Name: Landell Mills
Price range: $

Project Philippines

15/10/24 - 31/10/25

Accelerating Climate Resilience in Agriculture, Natural Resources and the Environment - 3 TA on Biodiversity

The Philippines ranks as highly vulnerable to climate change, placing 122nd in the 2023 ND-GAIN index and named the most disaster-prone country by the 2022 World Risk Index. Its rich biodiversity is under threat from human activities like deforestation and illegal fishing, as well as the growing impacts of climate change. To address these challenges, the government and the Asian Development Bank (ADB) launched the Climate Change Action Program (CCAP), focusing on adaptation in vulnerable sectors like agriculture and natural resources, and mitigation in emissions-heavy sectors like energy and transport. CCAP includes two subprograms:

Subprogram 1: Approved in May 2022 and currently under implementation.Subprogram 2: Estimated at $400 million, scheduled for ADB Board approval in 2024. It builds on Subprogram 1 to scale up efforts in increasing resilience and transitioning to low-carbon pathways.

In December 2022, the ADB approved a transaction technical assistance (TA) to support the government in preparing and achieving the policy and institutional reforms under Subprogram 2, aiming to enhance resilience in agriculture, natural resources, and the environment. Under the TA is the Policy Action 2.8(iii) which requires the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) to develop biodiversity management plans for critical ecosystems by March 2024. Additionally, Outcome Indicator (i) mandates the adoption of six climate-proofed protected area management plans by 2025.

Objectives

To facilitate the issuance of the appropriate legal documents, the TA on Biodiversity will assist the Biodiversity Management Bureau (BMB) in developing the design of six climate-proofed Protected Area Management Plans (PAMPs) in critical ecosystems with support for: (a) the installation of appropriate equipment and measures, such early warning systems for climate hazards, biodiversity monitoring and detection, energy-saving and environment-friendly equipment; (b) the conduct of climate risk modelling studies for wildlife; and (c) capacity building on climate hazards. The TA will also support BMB in the drafting a Memorandum Circular or a similar legal document to facilitate the development and adoption of the six climate-proofed PAMPs.

Project Afghanistan

15/10/24 - 14/01/25

UNICEF Afghanistan 2021-2024 Evidence Synthesis

Project Sudan

28/08/24 - 31/03/25

Evaluation of UNICEF’s L3 response in Sudan

This evaluation serves the dual purpose of accountability and learning and fulfilled the requirement of the UNICEF Evaluation Policy (2018) that all L3 emergencies must be evaluated. This evaluation:

Will generate evidence-based lessons on the preparedness, planning and implementation of UNICEF's emergency response in Sudan.

Will generate recommendations to inform ongoing operations and strategy in Sudan and more broadly to inform future L3 responses.

Will support accountability by demonstrating results achieved in relation to objectives through the UNICEF response – in terms of quality, coverage and equity.

The evaluation has a range of audiences. These can be differentiated as both primary stakeholder audiences for whom the evaluation makes specific recommendations and secondary audiences with an interest in the findings. Primary users will include Sudan Country Office (CO) and Field Office (FO), UNICEF Regional Offices (ROs) and Headquarters (HQ), UNICEF Office of Emergency Operations (EMOPS) and UNICEF Executive Board. Secondary users include international partners working in Sudan, national and local government stakeholders, NGOs, civil society organisations, beneficiaries of the response, as well as the wider humanitarian community and the general public. 

 The evaluation aimed to assess:

Adherence to the Core Commitments for Children.

Effectiveness of the response, including access to Hard-to-Reach areas.

Application of emergency procedures, other SOPs, timeliness of the L3 declaration, emergency preparedness and organizational readiness.

Coordination between and among HQ, ROs, SCO, and external partners.

Interagency scale up commitments.

Integration of cross-cutting issues, including PSEA and localization.

Leadership and advocacy, including vis-a‘-vis UNICEF cluster lead agency role

Effectiveness of operation support activities.

The thematic scope covered:

the programmatic, operational and cross cutting dimensions of the L3 response all of UNICEF’s key programmatic areas engaged in the response efforts.

