GFFO Final Evaluation Consultant

Requisition ID: req51452

Job Title: GFFO Final Evaluation Consultant

Sector: Monitoring & Evaluation

Employment Category: Consultant

Employment Type: Full-Time

Open to Expatriates: Yes

Location: Syria

Work Arrangement:

Deadline :28-April-2024

Job Description

About IRC

The International Rescue Committee (IRC) is an international non-governmental organization. IRC
helps people whose lives and livelihoods are shattered by conflict and disaster to survive, recover, and gain control of their future. IRC has built expertise in supporting societies in their transition to sustainable development, with a focus on assisting subnational institutions to deliver basic social services. With an annual operating budget of over $900 million and a presence in over 40 countries,
IRC has an exceptional capacity to build the technical capacity of subnational institutions and deliver quality services in sectors including health care, violence prevention and response (protection,
including child protection and GBV), education, economic recovery and development, governance, and research and learning. As a recognized global leader in protection programming, IRC is committed to addressing the world’s humanitarian crises and development challenges through context appropriate, gender sensitive, evidence-based, outcome-driven interventions that bring real change to the lives of our clients.

About project:
The IRC team is looking to assess the work implemented through GFFO funded project “Critical multi-sectoral humanitarian assistance to conflict-affected households in northern Syria”, which is a three-and-a-half-year project focuses on Northern Syria (Deir ez Zor, Al Hassakeh, Ar-Raqqa, Idleb and Aleppo governorates). The project outcome is: Vulnerable households in Syria have expanded access to Health, Protection and Agricultural Livelihoods services. 

The main four program objectives are listed below in addition to the key results and interventions table:

1.  Children and people are protected from and treated for the consequences of communicable and non-communicable diseases, and women and adolescent girls are protected from and treated for complications of pregnancy and childbirth.
2. People are safe in their communities and receive support when they experience harm.
3. Vulnerable individuals improve their food security by restoring agricultural livelihoods. 
4. Vulnerable households are able to meet their basic needs through MPCA 

The project is running in the Syria Country programs, and the implementation is through partners or directly through the IRC staff.

Table 1: Outputs and Activities

Output 1: Children and people are protected from and treated for the consequences of communicable and non-communicable diseases, and women and adolescent girls are protected from and treated for complications of pregnancy and childbirth

Activity 1.1:  Provide comprehensive primary health care (PHC) and reproductive health (RH) services through static health facilities and mobile medical units (MMU) in Raqqa, Hassakeh, Deir Az Zor, Idleb and Aleppo

Activity 1.2: Offer secondary health care services targeting children with acute medical conditions through 1 pediatric unit in Al Hol.

Activity 1.3: Treatment of severe acute malnourished children through supporting outpatient therapeutic program at five static facilities (Hazima PHCC, Areesha PHCC, Paediatric unit in Al Hol camp, Azaz PHC and Kafir Karmin PHC).

Activity 1.4: Conduct outreach activities through Community Health Workers (CHWs) to support local communities in accessing health services while disseminating health promotion/educational messages and conducting outreaches beyond the static and mobile structures.

Activity 1.5: Provide secondary health care services at the Al Hol Field Hospital.

Activity 1.6: Deliver mental health and psychosocial support services through clinical and out- reach interventions.

Activity 1.7: Support emergency access and transportation to healthcare facilities through a network of ambulances

Activity 1.8: Procurement and Procurement and distribution of essential medical supplies (mainly NCD kits) to highly prioritized health facilities in both Aleppo and Idlib governorate in coordination with the health cluster/supply chain technical working group

Activity 1.9. Health Facility Rehabilitation through Cash for Work

Output 2: People are safe in their communities and receive support when they experience harm.

Activity 2.1: Provision of quality inclusive child protection services to enhance the resilience, wellbeing and agency of children through comprehensive case management, structured PSS and inclusiveness services

Activity 2.2: Provision of quality community-based CP services to enhance communal prevention and response mechanisms to CP concerns through capacity building and awareness raising

Activity 2.3: Provide GBV risk mitigation and prevention activities targeting women, girls, men and boys in the community and GBV response services for GBV survivors, primarily women and girls through Women and Girls Safe Spaces (WGSS) in Abu Khashab, Tel Assamin and Mahmoudli camps and in Raqqa city

Activity 2.4: Inform advocacy and humanitarian response efforts through protection monitoring and community-level assessments in Deir Ezzor, Raqqa, Hassakeh, Idleb and Aleppo

Activity 2.5: The provision of protection services in Raqqa, Deir Ezzor, and Aleppo.

Activity 2.6: The provision of in-kind and cash assistance to meet Protection outcomes in Northeast and Northwest Syria

Output 3: Vulnerable individuals improve their food security by restoring agricultural livelihoods.

