Consultancy- Enhancing Equality Education and Peace Building 72 views1 applications

TERMS OF REFERENCE

Final Evaluation

Project Name: “Enhancing Equality Education and Peace Building – Phase II”

Country: South Sudan

Project location: Rumbek and Bor

Project Background

Save the children has been implementing a one-year NORAD funded education project from August 2017 through July 2018 on Enhancing equality education & Peace Building – phase II in Jonglei (Bor) and Lakes state (Rumbek). The project was designed to provide support to 32 schools (15 in Bor and 17 in Rumbek) to reach a total of 23,846 (14,308 M & 9,538 F) children through various activities. The project further supported 20 County Education Department (CED) and MoGEI officials, 400 teachers and 320 (198 M & 128 F) PTA members. In Bor this project supported 9,375 (5,812 M & 3,563 F) students of which 6,625 are in primary school and 2,750 in ALP while in Rumbek, it supported 14,471 (8,972 M & 5,499 F) students of which 11,721 are in primary and 2,750 in ALP. Integrated within the project are also elements of peacebuilding to promote peaceful coexistence between people of various ethnic groups and clans, and also build resilience of communities to cope with conflict. The main goal of the project was: Girls and boys have access to and participate in quality, safe and inclusive primary education

The project specific objectives were:

1 Increased access to quality, inclusive primary education 2 Safe and protective learning environment for girls and boys is promoted and improved 3 PTA, Community members and local authorities have increased participation in school management and support 4 Increased awareness of protection issues with schools to promote peacebuilding

Purpose of the final evaluation

The purpose for this evaluation is twofold. On the one hand, the evaluation report will assess the performance of the Enhancing equality education & Peace Building – phase II in Jonglei (Bor) and Lakes state (Rumbek) and ensures accountability towards NORAD as a donor and the beneficiaries of the program. On the other hand, it offers a learning aspect for all stakeholders. The evaluation should identify key lessons learned from implementation of project in South Sudan and substantial evidence of the value of collaboration for the delivery of project activities and contribution made towards the achievement of the principal objective

The evaluation will have three objectives:

Objective 1: Evaluate to what extent the save the children South Sudan Enhancing equality education & Peace Building – phase II project has delivered effective, efficient, relevant and timely activities to beneficiaries as set in the project log frame.

Objective 2: Evaluate and assess whether the collaboration between save the children and line ministry (MoED) has added value to the interventions with a positive effect on beneficiaries and other stakeholders (local partners, local NGO sector, INGOs) What has contributed to this added value and what has not

Objective 3: Assess the key lessons learned and establish recommendations for future projects/response

The evaluation should assess the following evaluation criteria and include all of the following questions:

Objective 1: Evaluate to what extent the save the children South Sudan Enhancing equality education & Peace Building – phase II project has delivered effective, efficient, relevant and timely activities to beneficiaries as set in the project log frame.

1 Effectiveness:

The evaluation should assess the following:

• To what extent have the planned objectives in the log frame of the project been reached, per indicator, disaggregated by gender and age
• To what extent have the project activities contributed to the overall goal Was the project effective in increasing access to quality and protective learning opportunities for vulnerable children and responding to humanitarian needs
• What were the major factors influencing the achievement of the objectives of the project
• What opportunities for collaboration have been utilized and how have these contributed to increased effectiveness Or otherwise
• Have proper accountability and risk management framework(s) been in place to minimize risks on program implementation

  1 Efficiency:

• How efficient was the delivery of project by save the children, not only in terms of expenditure, but also in terms of implementation of activities
• Was the project activity implementation (modality) considered to have been cost-efficient, while not compromising quality
• What would have been opportunities within project to reach more beneficiaries with the available budget or to reduce costs while reaching at least the same number of beneficiaries without compromising quality
• What choices were made in terms of collaboration and non-collaboration during program design Why were these choices made
• Were alterations made to the program design in terms of collaboration during the implementation phase based on the reality on the ground
• What were the outcomes of these choices for effective and efficient program implementation
• Relevance/Impact
• How relevant were the objectives and activities, implemented by the project, in addressing humanitarian needs in Bor and Rumbek
• How do beneficiaries perceive the relevance of the Enhancing equality education & Peace Building – phase II project and how has the activities implemented improved their lives Are there any stories of change
• How has the collaboration between save the children and MOED contributed to appropriate response of specific needs and priorities of the beneficiaries
• To what extent was project able to adapt and provide appropriate response to context changes and emerging local needs, and the priorities of beneficiaries

