TERMS OF REFERENCE – PROJECT EVALUATION
1.1 About Humanity & Inclusion
Created in 1982, Humanity & Inclusion (new brand name of Handicap International/HI) is an independent and impartial international aid organization working in situations of poverty and exclusion, conflict and disaster. Working alongside people with disabilities and other vulnerable groups, our actions are focused on responding to their essential needs, improving their living conditions and promoting respect for their dignity and their fundamental rights. HI was the co-winner of the Nobel Peace Prize in 1997 for its role in the International Campaign to Ban Landmines and was recently awarded (October 2016) a prize by the Office of the Presidency in Somaliland for services to Persons with Disabilities.
The Federation is responsible for implementing the network’s social missions in around sixty countries. It operates under the names “Humanity & Inclusion” or “Handicap International” depending on the country.
About Humanity & Inclusion in the country/region
HI started in Somaliland in 1992 by setting up a rehabilitation center in Hargeisa. HI’s strategy in Somaliland is to advocate for the rights of people with disabilities and to engage development actors to promote inclusion and participation of persons with disabilities and other vulnerable people at local and national level.
HI ‘s current strategy in Somaliland/Somalia includes 2 main components
- Emergency response with a focus on Internally Displaced Persons and host communities in vulnerable situations. The action is on provision of psychosocial support and protection services, promoting inclusion of persons with disabilities in humanitarian action.
- Long-term development projects: support to civil society organizations, improving access to services, promoting rights of persons with disabilities, inclusive governance, awareness, and facilitating access functional rehabilitation service etc.
Current operations consist of a project intervention in Woqooyi Galbeed (Hargeisa and Gebiley District), Togdheer (Burao and Owdweyne district) region, Banadir region (Muqdisho) and another intervention through participation in a consortium project, led by WHH, in Awdal (Borama) region. In Mogadishu, the action is aimed at supporting the implementation of the Humanitarian Response Plan, supporting actors on how to be inclusive in their programming.
I) Context of the evaluation
2.1 Presentation of the project to be evaluated
|Project title||Emergency response for most at risk displaced and host population with a focus on elderly, people with injuries, chronic illness, physical disabilities and/or psychological distress and their family members affected by the crisis in Somaliland/Somalia.|
|Implementation dates||01.03.2019 – 31.12.2020|
|Location/Areas of intervention||1. Banadir (Banadir Districts)
2. Togdheer (Sheikh, Burco, Owdweyne Districts),
3. Woqooyi Galbeed (Berbera, Gabiley & Hargeisa districts)
|Target Groups||Elderly, people with injuries, chronic illness, physical disabilities and/or psychological distress and their family members affected by the crisis|
|Project Budget||1,290,000 Euros|
|Objectives of the project||Enhancing protection for most at risk population and reducing vulnerability factors through their safe access to immediate and lifesaving protection services and support.|
|Expected results and indicators||Outcome /Specific Objective 1 Emergency comprehensive identification, situational analysis, mapping and referral for newly displaced vulnerable population including persons with disabilities and elderly:
Outcome/Specific Objective 2: Increase access to psychosocial support and mental health services;
Outcome/Specific Objective 3: Enhance capacity of community members to sustain self- protection
Outcome/Specific Objective 4: Service providers have increased their knowledge and show positive attitudes towards the inclusion of most vulnerable.
|Main activities implemented||Activity 1.1: Persons with disabilities, elderly and other isolated and excluded people identification, protection assessments
Activity 1.2: Facilitating and supporting referral and linkages
Activity 2.1: PSS Capacity-building needs assessments and training
Activity 2.2: Facilitate group and Individual counselling for persons in needs of psychosocial support including persons with disabilities, elderly and their families in community, IDP camps/Settlement sites and PHC level.
Activity 2.3: Design and production of IEC materials, leaflets, posters and brochures on self-care, common reaction of persons affected by disasters and Psychological first aid.
Activity 2.4: DPOs advocacy Capacity-building needs assessments
Activity 2.5: Production of DPO Advocacy policy and action plans.
