TERMS OF REFERENCE PROJECT EVALUATION 31 views1 applications

TERMS OF REFERENCE

PROJECT EVALUATION

Response to the long-term impact of Covid-19 on extremely vulnerable households: basic needs, mental health, and psycho-social support, economic recovery and resilience, gender equality – Egypt (B-SAFE II)

01/07/2022 – 31/03/2025

Duration: 33 months

1. General information (1 page maximum)

1. . About Humanity & Inclusion

HI is an independent and impartial aid and development organization with no religious or political affiliations operating in situations of poverty and exclusion, conflict, and disaster. We work alongside people with disabilities and vulnerable people to help meet their essential needs, improve their living conditions and promote respect for their dignity and fundamental rights. Since the organization was first founded in 1982, we have set up development and emergency response programmes in more than 50 countries and responded to many emergencies. Today we have a budget of around 185 million euros, with 3,500 employees worldwide. HI is engaged in an employment policy in favour of persons with disabilities. For further information about the organization, please visit www.hi.org.

1.2 About Humanity & Inclusion in the country/region

HI has been working in the Middle East since 1992. HI promotes the inclusion of persons with disabilities into countries’ local and national planning processes and responds to the urgent inclusion needs of persons with disabilities.

Handicap International (HI) registered in Egypt with the Ministry of Social Solidarity in 2013. Since then, HI has been implementing various programs to promote access to inclusive and adapted services for Persons with Disabilities & vulnerable groups.

2. Context of the evaluation

2.1 Presentation of the project to be evaluated

Project title: Response to the long-term impacts of COVID-19 on extremely vulnerable households: Basic needs, Mental Health and Psycho-social Support (MHPSS), Economic recovery and resilience, Gender equality – Egypt

Implementation dates: 01/07/2022 – 31/03/2025

Location/Areas of intervention: Cairo and Giza governorates (Omraneya- Kafr Elsisi- Matareya -Boulaq abu ElEla – Ezzbet ElHaggana)

Operating Partners: Caritas-Egypt

Target Groups:

• 2000 extremely vulnerable households economically affected by the Covid-19 crisis and in needs of basic needs assistance;
• 500 vulnerable households economically affected by the Covid-19 crisis and in need of business recovery.
• 150 inactive women, with and without disabilities
• Besafe-1 households who received business grants. (The first version of the project)

Objectives of the project:

• Overall objective: Ensure that extremely vulnerable households in Greater Cairo are able to cope with or recover from the COVID-19 socio-economic consequences, with meaningful participation of women.
• Specific objective (1): Improved capacity of extreme vulnerable households’ to cover their immediate basic needs through the provision of safety nets and psychosocial support.
• Specific objective (2): Improved capacity of vulnerable households’ to recover their livelihoods and build economic resilience to COVID-19 affected economic outlook, with greater participation of women, including those with disabilities.

During the period from July 2022 to June 2024 the action aims at ensuring that extremely vulnerable households in Egypt can cope with or recover from the socio-economic consequences of COVID-19, with meaningful participation of women with and without disability.

In relation to project impact, a post intervention monitoring survey of sampled beneficiaries showed that 76% of supported households reported improvement of their quality of life as a result of the intervention through basic needs and economic recovery support.

During the project period, HI provided food parcels to 2,541 households (HH). Of these, 627 HHs received the full package of food assistance (6 rounds). Additionally, Caritas social workers and community facilitators referred 737 HHs to social safety nets services. HI conducted a post intervention monitoring survey after providing the food parcel and the results showed that 65.38% of the sampled HHs reported an improved capacity to cover their basic needs. Furthermore, 80.22% of HH members reported an improvement in their psychosocial wellbeing, and 61.16% of HHs reported reduction in negative coping mechanism.

HI officers supported 339 HHs with grants to recover or start their business. This support included business skills training and coaching visits. Additionally, 89 inactive women attended life skills and vocational counselling training, 44 inactive women engaged in apprenticeships, and 20 inactive women were referred by HI women empowerment officer to job opportunities.

