Afghanistan: EXTERNAL CONSULTANT FOR FINAL PROJECT EVALUATION

Project Title: Strengthening the livelihood system of highly food insecure households living in urban and peri-urban informal settlements of Mazar-i-Sharif.

EC grant reference: EuropeAid/133533/M/ACT/AF

1. Background

The Czech NGO People in Need (PIN) provides humanitarian and development assistance in over 20 countries in the world. With a global turnover of 40 million USD and over 1000 employees, its food security, nutrition, WASH, education and other programs have assisted millions of poor people worldwide. PIN’s work is funded by the European Commission, UN agencies as well as private donors. PIN is a member of Alliance2015, a European NGO network. PIN mission in Afghanistan opened in December 2001 and has focused mainly on education, reintegration of returnees, water and sanitation, rural development and livelihoods.

Strengthening the livelihood system of highly food insecure households living in urban and peri-urban informal settlements of Mazar-i-Sharif is a 3 year project funded by European Commission.

Overall objective of the project: The overall objective of the action is to strengthen the livelihood system of the most food insecure households (HH) in urban and peri-urban areas with a view of moving towards sustainable development.
Specific objective of the project: The specific objective of the project is to improve resilience and strengthen coping mechanisms of 990 highly food insecure households in 5 urban and 5 peri-urban informal settlements in Mazar-i-Sharif, Balkh Province

Expected results:

Result 1: Enhanced resilience, access to food and dietary diversity of 500 chronically food insecure households in targeted area through the development of urban and peri-urban agriculture

Result 2: Enhanced economic, social and human capital of 450 vulnerable female-headed households from highly food insecure households through the establishment of 30 Self-Help Groups (SHG)

Result 3: Improved income and food security of 200 vulnerable households through vocational training, skills development and the start-up grants distribution

Result 4: Enhanced understanding of the causes and dynamics of the food insecurity, poverty and rural-urban migration in informal urban and peri-urban settlements of Mazar-e Sharif, and other urban centres in the region.

For target indicators that the project aims to achieve please refer to the Annex A : “Project logical framework”

2. Scope and objective of the Evaluation

The objective of the final evaluation report is to assess the level of achievement of project results and objectives and impact of the intervention. It will provide recommendations for the management to decide about the future programming and extract the key lessons learned.

Evaluation will detect the real changes in the field and analyse the changes attributable to the intervention. It will focus on assessment and explanation of the achieved results and sustainability of the intervention’s benefits Evaluation will cover the whole implementation period (28 months) and will cover the area of implementation of the project (Mazar-e Sharif, Balkh province).

3. Key evaluation questions

The evaluation will assess the achievement of the project results and objectives with regard to relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, impact and sustainability.

Relevance

• 
  

  To what extent is the focus of the project in line with government´s policies and efforts?

  
  


• 
  

  How are the specific components of the project (Self-help groups approach, saving groups, urban agriculture approach, vocational trainings, support to micro-business establishment etc.) relevant to the needs of beneficiaries in comparison to each other?

  
  


• 
  

  To what extent are the specific results contributing to achievement of the project objectives?

  
  

Effectiveness

To what extent have the objectives and expected results of the project been achieved? To what extent has the livelihood of targeted households been strengthened? Specifically:

• 
  

  How successful was the urban agriculture in achieving its objectives?

  
  


• 
  

  To what extent has the training improved hygiene and nutrition practice among beneficiaries?

  
  


• 
  

  Are the innovation projects contributing to livelihood improvement of the beneficiaries?

  
  


• 
  

  To what extent the activity improved the development of small businesses among beneficiaries?

  
  


• 
  

  Have the beneficiaries gained relevant skills and knowledge from the offered vocational trainings? Have they been able to find jobs and increase their income?

  
  


• 
  

  Has the SHG approach contributed to enhanced economic and social situation of women?

  
  

Efficiency

• 
  

  How could the approach used by the initiative (including methodology, expertise of staff and utilization of inputs) be improved?

  
  


• 
  

  To what extent was the project implementation cost-efficient?

  
  


• 
  

  Was the activity or project implemented in the most efficient way compared to alternatives?

  
  

Sustainability

• 
  

  To what extent are SHGs likely to continue their activities after the project ends?

  
  


• 
  

  To what extend are the urban agriculture activities likely to continue? What can/could be done differently to boost its sustainability?

