Afghanistan: Programme Evaluator Kabul, Evaluation of, “Building Resilient Communities for Sustainable Development and Peace 2013 - 2015”

1. Context and Programme Background

Norwegian Church Aid (NCA) with its long presence (since 1979) in Afghanistan, carried out an extensive review and planning process during 2012 to examine options for programme delivery from 2013 to 2015. This has fallen right into the transition[1] period in the country – perceived to be difficult and complex, with the risks that the security context and overall humanitarian situation may deteriorate. In addition, to this, Afghanistan has been suffering from a sustained and complex mix of violent conflicts, insecurity, underdevelopment, weak state infrastructure, limited capacity in civil society and a lack of participation by women and minority ethnic groups. Based on this, the programme to be implemented in such a period needed to be flexible and robust and adopt a holistic approach by integrating development and conflict mitigation processes while strengthening civil society institutions.

Examining the described situation, NCA Afghanistan applied for a three-year programme totalling 119 million NOK to implement the programme “Building Resilient Communities for Sustainable Development and Peace”, which aimed to link development and peace building while strengthening civil society. A key element of this programme, in this period of transition for Afghanistan, was to be attentive to the communities own priorities, and to mobilize and strengthen local capacities for development and peace, rather than bringing in external solutions to the Afghan context. The proposal for the programme was strongly informed by and built upon NCA’s previous programmes in Afghanistan “Integrated Rural Development Programme 2010-2012” and “Promoting Women’s Engagement and Participation in Faryab 2012-2013” and by a comprehensive context analysis process carried out during the second half of 2012. This process highlighted a number of critical deficits for the programme in the targeted provinces including:

• · Security and protection deficits especially for women and children who are caught between several forces (government forces, the insurgency and local militias);


• · Deficits in terms of access to justice and an overreliance on a weak and often dysfunctional local justice system; and,


• · Equity deficits with limited access to basic services such as livelihoods, water and sanitation and lack of electricity.

To respond to the deteriorating security and humanitarian situation, the programme was designed to focus its efforts on addressing three threads of work: conflict mitigation, meeting development needs and strengthening civil society. These are interconnected, exacerbate each other and are reinforced by two rooted issues – power dynamics and inequitable and adversarial relationships. As such the focus of the programme was on the contribution to “resilient communities” which are capable of responding to the range of deficits in the target communities and the challenges which they will face during the Afghan transition process. The NCA intervention is based on the reframing and strengthening of relationships between rights holders and duty bearers with inclusive dialogue between stakeholders and a structured expression of concerns and aspirations.

Over the period 2013 – 2015 the programme was planned to reach 250 – 300 communities, including approximately 10 – 15,000 households in twelve districts of Faryab, Daykundi and Uruzgan provinces. NCA is currently engaged in these provinces as there are few other actors present, the development deficit is high, and there are specific ethnic and conflict dynamics in these areas. In both Faryab and Uruzgan there are increasing levels of insurgent activities with a deteriorating security situation. There are also high levels of inter and intra-ethnic tensions with incidents of violent conflict and potential for serious outbreaks of violence in Faryab and in districts along the border between Uruzgan and Daykundi. The deteriorating security situation combined with access constraints means that the communities in these districts are particularly vulnerable and in need of sustained and integrated development and conflict mitigation initiatives.

NCA’s long-term overall goal for the programme was: Sustainable development and peace in Afghanistan is promoted by building resilient communities. The following were the outcomes of programme:

• · Outcome 1: Local capacities for peace are mobilized to prevent and transform destructive conflicts;


• · Outcome 2: Traditional and religious leaders are challenged to address key drivers of conflict;


• · Outcome 3: Women are empowered to influence and participate in peace building activities;


• · Outcome 4: Women and men have diversified and increased their income;


• · Outcome 5: Communities have secured sustainable access to renewable energy;


• · Outcome 6: Communities are benefitting from sound, sustainable environmental services in water supply, sanitation and hygiene promotion;


• · Outcome 7: A stronger, more inclusive civil society is proactively working for development and peace at community and district level; and,


• · Outcome 8: NCA partners are transparent and accountable civil society organizations working for social change.

Based on this the programme components included support: for the development of agriculture and livestock, income generating activities using new technologies, access to markets for women, access to water and sanitation facilities, electrification through renewable energy sources, building local capacities for peace and strengthening civil society organizations.