An assessment of the preparedness of the actions in advance of the Corporate Emergency Activation Procedure (CEAP).

An assessment of the performance of the whole organisations approach (at country, regional and head quarters levels)

The temporal scope covered from January 2023 to April 2023 (preparedness phase) and from April 2023- October 2024 (conflict phase).

The geographical scope covers the strategic response across Sudan and also its cross-border operations. The operational response includes HQ, RO (West and Central African Regional Office, Middle East and North African Regional Office and Eastern and Southern African Regional Office, and the Sudan CO.

The evaluation team travelled to Sudan and completed field work in Port Sudan, Kassala, Atbara, Gedaref, Central Dafur, Blue Nile and South Kordofan.

Project Liberia

15/08/24 - 30/03/25

UNICEF Country Programme Evaluation for Liberia (2020-2024)

The current Country Programme (CP) of UNICEF Liberia has been developed and implemented against a backdrop of complex and constantly evolving changes in the country's programming landscape. Liberia has faced unparalleled challenges due to the Covid-19 pandemic, necessitating rapid responses from UNICEF to meet the urgent needs and priorities of children in an emergency setting.

The CPE will serve UNICEF's accountability and learning purposes by looking into the CP's performance in achieving its intended results for children. The evaluation will inform UNICEF of the relevance, efficacy, effectiveness, efficiency, coherence and sustainability of programme implementation strategies to reach the planned CP results, and also shed light on potential corrective actions in the design and envisaged delivery modalities of the new country programme (TOC, change strategies, needed partnerships, and others).

The specific areas targeted for evaluation include: Reflecting on UNICEF's past role and strategic positioning while projecting forward into the CP for 2026-2030, particularly within the evolving landscape post-COVID-19 and amidst emerging climate challenges. Assessing UNICEF's sector-specific and multi-sectoral implementation strategies, with a focus on identifying avenues for improvement. Examining UNICEF's mechanisms for promoting effective and efficient multi-sectoral and convergent approaches, including integrated service packages. Evaluating the effectiveness and efficiency of coordination and implementation mechanisms in facilitating strategic shifts, fostering innovation, and enhancing participation among government entities and development partners. Analyzing the CP's results-based framework to ascertain the degree of integration regarding equity, gender considerations, and the identified needs and priorities of children and adolescents. Investigating the extent to which the CP's results framework is founded on informed and evidence-based decision-making processes. The evaluation will encompass the Country Programme's duration from 2020 to the present, examining its coherence and alignment with UNICEF's Strategic Plans as well as the Gender Action Plans spanning from 2018 to 2021 and 2022 to 2025.

Project Ukraine

13/08/24 - 13/10/25

SOE alignment with EU state aid rules

According to the most recent data available as of February 2024, Ukraine had 3,116 state-owned enterprises (SOEs) at the central government level, operating in key sectors such as energy, transport, and infrastructure. During the first three quarters of 2023, as few as 854 (27%) of those were operational, and only 475 (15%) were profitable. As of the third quarter of 2021 (the most recent data available), these SOEs employed 693,222 full-time employees. They are crucial to the economy but often suffer from inefficient management and political interference.

The lack of clear policies, oversight, and corporate governance has exacerbated these issues. Only eight (8) of the top 15 SOEs currently listed in the Cabinet’s protocol decision have independent supervisory boards, and the legal status of SOE assets is often ambiguous. This situation hinders the attraction of private investments and market financing, contributing to undercapitalisation and limited credit access for SOEs. It also prevents the development of competition and markets more generally, as the uneven playing field steers SOEs into loss-making market segments that private players are not willing to enter. At the same time, as SOEs are often used to cross-subsidise their loss-making activities with profitable ones – in sectors, such as gas, electricity, railway transportation, or postal services – they often get a competitive disadvantage vis-à-vis their private counterparts.