An external consultant was contracted to support beneficiaries who had received grants for business recovery or start-up. The consultant assisted these beneficiaries in creating online marketing materials and provided training on various products photography techniques.

Caritas-Egypt, with support from HI, achieved milestones, including the screening and assessment of 2,525 HHs and the selection of 2,541 HHs to receive a nutrition counselling sessions, financial literacy training, food assistance, access to Mental Health and Psychosocial Support (MHPSS), and referrals to social loans.

Additionally, HI screened and assesses 506 HHs potentially eligible for business recovery or start-ups and provided assistance to 339 beneficiaries in designing their business plans, receiving financial support, and undergoing business skills training. HI also selected 147 inactive women for awareness sessions with the head of household (HHH) on gender roles and the participation of women in household livelihood strategies. Of these women, 89 attended life skills training and vocational counselling sessions to develop action plans for improving their access to employment, 44 participated in apprenticeships, 20 were referred to job opportunities and started working, and 15 engaged in peer-to-peer support groups.

2.2 Justification of the evaluation

End of project evaluation is carried out at the end of the project to determine the value or significance of the project, with the aim of drawing lessons for improving policy or practices and thereby increasing the accountability of the organization. This will ensure that the project is assessed comprehensively, and the lessons learned are documented for future improvements.

The most common dominant motivation for evaluation is primary accountability and learning. This motivation focuses on extracting lessons and insights that can inform future projects, leading to continuous improvement in processes, methodologies, and outcomes.

Thus, evaluation serves two key purposes: learning and accountability.

The main addressees of an end-of-project evaluation typically include a range of project team, in which the team members who worked on the project need to understand what went well and what could be improved for future projects, and beneficiaries, in which their perspectives on the project’s impact are essential for evaluating success. This helps in building skills and knowledge for subsequent initiatives who are interested in the project’s outcomes, performance, and impacts.

The users of this evaluation will be:

• HI Egypt: (Country Manager, Deputy Country Manager, Senior MEAL Officer & Technical Offiers)
• At Field level: Project Managers, MEAL officers and project staff.
• HI HQ/ Mashriq region: Technical Specialists (MEAL and thematic areas), regional Managers (MEAL, Technical unit)
• External Stakeholders: Donor and implementing partners.

3. Objectives of the evaluation

• Overall objective: Ensure that extremely vulnerable households in Greater Cairo are able to cope with or recover from the COVID-19 socio-economic consequences, with meaningful participation of women.
• Specific objective (1): Improved capacity of extreme vulnerable households’ to cover their immediate basic needs through the provision of safety nets and psychosocial support.
• Specific objective (2): Improved capacity of vulnerable households’ to recover their livelihoods and build economic resilience to COVID-19 affected economic outlook, with greater participation of women, including those with disabilities.

During the period from July 2022 to June 2024 the action aims at ensuring that extremely vulnerable households in Egypt can cope with or recover from the socio-economic consequences of COVID-19, with meaningful participation of women with and without disability.

In relation to project impact, a post intervention monitoring survey of sampled beneficiaries showed that 76% of supported households reported improvement of their quality of life as a result of the intervention through basic needs and economic recovery support.

During the project period, HI provided food parcels to 2,541 households (HH). Of these, 627 HHs received the full package of food assistance (6 rounds). Additionally, Caritas social workers and community facilitators referred 737 HHs to social safety nets services. HI conducted a post intervention monitoring survey after providing the food parcel and the results showed that 65.38% of the sampled HHs reported an improved capacity to cover their basic needs. Furthermore, 80.22% of HH members reported an improvement in their psychosocial wellbeing, and 61.16% of HHs reported reduction in negative coping mechanism.