  1 Timeliness:

• Were the project design and interventions timely in responding to the needs on the ground
• Were the activities timely implemented in comparison to project planning
• Were funds available in time during implementation of the activities to respond to new developments,
• To what extent has the collaboration between save the children and MOED and other stakeholders contributed to efficient and timely coordination of logistic activities and processes

1 Reach:

• To what extent have the project beneficiaries been reached and what mechanisms were in place to improve coverage
• What are the main reasons that the project provided or failed to provide to its target beneficiaries proportionate to their need

1 Quality:

The evaluation should assess the overall quality of the implementation. It’s important to include beneficiaries’ opinion on the quality of the services received.

• What mechanisms are in place to track project implementation of the save the children projects (i.e. internal monitoring, evaluation, accountability, learning (MEAL) and quality assurance mechanisms)
• How have they been utilized to increase quality within the project
• Did the quality of activities, delivered by project meet the needs and expectations of the beneficiaries What do beneficiaries feel could be improved in Contribution to improving local capacity
• To what extent were the project interventions contributed to build long term community capacity
• To what extent the project was participatory in all the project cycle

Objective 2: Evaluate and assess whether the collaboration between save the children and line ministry (MoED) has added value to the interventions with a positive effect on beneficiaries and other stakeholders (local partners, local NGO sector, INGOs) What has contributed to this added value and what has not

Learning:

• Which of the interventions, approaches, modality/strategy have been most effective according to save the children and MoED
• Is there any substantial evidence on how project learning were generated and applied to improve the delivery or effectiveness or efficiency of activities
• Who benefited from shared learning experiences (e.g. quarterly, joint field visits, workshops provision on best approaches and methodology), mainly the NGOs or also the local sector, community members and beneficiaries
• How did the different actors learn from these experiences

Complementarity and harmonization:

• Are there any concrete examples of successful models of collaboration of save the children with other partners on geographic level, not just in terms of avoiding duplication but increasing complementarity and integrated programs affecting the reach and impact on beneficiaries
• What are barriers and/or enablers to this
• To what extent were the activities of the project complement to the work of other stakeholders, i.e. prevented duplication and contributed to the larger response activities in South Sudan

Visibility:

• What measures have been taken to create visibility of the project’s added value towards MoEDH, South Sudanese public (including beneficiaries), South Sudanese government, other INGOs/INGO forum

Joint activities:

• What joint activities have been undertaken during the implementation of project, both at a field level as well as at a country office level (Please provide concrete, short, substantial, cases of evidence)

Objective 3: Assess the key lessons learned and establish recommendations for future projects/response

Learning

The review should at least include one lesson learned and recommendation per evaluation category, i.e. effectiveness, efficiency, relevance etc.

• What are the key lessons learned per objective To what extent has the delivery of response activities contributed to effective, efficient, relevant and timely delivery of aid and enhanced impact for the beneficiaries

Sustainability

• Is there evidence that the initiative is likely to grow – scaling up and out – beyond the project life
• What are recommendations for future projects and what will be the added value of implementing them Consider at least the below questions:
• What are potential opportunities to increase accountability to beneficiaries
• How should recommendations be utilized for the future programing Why these strategies
• Methodology

The methodology will be developed by the consultant, as well as all relevant tools and presented in the inception report. The three strategic objectives mentioned in chapter 2 should be assessed, including all research questions under each objective.