The programme was implemented in partnership with 12 Afghan civil society organisations. NCA and its partners formed provincial Coordination Teams, which facilitated a participatory contextualized analysis in the communities in order to identify priorities and develop plans accordingly. This process aimed to mobilise people and resources in the communities, build relations and ensure a collective and agreed implementation process. It was believed that this approach would contribute to acceptance and ownership and enhance the impact of the programme. In particular, the increased focus on participation and coordination at local, provincial and national levels to lead to more integrated and strategic interventions, enhanced learning among stakeholders and ultimately to improved quality of life for Afghan communities. An evaluability assessment was carried out on this programme in 2013 and will be available to the consultant chosen. An endline study was conducted at the end of the programme in 2015, to measure change against baseline values.

2. Purpose of the Evaluation

The purpose of the external evaluation is to assess the impact of the programme “Building Resilient Communities for Sustainable Development and Peace”; how it has contributed to securing sustainable development and peace by building resilient communities. To do so, the evaluation will:

• Assess and analysis impacts of the programme in comparison to the outcomes and goals set


• Assess the synergy between the outcomes of development and peace to see if they have contributed to the sustainability of the intervention and if they have had an effect on the context at community and district level.


• Examine the success of the different elements of the programme in building community resilience.

In addition, it is aimed to provide an independent assessment of the performance of the programme against targets and comment on what has worked and why and what has not worked and why. Specific objectives of the evaluation include;

• · To assess the effectiveness of the programme and the extent to which it has achieved planned outcomes;


• · To analyse the programme’s wider impact and contribution to sustainable development and peace in Afghanistan


• · To identify best practise and advise how the programme could be strengthened to inform future programming, wider organisational learning and overall policy


• · To make recommendations (at both operational and strategic level) regarding the future development of the programme


• · To make recommendations on how to strengthen women’s participation in development and peace programmes in future


• · To what extent the programme was up to accountability principles

3. Implementing Stakeholders

Stakeholder participation is fundamental for NCA evaluations. The consultant is expected to conduct a participatory evaluation with meaningful involvement of programme partners, right holders and other relevant stakeholders. Stakeholder participation is to be an integral component of evaluation design and planning; information collection; the development of findings; evaluation reporting and results dissemination.

Summary of stakeholders to be consulted:

Relevant Stakeholders

• · Ministry of Rural Rehabilitation and Development (MRRD)


• · Provincial directorates of MRRD, Ministry of Agriculture and Ministry of Women Affairs


• · High Peace Council (HPC)


• · Afghanistan Peace and Reintegration Programme Secretariat


• · Provincial Peace Councils (PPCs)


• · NCA staff


• · Partners staff


• · Members of coordination teams on the provincial level


• · The Royal Norwegian Embassy in Afghanistan


• · NCA partners involved in implementation of the programme


• · NCA programme advisors from NCA HO involved in the designing of the programme


• · Members from the community institutions (local civil society organizations)


• · Community groups


• · Women groups

4. Expected Output

The evaluation will report results in English within the length of 25-30 pages; two page recommendations, 3 pages executive summary and maximum 20 – 25 pages presentation of the findings – outlining as well the overall evaluation methods, their appropriateness and evaluation constraints faced, if any. The annexes are excluded from the above page limitation. The annexes should contain any literature consulted, data collection instruments, the ToR, list of interviewees and any additional information required. Prior to finalizing the evaluation report, the evaluator will submit a draft to NCA for comments and inputs.

5. Evaluation Methodology

The evaluation methodology will be proposed by the evaluator. However, NCA’s strong preference is for the consultant to rely on qualitative methods, to probe findings from the endline study but especially to identify unintended effects and outcomes outside the logic model as formalised in the LFA. Participatory evaluative methods such as most significant change are encouraged to be applied. NCA Afghanistan will recruit a national consultant to assist the evaluator with data collection, translation, and interpretation should the evaluator require. Furthermore, the evaluator will prepare an inception report prior to the commencement of the evaluation field work. The inception report will present the proposed evaluation methodology, an evaluation matrix and instruments that will be used for the purpose of data collection in the field and evaluation timetable.