HI officers supported 339 HHs with grants to recover or start their business. This support included business skills training and coaching visits. Additionally, 89 inactive women attended life skills and vocational counselling training, 44 inactive women engaged in apprenticeships, and 20 inactive women were referred by HI women empowerment officer to job opportunities.

An external consultant was contracted to support beneficiaries who had received grants for business recovery or start-up. The consultant assisted these beneficiaries in creating online marketing materials and provided training on various products photography techniques.

Caritas-Egypt, with support from HI, achieved milestones, including the screening and assessment of 2,525 HHs and the selection of 2,541 HHs to receive a nutrition counselling sessions, financial literacy training, food assistance, access to Mental Health and Psychosocial Support (MHPSS), and referrals to social loans.

Additionally, HI screened and assesses 506 HHs potentially eligible for business recovery or start-ups and provided assistance to 339 beneficiaries in designing their business plans, receiving financial support, and undergoing business skills training. HI also selected 147 inactive women for awareness sessions with the head of household (HHH) on gender roles and the participation of women in household livelihood strategies. Of these women, 89 attended life skills training and vocational counselling sessions to develop action plans for improving their access to employment, 44 participated in apprenticeships, 20 were referred to job opportunities and started working, and 15 engaged in peer-to-peer support groups.

2.2 Justification of the evaluation

End of project evaluation is carried out at the end of the project to determine the value or significance of the project, with the aim of drawing lessons for improving policy or practices and thereby increasing the accountability of the organization. This will ensure that the project is assessed comprehensively, and the lessons learned are documented for future improvements.

The most common dominant motivation for evaluation is primary accountability and learning. This motivation focuses on extracting lessons and insights that can inform future projects, leading to continuous improvement in processes, methodologies, and outcomes.

Thus, evaluation serves two key purposes: learning and accountability.

The main addressees of an end-of-project evaluation typically include a range of project team, in which the team members who worked on the project need to understand what went well and what could be improved for future projects, and beneficiaries, in which their perspectives on the project’s impact are essential for evaluating success. This helps in building skills and knowledge for subsequent initiatives who are interested in the project’s outcomes, performance, and impacts.

The users of this evaluation will be:

• HI Egypt: (Country Manager, Deputy Country Manager, Senior MEAL Officer & Technical Offiers)
• At Field level: Project Managers, MEAL officers and project staff.
• HI HQ/ Mashriq region: Technical Specialists (MEAL and thematic areas), regional Managers (MEAL, Technical unit)
• External Stakeholders: Donor and implementing partners.

3. Objectives of the evaluation

1. Overall objectives and expectations of the evaluation

The final evaluation aims to assess the effectiveness, level of change and sustainability of the project interventions (all activities implemented by HI and implementing partner under this project) as well as the beneficiaries’ level of participation. Furthermore, it aims to provide recommendations for future such projects. In addition, the evaluation shall measure the changes occur due to the intervention on beneficiaries and stakeholders of the project as well as the effect on them.

This will be achieved through measuring the criteria of Partnership, Effectiveness, Changes, Relevance, and Accountability to populations (according to HI Project Quality Framework).

3.2 Specific objectives

The specific objectives of the evaluation are as follows:

1. Assess the quality of the project’s outputs and what are the contributing factors [Quality of implementation and its efficiency (the process until providing the services (Cash and vouchers assistance (CVA), Business grants, referral mechanisms), and evaluate the integration, effectiveness and linkages of cross-cutting themes, also identify the gaps in implementation in relevance with the project design]
2. Assess the impact on the beneficiaries’ quality of life (Short and long impact)
3. Assess how the partnership (the partnership and not the partner) affected the service provision to beneficiaries.
4. Capture beneficiaries/project team feedback (satisfaction, accountability, their engagement in the process, dealing with project team) to understand their perceptions of the project’s relevance, effectiveness, impact, sustainability
5. Whether the project is coherent with other interventions and align with national or local strategies or inform future strategies.
6. Lessons learned and recommendations relevant to the context.