The data collection should include the use of a number of approaches to gain a deeper understanding of the outcomes of the project, including:

• Desk review of background documents (project document, project monitoring data, progress report, mid-term review report, field visit reports etc).
• Evaluation survey with beneficiaries in project implementation sites (host community)
• Key informant interviews (e.g. with save the children project staff members, i.e. program manager, technical field staff, field coordinator and key community members/beneficiaries) to gather substantial anecdotal evidence on the effectiveness, efficiency, relevance and timeliness of the project activities implementation and delivery
• Focus group discussions (e.g. with Education stakeholders, head teachers, community members, Parent Teacher Association (PTA), members from Child Activity Centers (CACs), Child Rights Committees (CRCs), Foster parents, social workers, Community Site Management Committee (Local authorities) representatives, Child Resilience Clubs members etc). The FGD will serve as input for the narrative anecdotal evidence.
• A learning event in Juba, Bor and Rumbek to disseminate lessons learned through a presentation and a workshop facilitated by the consultant

Next to the data collection method, an appropriate and strategic sampling method should be selected e.g. snowball sampling, purposeful random sampling or mixed purposeful sampling methods.

1. Deliverables

The consultant is expected to lead, accomplish and submit the following deliverables within the agreed timeframe and budget:

• An inception report, which will serve as an agreement between parties on how the evaluation will be conducted. Items to address:
• Understanding of the issues and questions raised in the ToR
• Data sources; how to assess the questions in the ToR
• Research methodology, including suggested sample and size
• Schedule of activities and traveling (timeline)
• Proposal for a learning event/validation of evaluation findings in Juba/Bor/Rumbek
• Detailed budget
• Appropriate validated draft data collection tools (e.g. methodological guidelines, group interview questions)
• Raw data in any of the following statistical packages (STATA, SPSS, cSPro) and also transcribed qualitative scripts
• A max 25-page draft and final report (in MS Office and PDF for final), excluding annexes and in English, in the following format at a minimum, to be submitted to SCI and NORAD. It is preferable to illustrate the results by appropriate graphs, visuals, tables and/or a dashboard with an accompanied explanatory text. The report should consist of:

  1 Executive Summary in bullets (max. 2 pages) 2 Introduction 3 Methodology, including sampling and limitations 4 Analysis and findings of the evaluation. The analysis should be done according to the objectives:

• evaluation objective 1
• evaluation objective 2
• evaluation objective 3, including an implementation strategy for the recommendations
• Address concerns, lessons learned and comments from save the children
• Stories of change and quotes from respondents
• Conclusions for each of the evaluation objectives
• Recommendations for future projects
• Annexes:
• Relevant maps and photographs of the evaluation areas where necessary
• Bibliography of consulted secondary sources
• Finalized data collection tools
• List of interviewees with accompanying informed consent forms
• PowerPoint presentation of preliminary findings to save the children in Juba
• Learning event for Education partners in Juba, Bor or Rumbek. The structure and activities of the learning and evaluation meeting will be agreed with Save the Children.
• Indicative timescales

The data collection phase in the field is to be confirmed between the consultant and Save the Children, but ideally would start in fourth week of July 2018, with the final report deadline to Save the Children by the third week of August 2018.

Phase

Deliverables

Payment

Working days indication

Inception phase

Draft inception report

2

Tools development phase

Deliverable 1: final inception report including budget, methodology and qualitative research tools, approved by SC Norway, NORAD and South Sudan Project team.

30 % of total budget

Data collection phase

Desk review, interviews in and field visits South Sudan

10

Data analyses phase

Presentation of initial findings in South Sudan and draft of the report

3

Evaluation report phase

Draft Evaluation Report, for comment by project team in South Sudan and SC Norway and also NORAD team

2

Deliverable 2: Learning session in Juba

30 % of total budget

1

Deliverable 3: Final Evaluation Report

40 % of total budget

3

Total

100%

21 days

• Timetable depends on the weather, not all areas accessible in case of rain or insecurity.

** Number of workdays as if for one consultant at senior rate, however lump sum to be divided over a team of researchers, preferably 1 senior English consultant and a local consultant.