Activity 3.1: Conduct Sensitization campaigns
Activity 3.2: Formation of peer support group
Activity 3.3: Carryout focus group discussion with people with specific needs and community (leaders, members, mobilizers)
Activity 4.1: Inclusion capacity-building needs assessments, sensitization sessions trainings, mentoring and coaching.
2.2 Justification of the evaluation
This is an external project evaluation which is in line with HI’s project planning, monitoring and evaluation, as well in fulfillment of contractual commitments to carry out a project evaluation with the aim to draw lesson learning. It will provide credible and useful information that allows the lessons learned to be integrated into future decision-making and programming processes. Thus, evaluation serves key purposes in learning and accountability.
II) Objectives of the evaluation
3.1 Overall objectives and expectations of the evaluation
Overall objective of the evaluation:
Conduct a final external evaluation of the project’s achievements and limitations. The evaluation will be done in a participatory way and they will identify the lessons learned, provide recommendations for future interventions.
Overall expectations of HI: Be systematic and objective
Expectations concerning the evaluation: knowing achievements and recommendations
3.2 Specific objectives
Scope of evaluation: Somaliland/Somalia, (Hargeisa, Burao and Muqdisho)
- To evaluate the overall effectiveness of the project, the qualitative results of the various components of the project
- To determine the degree of sustainability and viability of the implemented and supported actions
- Provide evaluation of the project towards achievement of indicators and objectives within the Project time frame and recommendations for the future.
The evaluation criteria, which will be specified in the section below.
3.3 Evaluation criteria and evaluative questions
Criteria 1: Relevance
- To what extent did the project meet the needs of the direct beneficiaries?
- Has the project sufficiently adapted its actions to the context of the country of intervention
Criteria 2 Effectiveness
- The extent to which the project outcomes are attained, and the specific objectives achieved.
- How the different outputs interconnected to achieve effective outcomes
Criteria 4: sustainability: An assessment of whether the positive outcomes of the project are likely to continue
- Sustainability of capacity building and mobilization of humanitarian actors towards more disability inclusive practices
- How community level approaches (Sensitization, awareness raising, peer to peer support, focus group discussions on etc.) contributed to build and sustain self – protection
- Has the project put in place adequate means to ensure positive outcomes will continue?
Criteria 5: participation
The extent to which the project took into account the views of, and being held accountable by, different stakeholders, and primarily the people affected. To evaluate
- Were partners informed about the results and performance of the project?
- Did formal and informal beneficiary feedback mechanisms in place allowed to gather feedback and act on it?
III) Evaluation methodology and organization of the mission
4.1 Collection methodology
The external evaluation will be done through a participatory approach involving beneficiaries/ stakeholders/ and Project Team using a combination of qualitative methods such as document review, planning and monitoring tools analysis, observations during selected site visits, interviews with key informants and stakeholders. and triangulation of information.
4.2 Actors involved in the evaluation
HI steering committee: Technical Advisor, Country Manager and PM
Stakeholders: community leaders in the IDPs settlements, Women’s groups, relevant government agencies, organizations of people with disabilities, Beneficiaries, ensuring representation of people with mental disabilities and service providers including humanitarian actors
IV) Principles and values
5.1. Protection and Anti-Corruption Policy
|HI has developed a number of institutional policies to ensure the protection of its staff and beneficiaries. Throughout all its activities and relationship with partners, HI is committed to respect and implement the following policies. Code of Conduct||Protection of beneficiaries from sexual exploitation, abuse and harassment||Child Protection Policy||Anti-fraud and anti-corruption policy|
The consultant will sign the above-mentioned institutional policies
5.2. Ethical measures*
As part of each evaluation, HI is committed to upholding certain ethical measures. It is imperative that these measures are taken into account in the technical offer:
- Guarantee the safety of participants, stakeholders and teams: the technical offer must specify the risk mitigation measures.