  
  


• 
  

  To what extent are the start-up grants likely to contribute to sustainability of the activities?

  
  


• 
  

  What factors have influenced the achievement or non-achievement of sustainability of the project?

  
  

Impact

• 
  

  What are the likely long-term impacts, positive or negative, of the project? What is the evidence?

  
  


• 
  

  Are there any unexpected positive or negative impacts?

  
  

The following specific cross-cutting topics will be considered by the evaluator during the evaluation:

• 
  

  Target group – To what extent have the beneficiaries been well identified? Has the targeting been understood and accepted by all community groups? To what extent have marginalized groups benefited from the project?

  
  


• 
  

  Mainstreaming policies of PIN: To what extent has the project adhered to gender policy of People In Need?

  
  


• 
  

  Participatory methodology –To what extent have all the relevant stakeholders been involved in planning, implementation and decision making?Relevance and effectiveness of provided trainings – Have trainings been organized in line with beneficiaries’ preferences and needs and has the training design taken into account trainees’ capacities, e.g. literacy level, mobility? What are the shortcomings and lessons learned from the trainings?

  
  

4. Methodology

The consultant is expected to use both qualitative and quantitative methods and work with primary and secondary data sources.

Desk study, documents review:

• Analysis of available data sources such as baseline and needs assessment documents, mid-term evaluation, data from comparison group (92 people) for kitchen gardening activity, progress reports, monitoring reports, Urban Poverty study and any other materials that the evaluator considers useful for this evidence-based assessment


• Review of project documents, including project reports


• Review of policy documents and strategies


• Reports from project staff


• CRM records

Field Research

• Interviews with relevant project stakeholders


• Interviews and focus group discussions with project beneficiaries and non-beneficiary population in target areas


• Observation


• Quantitative survey on representative sample of beneficiaries (Self-help group members, Vocational training graduates, Kitchen gardening beneficiaries) – at confidence level 95%, confidence interval max. 10, and ideally also quantitative survey of selected sample of non-beneficiaries from comparison group for kitchen gardening activity. The detailed methodological approach will be designed by the evaluator in the inception report. The evaluator is expected to conduct an evaluation ensuring active and meaningful involvement of beneficiaries and other stakeholders.

5. Specific Tasks

• Review of project key documents


• Review of project logical framework.


• Meetings with project staff and relevant stakeholders.


• Field research, data collection and analysis.


• Provision of recommendations for future programming and capacity building.


• Preparation of evaluation documents (inception report, draft report, final report)

6. Deliverables

The evaluation report must provide clear, evidence-based and analytical answers to all the evaluation questions and include the assessment of the cross-cutting topics. It should contain all the necessary raw data information that was used in the process of data collection and analysis, and any other necessary annexes and references used. Data must be disaggregated by sex.

The Evaluator will deliver:

• inception report (clarifications on methodology, tools, work schedule),


• draft report for PIN comments


• final report


• presentation for PIN audience and relevant stakeholders summarizing the evaluation findings

These deliverables are to be:

7. Evaluation Report

The desired structure of the evaluation report is following:

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Summary of the evaluation, with particular emphasis on the main findings, conclusions, lessons learned and recommendations.

INTRODUCTION: Description of the evaluated intervention, its logic, history, organization and stakeholders, presentation of the evaluation’s purpose and questions.

METHODOLOGY: Description of the sampling strategy and methods used for data collection; description of the limitations.

FINDINGS: Factual evidence relevant to the questions asked by the evaluation and interpretations of such evidence.

CONCLUSIONS: Assessments of intervention results and performance against given evaluation criteria and standards of performance:

• Problems and needs (Relevance)


• Achievement of purpose (Effectiveness)


• Sound management and value for money (Efficiency)


• Achievement of wider effects (Impact)


• Likely continuation of achieved results (Sustainability)


• Mainstreaming

LESSONS LEARNED: General conclusions with a potential for wider application and use.

RECOMMENDATIONS: Specific and actionable proposals regarding improvements of the project or management addressed to the PIN or other intended users.

ANNEXES

• ToR


• Itinerary


• List of persons interviewed


• Summary of field visits


• List of documents reviewed


• Evaluation Question Matrix


• Questionnaires and Focus Group Discussions or Interview guidelines/outlines

The evaluation report Executive summary should not exceed the limit of 3 pages, and the remaining parts of the report should not exceed 25 pages (excluding annexes).