3.3 Evaluation criteria and evaluative questions

The following represents the evaluation criteria that will guide the evaluation team as well as the evaluative questions. Below criteria are based on HI Project Quality Framework, which is built and designed based on OECD/DAC[1], CHS[2] other humanitarian and development standards.

3.3.1. Partnership (Collaboration, Involvement, Relationship):

1. Has an evaluation of the partners’ capacities been carried out, leading to a jointly constructed action plan? Has this action plan enabled the partner to fulfil its commitments in the running of the project and to manage the risks, both for itself and for HI?
2. Are the partners actively involved in the decision-making processes relating to the design, implementation and evaluation of the project’s objectives?
3. Are the partnerships developed by the project relevant and effective in achieving the project’s objectives?

3.3.2 Relevance (Needs, Context, Lessons Learned):

1. To what extent has the project met the needs of the people affected?
2. Has the project adapted its actions sufficiently to the context of the country in which it operates?
3. Has the project drawn lessons from experience throughout the project cycle? Has it formalized and disseminated them (among the programme, the wider HI community and/or the partners)?

3.3.3. Changes (Effects, Continuity, Empowerment):

1. Has the project produced significant, unexpected positive changes in the lives of the people affected in a sustainable way? (EXCLUDING EFFECT INDICATORS FROM THE LOGICAL FRAMEWORK)
2. Has the project taken steps to ensure that all eligible beneficiaries, regardless of disability, gender or age, can benefit, and do the project indicators measure this?
3. Did the project anticipate, plan and formulate the sustainability strategy so that the effects would continue after the project ended? Were local partners involved in developing the strategy?

3.3.4. Effectiveness (Results, adjustment, technicality):

1. Do the results achieved contribute to the project objective?
2. Is the technical quality of the project in line with HI and/or international standards?
3. Are the project results regularly monitored, and have adjustments been made to the project to achieve its objectives?
4. 3.3.5. Accountability To Populations (Information, Participation, Expression):
5. How much were the stakeholders’ roles and responsibilities clearly defined and adapted to their expertise?

• To what extent have the resources (human, logistical, financial, technical) available enabled the project to achieve its objectives?

  HI also promotes systematic analysis of the monitoring system and cross cutting issues (gender, inclusion, environment, protection etc.).

  All HI external/independent evaluations are expected to use HI Quality Framework throughout the whole evaluation process. In particular, the evaluator must complete the following table and include it as part of the final report.

  The evaluator expected to use the following table to rank the performance of the overall intervention using the HI QUALITY FRAMEWORK criteria. The table should be included either in the executive summary and/or the main body of the report.

  Criteria Rating Rational

  Changes 1: Not At All, 2: Not Really, 3: Yes partially , 4: Yes fully

  Effectiveness 1: Not At All, 2: Not Really, 3: Yes partially , 4: Yes fully

  Partnership 1: Not At All, 2: Not Really, 3: Yes partially , 4: Yes fully

  Relevance 1: Not At All, 2: Not Really, 3: Yes partially , 4: Yes fully

  Accountability to populations1: Not At All, 2: Not Really, 3: Yes partially , 4: Yes fully

  The evaluation report is expected to provide sets of:

• Best Practices.
• Lessons Learned.
• Recommendations.