- Ensuring a person/community-centered approach: the technical offer must propose methods adapted to the needs of the target population (e.g. tools adapted for illiterate audiences / sign language / child-friendly materials, as well as ensuring the participation of women in the evaluation etc.).
- Obtain the free and informed consent of the participants: the technical proposal must explain how the evaluator will obtain the free and informed consent and/or assent of the
- Ensure the security of personal and sensitive data throughout the activity: the technical offer must propose measures for the protection of personal data.
*These measures may be adapted during the completion of the inception report.
V) Expected deliverables and proposed schedule
- An inception report refining / specifying the proposed methodology for answering the evaluation questions and an action plan. This inception report will have to be validated by the Steering Committee.
- A presentation document presenting the first results, conclusions and recommendations, to be presented to the Steering Committee.
- A final report of maximum 25 pages excluding annex
However, it must provide sufficient data to include:
- the context of the evaluation and its conduct;
- the results of the data collection phase and the findings;
- but also, the difficulties, divergent opinions and limitations of the methodology
- It presents the findings and conclusions to the evaluation questions;
- and the recommendations, linked to the conclusions.
The annexes must include at least:
- The tools
- The list of people met or consulted, disaggregated by age, gender and disability
- The biography used,
- The methodological approach that details the modalities and results of the tools used, (interview, reports, etc.),
A summary of 3-4pages
The conclusions and recommendations. Particular attention should be paid to the summary of the report, as it is usually the most widely read document, which serves as a communication document.
- The final report should be integrated into the final report template:
- The quality of the final report will be reviewed by the Steering Committee of the evaluation on the basis of quality checklist:
- External evaluation report will be disseminated among donor, beneficiaries, and stakeholders
|The final report should be integrated into the following template:||The quality of the final report will be reviewed by the Steering Committee of the evaluation using this checklist:|
6.2. End-of-Evaluation Questionnaire
An end-of-evaluation questionnaire must be completed at the end of the evaluation by evaluator, a member of the Steering Committee and the person in charge of the evaluation together.
6.3. Evaluation dates and schedule
Duration: 3 weeks in the month of November
- Expertise sought from the consultant(s)
- Master’s degree in humanitarian action/ social sciences or a related field in development studies
- At least 5 years’ experience of working in humanitarian, recovery or development setting
- Proven track record in assessments and analyzing issues pertaining to the inclusion of persons with disabilities, gender and protection in humanitarian assistance and disaster preparedness
- Good understanding of the UN Convention in the Rights of People with Disabilities (CRPD) and Disability in humanitarian action related frameworks
- Demonstrated experience in the field of disability from a cross-disability perspective and meaningful consultation of persons with disabilities (assessments, research, evaluation and consultation)
- Previous experience with primary research and experience working with secondary sources for research purposes
- Good understanding of Somaliland government and legal system, familiarity with Somaliland disability laws are a plus
- Excellent English language and writing skills
- Knowledge of Somali would be an asset
- Budget allocated to the evaluation
Funded by donor
Please note that the last payment is conditional on the validation of the final report and not on the sending of the final report. By validation, we mean validation of the quality and under no circumstances of the appreciation of the project evaluated (based on the quality checklist attached, chapter 6).
7.3. Available resources to made available to the evaluation team
VII) Submission of applications
Please send technical and financial proposal CV and academic qualifications, references if any to email@example.com ( firstname.lastname@example.org in CC) by Somaliland – Project evaluation consultancy
Evaluation tool box
- Protection Policies and Code of Conduct
- Protection of beneficiaries from sexual exploitation, abuse and harassment
- Child Protection Policy
- The Code of Conduct: Prevention of Abuse and Protection of Individuals
- Anti-fraud and anti-corruption policy
- HI’s Quality framework and PME Policy
- HI’s Quality Framework, on which all evaluators must base their evaluation.
- HI PME policy
- Summary of evaluation process
- Evaluative questions
- Inception report checklist
- Final report quality checklist
- Final report template
- Project proposals and grant;
- Logical framework
- Action plan
- case stories
- Project reports (donor reports)
Deadline for submission – 26th October 2020