In 2014, Ukraine initiated reforms to enhance the corporate governance of SOEs, including the establishment of independent supervisory boards. This reform began with Naftogaz and spurred national-level changes. In 2016, Parliament adopted a new law on the corporate governance of SOEs. Subsequently, in 2018, Ukraine also adopted a law on the corporate governance of state-owned banks. That same year, the government approved an overarching state-ownership policy, outlining the rationale for state ownership of enterprises. However, this policy was adopted as an internal (protocol) decision of the Cabinet of Ministers, resulting in weak legal authority and limited enforceability. These reforms, strongly supported by the EU, aim to minimise political meddling and graft, modernise SOEs and improve their performance, develop markets, curb corruption, reduce fiscal risks, attract foreign investment, and lay the foundation for capital markets. One of the most critical aspects of the SOE reform is defining their public policy assignments, such as public service obligations (PSOs), and ensuring transparency in financial transactions between the state and SOEs via the structural separation of accounts within SOEs. This measure must ensure that public funds intended for PSOs are costed appropriately and transparently, as well as compensated to SOEs in an appropriate and timely manner. This will prevent market distortions and ensure fair competition. Aligned with EU competition and state aid rules, this reform will support Ukraine’s broader goal of EU integration.

According to the recently adopted law on corporate governance of SOEs (formerly known as Draft Law 5593-d), the Cabinet of Ministers will approve an overarching, national state ownership policy, which will define the rationale for state ownership of enterprises. The policy will also define the categories of SOEs that have non-financial (including public policy) objectives, particularly related to PSOs, and the procedure for accounting and compensation of expenses incurred to achieve such objectives. The law also gives more authority to supervisory boards, including the power to appoint and dismiss the CEO and the power to approve the SOE’s annual budget (known as the “financial plan” in Ukraine) and provides for the establishment of clear guidelines for the accountability and performance evaluation of SOE boards and management. These changes are called to reduce political interference, improve SOE performance, bolster investor confidence, and promote a level playing field between SOEs and private enterprises. The European Council’s decision to grant Ukraine EU candidacy status in 2022 has accelerated these reform efforts. The Ukraine Facility, adopted in February 2024, supports these initiatives by providing financial aid for both immediate needs and long-term reconstruction. The Facility’s Ukraine Plan includes specific reforms to optimise SOE portfolios and enhance their governance.

The overall objective of this assignment is to assist Ukraine to implement the reform of the SOE sector as foreseen in the Ukraine Plan.
The specific objective of this assignment is to support the Ministry of Economy of Ukraine and other line ministries to prepare for and implement the separation of accounts between public service obligations (PSO) and non-PSO activities in all top key Ukrainian SOEs approved by the Cabinet of Ministers protocol decision.

Project Liberia

06/08/24 - 04/12/26

TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE “FOOD SYSTEMS GOVERNANCE” - FISHERIES

The "Technical Assistance for Food Systems Governance in the Fisheries Sector of Liberia" aims to enhance the sustainability, governance, and productivity of Liberia’s fisheries sector, which is vital for food security, economic growth, and poverty alleviation. Liberia’s fisheries, particularly artisanal, play a crucial role in providing animal protein to the population, yet the sector faces significant challenges such as weak governance, inadequate infrastructure, and poor management. This project, funded by the EU, will focus on strengthening the institutional capacity of the National Fisheries and Aquaculture Authority (NaFAA) and addressing these critical challenges.

Key objectives include building NaFAA’s capacity to regulate, supervise, and coordinate the fisheries sector, with an emphasis on decentralising governance through the establishment of Collaborative Management Associations (CMAs) in all coastal counties. The project also aims to enhance NaFAA’s ability to fight illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing, which threatens the sustainability of marine resources. Additionally, the project will support the development of a robust fisheries value chain by promoting viable business models and empowering local entrepreneurs and fisher communities.

To achieve these objectives, the project will provide technical assistance in areas such as the drafting and implementation of fisheries regulations, resource management, and investment promotion. Capacity-building activities will target both NaFAA’s management and the private sector, focusing on modernising the fisheries business environment and improving market access for artisanal fishers. The project also emphasises the importance of promoting the fisheries sector’s visibility in the media, raising public awareness about its contributions to nutrition and economic development.