Activity 3.1: Support farmers to engage in agricultural activities for consumption and income generation

Activity 3.2: Agricultural market system strengthening

Output 4: Vulnerable households are able to meet their basic needs through MPCA

Activity 4.1: Distribution of Multi-Purpose Cash Assistance

Evaluation Scope:

• The overall purpose of the evaluation is to measure the extent to which IRC was able meet the project objectives and results; to assess the achievements of the project anticipated targets including outcome/impact levels that made any difference to people’s lives. Moreover, the evaluation is aimed to assess the processes and achievements made to effectively draw lessons that will inform the design and development of the future project. The final evaluation should help the IRC understand what has and what has not worked in terms of effectiveness, relevance, efficiency, impact, sustainability and durable solutions, and coherence and to identify key programmatic and non-programmatic recommendations to improve the design and implementation of future project.

• The main purpose of the evaluation is to measure the impact/outcome of the project and in light of the OECD criteria, the evaluation aims to answer the questions below:

General:

• To what extent collaborative partnerships between IRC and downstream partner organizations enhanced the relevance, effectiveness, sustainability, efficiency and impact of the project?

• To what extent IRC ensured community participation and accountability specifically with project design and implementation? How did this affect the project progress?

Relevance:

• To what level did the project address the community and individual needs of the targeted community?

• To what extent did the project achieve its intended activities?

• To what extent was the project adaptive to contextual developments?

Effectiveness:

• How effective were the mechanisms, strategies, and approaches used during the implementation of the project?

• How effective were the partnerships with the local NGOs?

• How effective was the project in delivering the planned program?

• What was the tangible progress/improvement that could be achieved through a multi-sectoral approach?

Efficiency:

• Were the required resources (human, financial, and operational) for both IRC and partners in place and sufficient to implement the project activities and achieve the output targets on time?

• How did the partnership modality contribute to the efficiency of the project delivery?

• What internal and external factors affected the project progress in achieving the targets/objectives and what external factors have led to delays in some activities launching?

Coherence:

• Did the project build internal compatibilities and synergies within IRC/Syria Country Program and with partners?

• How did the project build interlinkages with other projects in the area? What is the added value? What are the strategies set by the organization to avoid duplication of efforts?

• How did the project align with broad humanitarian interventions in Northern Syria?

Impact:

• Which project activities had the greatest contribution to improve people’s life in line with the project outcome/outputs?

• What are the unintended effects of the project, if any, negative and positive?

• What are the long-term changes achieved (if any) so far, especially through agricultural activities?
• How well did the activities contribute to the project outputs and to what extent has the theory of change for each output been achieved? Are there examples/ case studies of this change from project beneficiaries?

Sustainability:

Did the partnerships approach create a sustainability of the long-term interventions and gender transformative change in local communities?

What are the likelihoods of sustainability of project outcomes after completion of the project?

• What key lessons learned, challenges, and solutions could IRC and partners make to strategically improve its humanitarian response and achieve better outcomes for people affected by the Syrian crisis? What are the key factors of sustainability if the project is replicated?

Evaluation Methodology:

• The final evaluation will be based on a mixed qualitative and quantitative approach and carried out in line with OECD/DAC evaluation principles to scientifically answer the key evaluation questions and make recommendations for next programming. The selected service provider and based on their technical proposal, will determine in collaboration with the IRC the final evaluation approach. The IRC is initially proposing the following as minimum:

Research Methods

• Primary and secondary Desk Review of project documents
• Quantitative methods, including community and HH surveys.
• Qualitative methods, including KIIs, FGDs and case studies

Sampling

• Using a represented sample approach, select the targeted locations for data collection; map-out the homogenous communities beyond the administrative boundaries of the governorates.
• The sample is expected to cover communities at the district/areas level in Northern Syria.

Data collection

• Select and design quantitative and qualitative data collection tools based on the identified requirements – Surveys + Focus Group Discussions (FGD)+ Key Informant Interviews (KII). 
• Ensure data collection tools are standardized to support analysis and visualization using Power BI.
• Create a detailed evaluation question matrix to map which data collection tools will be used to answer each evaluation question.
• Select the appropriate data collection tools for specific groups
• Recruit and train enumerators in both North East and North West Syria.
• Train of the enumerators on the data collection tools.
• Pilot and roll-out the data collection tools.
• Ensure data collection processes are aligned with IRC’s approach to Monitoring, Evaluation, Accountability and Learning (MEAL) and in close collaboration with the MEAL unit at IRC Country Program.

Analysis and Reporting

• Perform data analysis using relevant tools such as SPSS, PowerBI and qualitative tools.
• Provide insights and recommendations on IRC’s values.
• Present the preliminary findings and recommendations of the study.
• Deliver a final narrative and statistical report, and presentation of the study.

