Independence and assignment acceptance

• Review the task assignment and confirm availability, competence and independence before starting work.

• Commit to the timeline for the review defined and agreed with IPMG focal point.

• Complete the assignment-specific conflict-of-interest declaration.

• Decline the assignment where the reviewer prepared, materially supported, supervised or directed the design, or where another actual or perceived conflict exists.

• Identify immediately where the design is outside the reviewer's technical category, authority limits or available time.

Technical review

• Review design drawings, technical specifications, and BOQs in terms of accuracy and suitability to overall design requirements, identifying aspects where designs do not comply with minimum codes and standards and IPMG policies, and providing practical guidance for design improvement.

• Review the design brief, basis of design and applicable codes and standards.

• Check the completeness and reliability of site information, including topographic, geotechnical, hydrological, hydraulic, traffic, seismic and environmental inputs as relevant.

• Confirm that the approved model design is applicable to the site and that all adaptations remain within the approved limits.

• Review calculations, assumptions, load cases, dimensions and material parameters. To ensure the safety, functionality and fitness of infrastructure while recognizing the circumstances and constraints of the UNOPS operational context, the Retainer will be required to apply professional judgment in the application of relevant codes, standards, and IPMG policies.

• Check consistency between calculations, drawings, specifications, Bill of Quantities and supporting reports.

• Review constructability, maintenance implications and suitability for local materials, skills and operating conditions.

• Identify safety-critical omissions, inappropriate assumptions, unresolved interfaces and departures from the approved model design.

• Where necessary, recommend additional site investigations, specialist input or escalation to the normal IPMG review route.

• Share the review comments with the designated IPMG focal point through official email communication. The IPMG focal point will be responsible for reviewing the comments, discussing them with the retainer where necessary, and subsequently sharing them with the project team.

Review comments and closure

• Record clear, specific and actionable review comments using the approved UNOPS format.

• Distinguish between safety-critical, compliance, coordination and advisory comments.

• Review the designer's responses and revised documents until comments are satisfactorily closed or escalated.

• Complete and sign the applicable model-design checklist and the review report. Sign the project review Sign-off certificate provided by IPMG.

• Recommend one of the following outcomes: accepted; revise and resubmit; or outside the approved route and to be escalated.

Coordination and site verification

• Coordinate with IPMG focal point that will organize any necessary engagement with the project teams.

• Attend technical meetings where necessary to explain comments and resolve questions.

• Undertake site visits where critical assumptions cannot be confirmed from submitted documents, subject to security and travel approval.

• Prepare a concise site-verification note where a visit is undertaken. The note shall be shared with the designated IPMG focal point, who will subsequently share it with the project office.

• Provide limited technical guidance to help the designer understand review comments, without taking over design development.

Records and confidentiality

• Maintain complete, orderly and traceable review records.

• Use the official project and IPMG systems and templates specified for the assignment.

• Protect confidential project, partner and design information.

• Return all required records and confirm assignment completion before payment approval.

Hydraulic Works and Irrigation Structures

Relevant experience should include several of the following: 

• design or independent review of check dams, small weirs, irrigation intakes, canals, aqueducts or similar hydraulic structures;

• hydrology, flood flows, catchment characteristics, hydraulic capacity, sediment, scour and erosion assessment;

• stability assessment of small hydraulic structures, including sliding, overturning, bearing and foundation conditions;

• river or irrigation protection works, including gabion, masonry or concrete structures; and

• practical experience with irrigation and water-management infrastructure in mountainous, arid or semi-arid environments.