• 4. Evaluation methodology and organization of the mission

  4.1 Collection methodology:

• Evaluation methods will be discussed with the HI steering committee and should be rigorous while remaining proportionate and appropriate to the context of the project intervention. The project will work across various locations in Greater Cairo (Cairo and Giza), site visits will be scheduled in accordance with the methods chosen.
• The evaluator shall adopt a mixed-method approach where the following data collection tools may be applied.
• Secondary data analysis and reviews of existing data management approaches and M&E systems in place. The mission has an established monitoring and evaluation (M&E) department at coordination level and is under process of expansion and strengthening its existing systems.
• Beneficiary surveys.
• Key Informant Interviews (KII).
• Focus Groups discussion (FGDs).
• Phone Interviews (structured and semi-structured/ if required).
• Interviews with relevant staff from HI staff and stakeholders.
• POINTS OF ATTENTION
• Please note that all the data collection tools shall cover all HI quality framework points under study.
• Lists of beneficiaries shall be provided by the MEAL team after the inception report is shared.
• 4.2 Actors involved in the evaluation
• The following are the actors involved in the evaluation of this project:
• *Handicap International (*HI): lead implementation party of the project and overall responsible and authority of the evaluation.
• Partner (Caritas): project implementing local partner involved in the implementation of project activities.
• Service providers: suppliers and consultants who delivered the different needed services to project beneficiaries.
• Women-led organizations.
• Beneficiaries who received different services.
• 4.3 Organization of the mission
• The Regional MEAL Manager is the authorized person, who oversees the overall evaluation process and ensures the adherence to guidelines and procedures.
• Project Manager is the responsible person to ensure the evaluation process implementation.
• The steering committee of the evaluation which includes:
• Regional Economic Inclusion Technical Specialist
• HI Project Manager
• HI Senior MEAL Officer
• HI Log Manager
• HI Finance Manager
• The steering committee will have the following roles:
• Selection of the evaluation team.
• Participation in the evaluation kick-off meeting.
• Validation of the inception report and tools/templates of the evaluation.
• Validation of the final evaluation report and its related deliverables (based on the quality checklist attached, chapter 6)
• Actively participate in the presentation of findings meeting.
• Complete the end of evaluation questionnaire with the evaluator and the person in charge of the evaluation (Project Manager and Senior MEAL Officer).

• 5. Principles and values

• 5.1. Protection and Anti-Corruption Policy
• Code of Conduct:
• https://hi.org/sn_uploads/document/ID_CodeOfConduct.pdf
• Protection of beneficiaries from sexual exploitation, abuse and harassment:
• https://hi.org/sn_uploads/document/PI03_HI_Protection-Beneficiaries_EN.pdf
• Child Protection Policy:
• https://hi.org/sn_uploads/document/PI02_HI-Child-Protection_EN_1.pdf
• Anti-fraud and anti-corruption policy:
• https://hi.org/sn_uploads/document/PI04_IP_antiFraud-bribery-corruption-policy_1.pdf5.2. Ethical measures*
• HI is committed to upholding certain ethical measures as part of each evaluation. These measures must be considered in the technical offer:
• Guarantee the safety of participants, partners and teams: the technical offer must specify the risk mitigation measures.
• Ensuring a person/community-centred 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, 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 participants.
• 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.
• 5.3 Consultants are expected to collect an appropriate range of data using a mixed-method approach. This includes (but not limited to):
• Direct information: Interviews/group discussions with beneficiaries and related stakeholders – observation visit to project sites and to the facilities provided to the beneficiaries
  • Indirect information: Secondary information analysis: including analysis of project monitoring data or of any other relevant statistical data.

5.4. Others

It is essential that the process of data collection, as well as storage of data, be supported by careful ethical practice, including informed consent/assent, anonymity, confidentiality, Do-No-Harm, and protection of data and data storage. Informed consent needs to include awareness of the evaluation data collection process, and that the evaluation report may be published and publicly disseminated. Extra precaution must be taken in involving project beneficiaries considering the sensitivity of the thematic issues tackled by this project. To protect the anonymity of communities, partners and stakeholders’ names or identifying features of evaluation participants (such as community position or role) will not be made public.

The evaluator should engage in respecting the following ethical principles:

• Child protection principles;
• Integrity (respect for gender sensitivity issues, especially when performing interviews/focus groups, religion, and beliefs);
• Anonymity and confidentiality;
• Independence and objectivity;
• Veracity of information;
• Coordination spirit;
• Intellectual property of information generated during and by the evaluation (including report and annexes) will be transferred to the evaluation commissioner;
• Quality of reporting;
• Respect for timelines, in case of late submission of the report, HI reserves the right to terminate the contract.