Ethics/protection

• Given the sensitivity and confidentiality strict measures around this project the consultant will not have access to sensitive information especially those related to CP case management. In this case, the IRC may provide case management staff who can support only in sensitive related data collection.

• The consultant is requested to include a section on research ethical considerations in the inception report which elaborates on protection issues and other ethical concerns. A child safeguarding briefing by IRC staff is part of the assignment.

• The consultant(s) should take all reasonable steps to ensure that the Evaluation is designed and conducted to respect and protect the rights and welfare of people participating in this evaluation, and to ensure that the Evaluation is technically accurate, reliable, and legitimate, conducted in a transparent and impartial manner, and contributes to organizational learning and accountability.
• The Consultant should also adhere to the safeguarding policy to ensure that evaluation whole evaluation process and members follow the do no harm to the community and the people who are part of the exercise.

Data sharing and protection

• All data and information received for the purpose of this assignment are to be treated confidentially and are only to be used in connection with the execution of these terms of reference. All intellectual property rights arising from the execution of these terms of reference are assigned to the IRC. The contents of written material obtained and used in this assignment may not be disclosed to any third parties. No data should stay with the consultant following the approved end of the assignment.

Expected Outputs and Deliverables:

Inception report setting out the conceptual framework to be used in the assessment and updated methodology for data collection, including information on data sources (locations and groups) and collection, initial reflection on the desk review including sampling, evaluation questions matrix, and timeframe.

Data collection tools (surveys, FGDs and KIIs)

Data collection piloting summary

Preliminary findings (Draft evaluation report)

Final report and presentation

Raw data set

Final Workshop: online half day workshop for stakeholders to discuss the report, reflect on recommendations and areas of improvement.

Timeframe

March 2024                  Consultancy Advertised

April 2024                     Consultant selection and contracting

May 2024                     Inception Report and Field work Plan / Data Collection Tools

June 2024                    Data Collection/ Analysis and Final Evaluation Report

The expected duration of the above activities is two months, effective from the date of contract signatures; the below table provides a general timeframe to be followed, however, the service provider is required to provide detailed timeframe as part of the inception report which is due one week from the date of contract signatures. 

Deliverable/ Task	Timeframe
	1st Month	2nd Month
	W 1	W 2	W3	W4	W1	W2	W3	W4
Desk review
Inception report
Developing data collection tools
Implementation of evaluation activities including data collection
First draft of the final report
Final report and presentation
A workshop for the IRC Syria Country Program Leads

 

Profile of the service provider: Qualification and experience:

• The service provider must have a strong background in the context of the region, with proven experience in relevant and multi-countries research and revaluation studies. Service provider should have strong research and field presence in both North East and North West Syria.
• Other's requirements are:
• Strong experience in leading evaluations and capitalization exercises conforming OECD/DAC’s Quality Standards for Development and Humanitarian Evaluation.
• Evaluation team members should have strong experience in working in the Health, Child Protection, Protection and Rule of Law and Economic Recovery sector.
• Strong expertise in project cycle management, project monitoring, and outcome/impact measurement
• Strong conceptual and analytical thinking.
• Excellent communication and writing skills in English and Arabic.
• Prior experience, knowledge, and strong track record in implementing evaluations in the region is required.
• Prior experience working with international Nongovernmental Organizations (NGOs)
• Understanding of the culture, safeguarding concerns and standards relating to ethical and confidential data collection

APPLICATION PROCEDURES

• To be considered, interested, and qualified consultant/team must submit the following documentation:
• Maximum 10-page proposed approach, plan and timeline for completing the evaluation.
• CVs of all team members including local researchers as needed, clearly indicating roles including the lead evaluator. CVs should not exceed 4 pages each.
• Past performance references for similar assignments (2-3 Final evaluation reports in softcopy format with URL links)
• Cost proposal, including all costs necessary to complete the evaluation, and distinguishing (at a minimum) between:
• Individual consultants’ number of days and daily professional fee rates
• Field work costs (Per data collection unit and or per field data collectors daily rates)
• Other costs

Applications without all four components will not be considered.

LOGISTICS

• Under this consultancy, the responsibility for logistics and security lies primarily with the service provider. The team leader should ensure that all evaluation activities have sufficient logistics, field work should be also fully coordinated with the IR’s Humanitarian and Access teams. The IRC will arrange for the evaluators to have access to staff, partners, and beneficiaries while in the field in selected locations, as per pre-agreed schedules. If needed, it is possible for IRC to provide other reasonable administrative and logistics support to the evaluators during their field work and coordination meetings; regardless, all such costs should be covered in the consultant’s cost proposal, including translation and transportation. The service provider can use local researchers for field activities (local researcher CVs should be approved by IRC).