8. Duration

The evaluation should take place from 6th December 2015 to 10th January 2016. The total duration will be 36 calendar days.

Preparation and inception report – Timing: 5 days – Completion date: 6.12.2015 – 10.12. 2015

Field research – Timing: 15 days – Completion date: 13.12.2015 – 27.12. 2015

Draft Evaluation Report – Timing: 6 days – Completion date: 28.12.2015 – 2.1.2016

Final Report – Timing: 5 days – Completion date: 6.1.2016 – 10.1. 2016

Maximum budget available is 7500 € the evaluator will be selected on a competitive basis based on the listed criteria.

9. Requirements and profile of the Evaluation Consultant

• Relevant professional experience in conducting development project evaluations (mandatory)


• Knowledge and practice of working in or evaluating of the projects focusing on: urban poverty, livelihoods and income generation, agriculture, social protection, women empowerment (preferred, not mandatory)


• Working knowledge of Afghanistan or region (preferred)


• Excellent spoken and written English (mandatory)

10. Application process

Applicants are requested to send their applications by email to michala.deveckova@peopleinneed.cz, stating “UP Evaluation” in the subject field. The application deadline is 1st of December 2015, 23.59 CET.. Only pre-selected candidates will be contacted.

If any of the applicants requires any clarification related to this offer, such question should be sent to PIN by e-mail to the following e-mail address: michala.deveckova@peopleinneed.cz by 28th of November 2015. PIN does not guarantee that all questions will be answered. If PIN answers the question, all other applicants will be copied the answer. Communication will be held through e-mail.

To ensure that PIN could copy the answer to all applicants, everyone applying for this offer is advised to send their e-mail contacts to the above specified PIN e-mail address, or otherwise ensure that PIN knows their contact details.

Content of the application (only complete applications will be considered)

• Cover letter summarizing qualification and experience of the candidate to conduct above described evaluation


• Curriculum Vitae (indicating at least two reference persons, ideally managers of evaluations, who can provide information on previous evaluation experience)


• Preliminary though tailored methodological proposal for the implementation of the evaluation


• At least one example of previous relevant work outcomes (evaluation reports, ideally related to similar projects)


• Financial proposal (including daily rate and total sum, including all taxes, if applicable)

PIN applies a transparent selection process based on the following criteria:

• Relevant qualification and experience – to be proven by submitted documents- CV, cover letter, example of previous work (criteria weight is 45%)


• Price in EUR (criteria weight is 45%)


• Quality of proposed methodology – mixture of qualitative and quantitative methods proposed in Preliminary methodological proposal (criteria weight is 10%)

Each evaluation criteria will obtain between 0 and 10 points, 10 points being the maximum, 0 points the minimum and multiplied by criteria weight. For example, the Price criterion formula will be as follows: PriceA/PriceB criteria weight (0,45) 10. Price A = most convenient price for PIN from all submitted offers; Price B = actual price offered by the applicant.

11. Logistics

The evaluator will receive logistical support from PIN team, including:

• Accommodation in Mazar-e Sharif, in PIN guesthouse, lunch for the working days (Sunday to Thursday)


• Vehicles for transportation from guesthouse in Mazar-e-Sharif to implementation sites of the project, incl. drivers and fuel

PIN will NOT provide:

• Interpreters


• Research assistants / enumerators (however PIN can provide assistance with hiring them)

12. Payment modalities and specifications

Milestones

20% – Following the signing of the Contract on Evaluation Services

30% – After the 1st draft of the final evaluation report has been submitted and approved by PIN

50% – After the final version of the final evaluation report has been submitted and approved by PIN none;

PIN reserves the right to deduct up to 0.5% of the total contract price for each day’s delay in meeting the deliverables specified. This deduction shall be applied to the last payment of 50% of the contract price.

PIN will require specific and by data supported answers to each of the agreed evaluation questions or strong justification why the data could not be obtained. Justification of data unavailability must be communicated by the evaluator without delay as soon as it becomes apparent and approved by PIN. Failure to do so can result in decreasing the consultant’s remuneration.

13. Annexes

Annex A: “Project logical framework” – http://bit.ly/1Nq6tj8