Project Quality Policy and Project Quality Framework.

6. Expected deliverables and proposed schedule

6.1. Deliverables

• An inception report (maximum 15 pages excluding annexes) 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 approximately 20-30 pages maximum (excluding annexes) with the following structure:
  • Cover page
  • Acknowledgement
  • Table of content
  • Executive Summary (that can be used as stand-alone external document).
  • Presentation of the intervention evaluated (about HI, evaluation objectives, activities deployed during intervention)
  • Presentation of the evaluation (specific objectives, evaluation questions, methodology, limitations, etc.)
  • Results (by evaluation criteria and evaluative question).
  • Conclusions
  • Recommendations
  • Appendices: ToR, inception report, tools and guides/protocols, profiles/persons interviewed (cartography), bibliography, conflict of interest, photos, etc.
  • A summary of 5 pages that can be used as external document.
  • Transcript of qualitative data collected (in hard and soft copies).
  • Raw and analysed quantitative data.
• The evaluation exercise will have the following expected milestones and deliverables.
• Inception report specifying the methodology
• Preliminary findings Workshop (Presentation) with Evaluation Committee.
• Draft report and a possible feedback document to provide feedback
• Final report, with PowerPoint presentation and summary
• 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 will be given to the evaluator and must be completed by him/her, a member of the Steering Committee and the person in charge of the evaluation.

6.3. Evaluation dates and schedule

Preferably, the evaluation shall be completed before end of January 2025. The below table is indicative plan for the working days for the evaluator, consultants shall propose a schedule.

Activities

• Evaluation briefing with Evaluation Committee (virtual or face-to-face) : 1 wd
• Inception Report (including data collection tools) : 8 wd
• Final Inception report (after Revision from HI) : 3 wd
• Field work, which includes collection of primary data, meetings with stakeholders and analysis of available secondary data. : 12 wd
• Analysis of collected data : 5 wd
• 1st Draft evaluation report : 3 wd
• 2nd Draft evaluation report : 2 wd
• Presentation of findings : 1 wd
• Final evaluation report : 1 wd
• Total: 36 working days

7. Means

7.1 Expertise sought from the consultant(s)

• Academic background in Economic Resilience, Disability, Social Sciences, and/or developmental studies with a minimum of a master’s degree in the relevant field (or bachelor’s degree compensated with 3 years of experience).
• Solid experience in project evaluation and related methodologies for at least 5 years.
• Knowledge of relevant projects/programming, including multi-sectorial and integrated approaches.
• Significant field experience in the evaluation of humanitarian / development projects of similar themes.
• Significant experience in coordination, design, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of programs.
• Ability to write clear and useful reports (may be required to produce examples of previous work)
• Experience in OECD/DAC evaluation criteria and CHS is a plus.
• Demonstrated Experience in conducting participatory (qualitative and quantitative) evaluation techniques.
• A broad experience in all aspects of project cycle management.
• Experience working with persons with disabilities and other vulnerable populations, in general, is an asset.
• Practical knowledge of rights-based approaches and Inclusion.
• Strong analytical, statistical skills and strong experience using statistical analysis software SPSS, Python, etc.
• Excellent speaking and writing skills in English and Arabic.
• Speaking skills in Arabic within the evaluation team.
• Experience in project evaluation and related methodologies with European Union funded projects and understanding of donor requirements is a plus.

The consultancy team/firm must be available for the implementation of this evaluation, with no or limited other assignments currently ongoing with them.

The scoring of applications will be based on Consultancy Team Experience (20%), Technical Offer (50%) and Financial Offer (30%).

7.2 Budget allocated to the evaluation

The candidate must detail in his/her offer (see 8.2): the cost per day for each evaluator; the breakdown of the time spent per evaluator and per stage of work; the ancillary costs (services and additional documents); the overall cost of the intervention including transport costs (international and local), logistics costs, translation costs; with proposals for payment modalities.