By the project’s end, it is expected that Liberia’s fisheries governance will be significantly strengthened, creating sustainable growth opportunities and contributing to the country’s broader development goals, including poverty reduction and enhanced food security.

Project Armenia

26/06/24 - 26/06/25

Evaluation of the World Food Programme's Enterprise Risk Management Policy

The Evaluation of WFP's Enterprise Risk Management Policy provided evidence on the quality of WFP’s Enterprise Risk Management Policy (2018) and the results of its implementation. It commenced in July 2024 and was completed in March 2025. Data collection took place between October 2024 and January 2025. The WFP evaluation policy requires that evaluations of policies take place between and four and six years after the start of policy implementation. The evaluation will be tabled at the Executive Board session in November 2025 and its results will inform the development of an ERM Policy update.

The evaluation had two main objectives: accountability and learning. To meet the accountability objective, the evaluation assessed the quality, implementation, and results of WFP’s 2018 ERM Policy, ensuring transparency and alignment with organisational goals. To support learning, the evaluation assessed progress, examined how and why expected changes have occurred, and distilled lessons to inform future risk management approaches.

The evaluation had a global scope and examines ERM Policy implementation mechanisms at all levels of the organisation, covering the full range of risk management tools, components and processes. The period covered by the evaluation extends from the adoption of the Policy in October 2018 to January 2025, when data collection activities concluded. The assignment responded to three overarching evaluation questions, which collectively assess the OECD DAC criteria of relevance, coherence, effectiveness, and efficiency:

EQ1 – How good is the ERM Policy (criteria: relevance and coherence)?

EQ2 – What results has the ERM Policy achieved (criteria: effectiveness and efficiency)?

EQ3 – What were the enabling or hindering factors for results achievement (criteria: effectiveness, efficiency and coherence)?

A mixed-methods approach was adopted to explore whether pathways and assumptions identified in the ToC (Figure 7) held true. Data collection methods drew on both primary and secondary data sources to ensure comprehensive coverage of ERM implementation (see Table 3). The main features were:

Country studies: The evaluation employed a country study approach through a combination of in-person missions and remote desk review complemented by selected KIIs. Each study analysed two to four key decisions process per country (see next point) to explore how and how effectively risk management is considered.

Analysis of key decision processes: A purposive sampling method was used to analyse key decisions relevant to ERM implementation across selected countries, focusing on different business processes relating to the following areas: Strategic-level decision making, including the development of Country Strategic Plans, and workforce adjustment; Operational decision making around emergency scale-up; targeting and prioritisation; choice of aid modality; fundraising with private entities; and working with partners; risk considerations in cross-cutting areas such as around reflecting humanitarian principles in operational decision-making.

Desk-based review: Policies and guidance documents were reviewed alongside corporate and administrative data, audits, reviews, evaluations, and comparator analyses with UNHCR and FAO.

Key informant interviews (KIIs): Conducted with WFP staff across HQs, Regional Bureaux (RBs), Country Offices (COs), donors, and comparator agencies.

In-person observations: During the 2024 annual RMD workshop with Risk Officers/Advisors to further enrich the analysis.

Quantitative data analysis: Included risk indicators from Corporate Risk Register dashboards and financial data related to ERM activities.

Project Pakistan

02/06/24 - 17/10/24

Final Evaluation of 'Public Finance Management II programme' (PFM II)

