Consultant- Evaluation Consultant Trafficking in Human Beings program in Serbia

1.IRC overview

The International Rescue Committee (IRC) is among the world’s leading humanitarian aid organizations. Founded in 1933 at the request of Albert Einstein, the IRC works with people forced to flee from war, conflict and disaster, helping them to survive, recover, and rebuild their lives. The IRC operates and fosters partnerships in over 40 countries and 28 U.S. cities. We deliver a lasting impact for the people we serve, empowering them to rescue their dignity, hope and potential. See more details about our impact at: http://www.rescue.org/ .

IRC currently operates in the U.S., Africa, Middle East, Asia, Europe, and Latin America. For a complete listing of countries in which IRC operates and supports refugee programs, please visit http://www.rescue.org/where .

2.Background

In cooperation with NGO Atina and with the support of the U.S. Department of State Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons, IRC implements a 39-month project From Harm to Safety: Improving the Protection of Victims of Trafficking (VoTs) in Serbia, aiming to further improve combat against modern slavery in a context where trafficking networks target not only traditional victims of trafficking (VoTs), but also especially vulnerable individuals within populations of refugees and migrants.

General Goal of the Project - VoTs are identified, protected, and supported to recover from the consequences of violence and exploitation, including in populations of refugees and migrants.

3.Purpose

The purpose of the evaluation is to assess the implementation of activities planned within the project From Harm to Safety, whether the stated objectives of the program were achieved and the various reasons if the program did or did not work. The findings of the evaluation will be used to improve future programming and to help senior management team to determine whether it should be continued. The evaluation will focus on the relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, sustainability, and adaptability of the From Harm to Safety Program.

4.Evaluation Questions

The evaluation will seek to answer the following questions, which may be modified in collaboration with selected Evaluator as necessary:

-What approaches have been used to implement From Hart to Safety anti–trafficking program?

-How rigorous have the methods of monitoring and evaluations been?

-What are the limitations and challenges of conducting quality actions and interventions within the project?

-What was the cooperation with partners and relevant actors during the project implementation?

-Have possible changes in institutional and policy setting impacted the project activities, and if yes, how?

Relevance

a)Was the project for improving the protection for VoT in Serbia responsive to VoT’s needs? If yes, how, and what was the most useful intervention?

b)To what extent has the project for improving the protection for VoTs in Serbia contributed to VoTs’ exercising their rights?

Effectiveness

a)To what extent was the From Harm to Safety Program being implemented as planned. Were program activities completed and output, outcome, and objective targets met? If not, why not?

b)Were trainings to stakeholders, service providers, and authorities of high quality and of value to the trainees? Did the trainings successfully address learning objectives?

c)To what extent did VoT find services provided (legal aid, mental health services, psychological counselling, and income-generating activities) valuable and efficient? Have programmatic changes been made as a result of the feedback provided by VoTs? What changes have been made?

d)Did additional activities introduced through Grant Agreement Amendments meet the project overall and specific objectives, and if possible, what impact they had on the specific target groups?

Efficiency

a)How has COVID-19 affected the From Harm to Safety Program? How well has the program adapted to COVID-19?

Sustainability

a)To what extent could partners continue the implementation of the project for improving the protection for VoT in Serbia without support (financial, technical)?

b)To what extent the project for improving the protection for VoT in Serbia built the capacity of partners who could take up and continue the implementation?

c)What are the lessons learned and best practices in the advocacy and coordination with local and national actors?

5.Evaluation Approach and Methods

The evaluation shall be independent and evidence-based. A variety of methodologies will be applied to collect information during evaluation. These methodologies include the following:

a)A review of documents relevant to projects. These will be provided by the Serbia Country Program staff and documentation available with the partner organization. Documentation to be reviewed will include:

i.IRC Strategic Action Plan for Serbia

ii.Original project document, amendments, workplans

iii.Project log-frame and theory of change

iv.Monitoring and donor reports

b)Key informant interviews (KII) and consultations, key stakeholders including each of the implementing partners. The criteria for the selection of stakeholders to be interviewed shall be clarified in the inception report at the beginning of the evaluation.

6. Accountability and Responsibilities

The evaluation will be managed by the International Rescue Committee’s Country Office in Serbia in coordination with Project Coordinator and Head of Office, Senior AT Specialist, Procurement Officer, and Grants Manager. The country office in Serbia will ensure that contractual requirements are met and approve quality of all deliverables. The consultant is responsible for meeting professional and ethical standards in planning and conducting the evaluation and producing the expected deliverables.

7.Consultancy Schedule

The evaluation will take an estimated 15 days of work over a two-month period. It shall be conducted remotely and through in-person interviews (if the situation regarding the COVID-19 pandemic allows it). The consultant is expected to prepare an evaluation plan that will operationalize the evaluation. In the inception report, the consultant shall illustrate understanding of the evaluation questions, and elaborate on methods to be used, limitations or constraints to the evaluation, and schedules and delivery dates to guide the implementation of the evaluation. The timeline of the evaluation is as follows:

8.Deliverables

IRC expects the consultancy to result in the following deliverables:

a)A comprehensive evaluation plan (inception report), which will include a detailed workplan. Once approved, it will become the key management document for the evaluation.

b)Relevant data collection tools.

c)Final accessible, utilization-focused evaluation report written in English and follow a standard format of an evaluation report including an executive summary, introduction, methodology, findings, conclusions, lessons learned, recommendations, and appendices. The report shall not exceed 40 pages (excluding Executive Summary and Appendices).

d)Briefing to IRC Serbia including presentation slides summarizing findings and recommendations of evaluation report.

9.Payment Schedule

Payment will be made upon the completition of the assignment and the delivery of the report and not later than March 31, 2021.

10.Consultant location

The consultancy is home-based with possible travels to 7 municipalities. To conduct KII based on a pre-approved travel plan. The cost of travel and accommodation will be covered by the office and will not be part of the consultant fees. Travels depend on the status of the COVID-19 pandemic. In case travel is not possible, the interviews will be realized remotely.