7.3. Available resources made available to the evaluation team

• Evaluation Protocol and Standard procedure (Evaluation Toolkit)
• Project Quality Policy.
• Report Templates
• Related documentation of the project (log frame, proposal, budget, reports, assessments etc.)
• Assessing quality of the Evaluation – Template
• Dataset of beneficiaries (anonymous) and any other relevant data
• Any other related documentation to evaluate the project
• Set of Institutional policies of HI (Child Protection Policy, Protection, Sexual, Exploitation and Abuse Policy)
• Code of Conduct Policy

8. Submission of applications

Bids from interested individual consultants or firms should include:

1. .Technical Proposal

• A detailed technical offer that includes the methodology and evaluation plan (maximum 5 pages)
• A Resume (list of Resumes) detailing relevant skills and experience of the consultant and her/his team of no more than 3 pages each, including contactable referees. In case of a team of experts, the Team Leader must be clarified.
• A minimum of two sample of a relevant previous evaluation, preferably for an international donor-funded project in a similar area, sectors or context.
• Complete list of all Evaluations conducted, with Entity, title and dates. (to attach the template of log of experiences)
• Proposed methodology.
• Tentative timeline plan.
• 2 references (from the contacted entity, NGOs, individuals)
• Furthermore, the proposed methodology shall have coverage of all HI Quality Framework points, participatory and mixed-method approach, with clear timelines for all the phases of this study. (Please refer to 6.2: Evaluation Schedule).

8.2 Financial Proposal

– A detailed financial offer that covers:

1. Total Cost.
2. Cost per day of each contributor.
3. Additional costs (additional services and documents).
4. Transport costs (international and local).
5. Logistics costs.
6. Translation costs.
7. Bank account details (Bank name, IBAN, Swift code).

8.3 Required documents from the evaluation team

• (In case of company) Legal (ID card, commercial register, VAT certificate) and valid registration.
• The consultant(s) are responsible for personal/life/travel and health insurance during the evaluation for themselves and their team(s).
• The consultant(s) will also need to provide any necessary materials (including their own laptops) required for the evaluation.

8.4 Schedule of Payment

HI suggest the following payment instalments unless stated and agreed otherwise with the selected evaluator:

• First payment: 20% – after contract signature submission of inception report.
• Second payment: 30% – after validation of Inception report.
• Third payment: 50% – after validation of final report and submission of all deliverables.

All payments will be made upon reception of invoice and signature of the selected consultants, by bank transfer or cheque in EGP, under the name of the contracting parties. The offer and payments are subject to in-country fiscal regulations applicable and fulfilment of deliverables.

Note: Handicap International reserves the right to accept or reject any proposal without giving reasons and is not bound to accept the lowest or the highest bidder.

Bids must be sent by email to this address: to [email protected] . Please indicate in the email subject: “Final Evaluation – BSAFE2 Project – [name of consultant]”.

Deadline for submission of applications : Wednesday, October 9th, 2024 @ 17:00 PM (Cairo Local Time).

Applications submitted after the deadline (day or hour) will not be considered. Selected consultants will be invited for an interview. Also, candidates who only submit resumes without technical and financial offers will be disregarded.

Handicap International is committed to protecting the rights of children and opposes all forms of child exploitation and child abuse. HI, contractors must commit to protecting children against exploitation and abuse.

Persons with disabilities are particularly encouraged to apply.

9. Appendices

• HI’s Quality Framework, on which all evaluators must base their evaluation. https://hinside.hi.org/intranet/upload/docs/application/pdf/2022-12/posterqualityframeworkhi_pqp_en.pdf
• The Disability – Gender – Age Policy, which must guide the approach and the construction of evaluation tools in the technical offer. https://hi.org/sn_uploads/document/IP_DisabilityGenreAge_1.pdf