Project Tuvalu

28/05/24 - 30/11/26

Tuvalu Coconut Rehabilitation – Technical Assistance contract

Project Malaysia

06/05/24 - 31/12/24

UNICEF Malaysia 2022-2025 Country Programme Evaluation

The UNICEF Malaysia Country Office (MCO) commissioned Landell Mills to undertake an
evaluation of its Country Programme 2022-2025. Country Programme Evaluations (CPEs) in
UNICEF play a key role in identifying lessons which can inform the design of the next country to programme or adjustments in the current country programme. The CPEs also provide opportunities to improve UNICEF’s performance in several key areas: (i) the contribution of tthe Programme of Cooperation to national development results; (ii) UNICEF’s contributionadvancing the SDGs through the UN Sustainable Development Cooperation Framework (UNSDCF) results and (iii) UNICEF’s strategic positioning in relation to its child rights mandate.The CPE took place at an opportune time for UNICEF programming in Malaysia. While
substantial progress has been made in the country on child rights over the past several decades, the COVID-19 pandemic halted or reversed progress on some key indicators. As the country strives toward achieving High Income Country (HIC) status, UNICEF aims to support the government to ensure that development progress is accessible for all children in Malaysia. The UNICEF Malaysia Country Programme (2022-2025) is a partnership engagement between UNICEF and the Government of Malaysia defined in a Country Programme Document (CPD). The overarching theory of change (ToC) for the country programme is that accelerated progress for children can only be achieved if: (a) an enabling environment is sustained that provides leadership, guidance and resources and encourages partnerships for scaled-up action to reach deprived children, regardless of location, race, religion, sex, disability, citizenship or legal migration status; (b) service providers are motivated and equipped to provide quality services, cooperate with others and innovate, and are held accountable for their work; and (c) children, families and communities are empowered with the knowledge, positive attitudes, skills and values to practice healthy, caring and protective behaviours. If these conditions are achieved, then all children in Malaysia – including the most vulnerable – can realize their rights and have an equal opportunity to survive and thrive in a safe, protective and nurturing environment. The CPD has three programme components, including:
1. Child wellbeing, equity and inclusion (including interventions in social policy and
social protection, nutrition, education, climate and adolescent development),
2. Ending violence against children (including interventions in enabling environment,
social workforce strengthening, and addressing social norms)
3. Programme effectiveness (including interventions in communications and public
advocacy, social and behaviour change, gender and disability, knowledge management,
technology for development, child rights and business, and monitoring and evaluation).The primary strategies used by UNICEF to achieve results at scale include policy advocacy (support in strengthening Malaysia’s policy framework and advocating for children and families), evidence generation (building an evidence base on the situation of children in Malaysia) and innovation (modelling innovation to advance the rights of children in Malaysia).

The purpose of the CPE was both summative and formative in nature, assessing the past and ongoing programme implementation to inform future programming, including design of the next CPD 2026-2030. Under this overarching purpose, the CPE had the following specific objectives:

1. To assess the relevance, effectiveness, coherence and sustainability of the current country programme 2022-2025, with a strong cross-cutting focus on equity, human rights, disability, gender equality and child rights and business, and with a focus on specific programme areas which have not been subject to recent evaluation.2. To identify key challenges that constrain, or catalysts that enhance, the effectiveness of
CP implementation and its results (including synergies with the fundraising side of MCO).3. To assess the ability of the CP to respond and adapt to changing contexts, new emerging issues, and national priorities.4. To support accountability by providing an independent assessment of progress towards
expected results of the CP, its contribution to national development results, and UNICEF’s contribution to UNSDCF results.5. Identify key lessons from implementation of the ongoing CP which can inform design of the next CP (including lessons learned from the COVID-19 response).6. Provide an assessment of UNICEF’s strategic positioning (UNICEF's added value and comparative advantages) among the development community and national partners, considering its ability to respond to the needs of children in Malaysia.7. To guide UNICEF in being fit-for-purpose for a country that is on the verge of graduating to HIC status.The evaluation team used a mixed-methods approach in which qualitative and quantitative data from primary and secondary sources was collected and analysed. The mix of methods and diverse range of sources enabled triangulation and validation to develop the evaluation evidence, and enhance the credibility of its findings, conclusions, and recommendations. Desk review, key informant interviews, focus group discussions, and an online perception survey were the main data collection methods used. Primary data was collected between July and September 2024. The evaluation undertook two field missions to Malaysia: a) a two-week mission by three members of the team to Kuala Lumpur/Putrajaya and Eastern Malaysia (Sabah and Sarawak) and b) a one-week mission to Kuala Lumpur/Putrajaya by one member of the team.

Our projects

862 projects found