6. Evaluation Scope and Questions

While all OECD/DAC five criteria for evaluation are pertinent, the evaluation would focus on effectiveness, efficiency, impact and sustainability. Addressing the evaluation purpose will require that the consultant to provide answers to the following specific questions – which could be refined in the inception report:

• · Relevancy: To what extent the programme has been aligned to National priority programmes and original programme documents and budget? Do the programme outputs match the priorities of the communities?


• · Effectiveness: What has been the effectiveness of programme efforts and its positive role in building resilient communities? What has been the contribution of programme in changing the living conditions of the targeted communities?


• · Efficiency: Is the relationship between the programme costs and results reasonable? Have the most efficient approaches been used during the implementation of the activities?


• · Impact: What is the impact of the programme on the participants and wider sustainable development and peace? Is there evidence that the programme is having an impact (Positive/negative, intended or unintended) on key development issues and conflict drivers?


• · Sustainability: Is there evidence that the results of the programme can be sustained? To what extent has the programme established processes and systems that are likely to support the continued implementation of the programme? Has the programme reached a critical mass of key actor? What are the challenges and advantages of such a number of participants for the sustainability of the community institutions established or strengthened?

Additional issues to be addressed by the evaluation

• · Gender aspects: To what extent were gender aspects considered throughout the programme?


• · Conflict sensitivity: To what extent was conflict sensitivity integrated into programming?


• · Accountability: To what extent does the project lived up to accountability principles, in particular in relation to sharing of information, participation, and handling complaints, provided a complaint system is in place? To what extent have the involved partners followed up key accountability standards mentioned above with rights holders?


• · Networking and bridge building: To what extent has the project encouraged (positive) relations between the different stakeholders (mentioned above under implementing stakeholders) on the one hand, and local/national government authorities on the other hand?


• · NCA’s added value: What is the added value of NCA under this programme?

7. Skills and Competencies

NCA is looking for an international evaluator who will be responsible for the analysis and the final report of the evaluation report, and for liaising with NCA. If there is a need felt by the international evaluator to recruit a local consultant to provide assistance to the evaluator, NCA will take this into consideration.

Applicants will be shortlisted based upon their expression of interest, budget and CV. The marking system is as follows:

• Quality of proposal (35 points)


• Experience in carrying out quality evaluations of a similar nature (15 points)


• Familiarity with Afghanistan context. (10 points)


• Experience with participatory evaluation tools (15 points)


• Knowledge in development (5 points), peace building (5 points), conflict sensitivity (5 points) and gender mainstreaming (5 points)


• Proven facilitation skills (5 points)

Those attaining 70 or more points will be shortlisted, and the Steering Group selected for this evaluation will then select the successful candidate. The purpose of the steering group in this instance is to ensure that all procurement is carried out objectively in a fair and transparent manner in order to prevent conflict of interests and corruption. The evaluation will be advertised openly as this will generate competition and promote transparency and accountability.

8. Time frame

The evaluation is planned to be undertaken in July – August 2016. The evaluation will include meetings and workshop with NCA and partners’ staff, expatriate staff of NCA working in Afghanistan and the advisors from NCA’s HO in Oslo. NCA recommends these meeting to be organized prior to field visits and collection of data for the evaluation. This will enhance evaluator understanding and knowledge on the programme modality and working approaches of NCA and its partner organizations. However, the potential evaluator may offer other suggestions such as the necessary interaction with the stakeholders defined. The following is a proposed time table that may be revised after discussions between parties.

• 16^th May 2016 – Submission of expression of interest, budget and CV


• 31^st May 2016 – Selection of consultant


• 18^th June 2016 – Submission of inception report to NCA, after desk review of relevant documentation and kick-off skype with NCA.


• 10 – 13^th July 2016 (4 days) – Meetings with stakeholders and data collection in Kabul


• 14 – 25^th July 2016 (12 days) – Data collection from field


• 26^th July – 2^nd August 2016 (7 days) – Submission of draft evaluation report


• 10th August 2016 – Draft version reviewed and commented by NCA and sent to the evaluator for revision and finalization


• 12^th August 2016 (2 days) – Submission of the final report to NCA Total working days = 25

9. Consultant’s Proposal

The evaluation firm or person shall submit the following:

• Initially an expression of interest with budget and short CV by 16^th May 2016.


• Only shortlisted candidates will be contacted