final version, ready to be used for the next stages of the evaluation process.

The lead assessor will be entirely responsible for consolidating the evaluations. The lead assessor will carry out all the consolidation work without consulting the other assessors, except in the event of a significant discrepancy between their total scores, as defined by the evaluation committee. In this situation, the lead assessor will attempt to facilitate an agreement between the two assessors; failing that, they will carry out a third evaluation. When a third assessment is required, the final consolidation is carried out on the basis of the third expert's grid and the expert whose score is closest to it, according to the terms defined by the assessment committee. This consolidation aims to harmonise the scores by taking into account only the assessments of the third expert and the closest expert.

The consolidation results in a single assessment grid, approved by consensus, with common scores and comments for each criterion. The consolidated assessment constitutes the final assessment and serves as the basis for the committee's deliberations on the ranking and selection of proposals, thus ensuring rigour, fairness and transparency.

Logistics and timetable

Location: Remote interventions with the possibility of virtual and face-to-face meetings.

Timeline: First half of 2026.

The assessors' mission is part of the WASOP call for proposals evaluation process, coordinated by the evaluation committee.

It will span a total period of approximately six (6) months, covering two successive evaluation cycles:

• • an initial evaluation of the summary scores;
  • a second evaluation of the complete forms for the shortlisted proposals.

The actual duration of the assessors' involvement will depend on the number of proposals received and will be specified at the time of operational planning for each phase.

The provisional timetable will be structured as follows:

Phase 1 – Familiarisation and briefing

• • Reading of reference documents (terms of reference, evaluation guide, criteria and scoring grids);
  • Participation in a briefing session organised by Expertise France to harmonise understanding of the criteria, procedures and evaluation tools.

Phase 2 – Evaluation of summary notes

• • Analysis and scoring of summary notes sent by Expertise France, based on the evaluation grid provided;
  • Transmission of results to the lead assessor for quality validation.

Phase 3 – Evaluation of complete forms

• • In-depth evaluation of the complete forms for the shortlisted proposals;
  • Consolidation of ratings and analyses between assessors, coordinated by the Chair of the Evaluation Committee and the lead assessor;

Transmission of results to the lead assessor for quality validation.

Contractual and logistical terms

Nature of the mandate

• • The assessors' mission is planned as a one-off mandate, funded by Expertise France as part of the WASOP programme.
  • The assessors will act as independent experts, responsible for evaluating proposals in an objective, transparent and confidential manner.

Working methods

• • The mission will mainly be carried out remotely, using the digital tools and secure platforms provided by Expertise France.
  • Assessors may be required to participate in online or hybrid meetings with the Evaluation Committee, particularly during the consolidation and validation phases.
  • The coordination and supervision of the evaluation work will be carried out by the Chair of the Evaluation Committee.

Workload per assessor

The amount of effort required for the evaluation per assessor will be calculated as follows:

• • For the evaluation of a brief note (individual evaluation): 0.33 days/hour.
  • For the evaluation of the complete form (individual evaluation): 1 day/hour.

These times reflect an estimate of the time required to carry out a rigorous and comprehensive evaluation of the documents submitted.

Availability

• • Assessors must be available for all key phases of the evaluation process (briefing, analysis of proposals, consolidation of scores, evaluation committee, drafting of the final report).
  • The precise duration of each intervention will depend on the volume of proposals received and will be communicated to assessors upon receipt of the documents to be evaluated.

Deliverables

• • Assessors must produce and submit the evaluation grids via the lead assessor.
  • All documents must be submitted within the deadlines set by the Evaluation Committee, in strict compliance with the rules of confidentiality and document security.

Logistical requirements

• • Assessors must have access to a computer with reliable internet connection, as well as the necessary skills to use word processing, spreadsheet and presentation software and secure online platforms.
  • Any participation in face-to-face meetings, if necessary, will be subject to prior notification and logistical arrangements made by Expertise France.