1. Roles and responsibilities

Lead Consultant

SC- South Sudan

SC NORWAY & NORAD

(Contract holder)

Develop an inception report, detailing the methodology-stakeholders to be interviewed, tools to be developed, time frame for the evaluation and budget

• Provide all required background materials to the consultant in a timely manner.
• Read and provide comments on the inception report including the proposed research methodology, the information gathering techniques and the suggested target sites.
• Providing data/information for desk review
• Review consultant’s qualifications or specialized knowledge or experience required.
• Provide all required background materials to the consultant in a timely manner.
• Read and provide comments on the inception report including the proposed research methodology, the information gathering techniques and the suggested target sites.

Holds the overall management responsibility of the review, including designing and carrying out the evaluation, drafting the final report and debriefing the project team and key stakeholders.

• Review and comment on deliverables
• Provide guidance where necessary
• Support logistics for the evaluation team where necessary
• Facilitate contacts with key beneficiaries and MoED Arrange logistics and planning of the field research, supporting the review team during field work and bring research team to the beneficiaries
• Oversee the service provider by managing the consultancy contract; monitor adherence to specified deadlines; facilitating access to required information; review and comment on deliverables

Liaise with Save the Children NORWAY staff throughout the process, providing weekly updates and seeking their input and advice where necessary. Request approval in case of deviation from budget, and for miscellaneous costs.

• Provide guidance throughout all phases of execution, facilitation of the field work, including interviews with local government, communities, etc.
• Review and provide feedback to the project evaluation report
• Review and comment on draft report submitted by the evaluator i.e. preliminary reports and the final report, providing feedback to draft data collection tools and reports
• Approving all deliverables, and facilitating access to any documentation (or any person) deemed relevant to the evaluation process.

Sign the SCI Child Safeguarding Policy and abide by the terms and conditions thereof.

• Manage the evaluation budget and communication around costs and requests from evaluator for miscellaneous expenditure.
• Qualifications and experience

Required

• At least Master’s degree in Education, International Development Studies, Humanitarian Leadership Program, or a related field. A Master’s degree in educational measurements and standards or monitoring and evaluation is desirable.
• At least 7 years’ experience in working with humanitarian sectoral programs relating to education program
• Demonstrated experience with quantitative and qualitative research, data base management and statistical data analysis
• Experience of working in South Sudan/East Africa
• Experience of evaluating emergency response programs
• Proven record of communicating with beneficiaries, also with children using child friendly methods
• Ability to assess and further develop a conceptual evaluation tool
• Relevant subject matter knowledge and experience regarding the thematic areas of the project
• Ability to deal with hardship and remote area field work

Preferred

• Strong understanding of humanitarian and evaluation ethics and a commitment to ethical working practices
• Experience of working in insecure environments in South Sudan and managing security risks
• Action-oriented and evidence based approach and strong drive for results;
• Highly developed self-management, and communication skills;
• Guiding Principles and Values

Adherence to Save the Children Code of conduct, Child Safeguarding practices and confidentiality when interviewing or photographing children. Gender mainstreaming is key to Save the Children and the donor; therefore, the lead consultant will have to ensure that the research team is gender balanced, ensuring that females are available to interact with female beneficiaries and vice versa. The consultant will also take into account principles of impartiality, independence, objectivity, participation, collaboration, transparency, reliability, privacy, and utility throughout the process.

1. Selection process

Save the Children Norway and NORAD, in line with internal procedures, will use Approved Quality Proforma humanitarian evaluations guidelines for select the successful consultant. The guidelines require consultant to submit a proposal explaining their comprehension of the ToR and how they would approach this assignment with a summary of their methodology especially in terms of how they plan to meet the objectives, including a time planning and budget. This should include a team composition with a lead consultant and at least one other experienced evaluator and a cv of each person to be involved in the assignment, including relevant experience, a detailed budget and time availability

1. Submission of application

Interested candidates/institutions should submit a technical and financial proposal and two samples of similar previous assignments. In the submission, candidates should consider that the budget will cover approximately 21 full consultant days. The consultant will discuss and agree on daily rate for the proposed number of days with organization. All operation and field logistics cost will be covered by save the children.

Applications will be reviewed on a rolling basis.