Endline Evaluation Consultant, THRIVE at Catholic Relief Services (CRS) 99 views2 applications

Task

Catholic Relief Services (CRS) seeks an independent consultant to carry out the end line evaluation of one of its programs in Northeast Nigeria.

Location

The end line evaluation is to be conducted in Maiduguri, Borno State in the month of October, 2024

Background

CRS leads the consortium implementing THRIVE, a two-year integrated multi-sectoral program from May 2022 to May 2024 that targets seven communities in three wards, Mashamari, Dusuman and Mairi, of Jere local government area (LGA) in Maiduguri , Borno State. THRIVE is funded by the United States Agency for International Development ( USAID) Bureau of Humanitarian Assistance ( BHA). The consortium partnership also comprises Mercy Corps (MC), the Justice, Development and Peace Commission (JDPC), Salient Humanitarian Organisation (SHO) and Women in New Nigeria (WINN).

As part of its deliverables to USAID/BHA, CRS intends to conduct an end line evaluation for THRIVE and submit a final evaluation report to the donor

THRIVE Project

THRIVE delivers an integrated and coordinated package of immediate lifesaving, life-sustaining, and life-building support to vulnerable households (HH) in food assistance ( FA), nutrition, shelter, water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH), protection, agriculture, and economic recovery and market systems ( ERMS). THRIVE explicitly aims to reduce vulnerability in Jere by layering lifesaving, life-sustaining, and life-building interventions informed using an area-based approach (ABA) to minimize inefficiencies and build synergies. The interventions target host communities, returnees, and internally displaced persons (IDPs) impacted by the violent insurgency in Borno State.

THRIVE is expected to reach approximately 120,000 (72,000 female, 48,000 male) unique participants over the two-year project lifespan, spanning ten sectors. THRIVE is implemented across seven communities in the three wards of Jere LGA, that is Dusuman, Mairi, and Mashamari.

Purpose of the evaluation

The project intends to conduct a multi-sectoral endline study to measure project indicators at the conclusion of the program. This study will provide a comprehensive assessment of the project’s effect and the extent to which it has achieved its goals across the different sectors. The primary objective of the THRIVE evaluation is to assess the progress and effect of the project throughout its entire lifecycle, spanning from inception in May 2022 to close out in December 2024. This comprehensive evaluation will include an analysis of changes in food security status, change in hunger scores, the adoption of food security coping strategies by communities, enhancements in the nutritional well-being of malnourished children who have received support, and the retention of knowledge, practices, and skills resulting from training, sensitization, and counseling sessions promoting optimal MIYCN-E practices. Furthermore, the evaluation will consider improvements in the utilization of water and sanitation facilities, alterations in hygiene behavior and practices, shelter, ERMS, livelihoods, and agricultural practices.

The evaluation will also investigate the relevance and effectiveness of adaptations and innovations made by the program during the course of its implementation.

Methodology of the evaluation

The endline will provide post-intervention measurement for THRIVE’s ITT indicators and comprehensive information on HH characteristics. The endline will also provide end value measurement for resilience-related indicators tracked by CRS. The evaluation will use a mixed method approach:

• Conduct two participant based HH surveys, one among registered participants for food assistance and the other among nutrition and WASH participants’
• Conduct one population-based HH survey for the nutrition and WASH sectors maintaining the necessary level of precision to detect the change targeted for the relevant WASH and nutrition indicators;
• Conduct a secondary analysis of the registration data for MPCA, agriculture and ERMS, shelter and settlements interventions;
• Hold focus group discussions (FGD) with relevant stakeholders and implementers;
• Hold key informant interviews (KII) with local government stakeholders, local leaders and other community stakeholders.

Evaluation team composition and requirements

The evaluation is expected to be conducted by at least two external evaluators: a lead evaluator and co-evaluator(s). The lead evaluator will oversee the execution of the entire evaluation process in partnership with CRS staff. The CRS MEAL Coordinator/Manager will provide the overall coordination of the evaluation, checking quality and compliance issues to the CRS and USAID evaluation guidelines. The evaluator will work with support from enumerators engaged by CRS to collect the endline data. To allow better collaboration among the different actors involved, clear roles and responsibilities will be outlined as part of the contract for the external evaluation team.

Required qualifications for the lead evaluator are as follows:

• Post graduate qualification in development studies, monitoring and evaluation, statistics, economics, sociology, international development or a related field.
• Extensive knowledge of evaluating multisectoral projects in emergencies and previous work experience of humanitarian programming Northeast Nigeria.
• At least five years’ experience in conducting evaluations in complex and insecure environments and experience in evaluating USAID/BHA funded projects;
• Extensive experience in evaluating multi-sectoral programs implemented through multiple partners.
• Excellent oral and written communication skills in English and oral fluency in Hausa. Fluency in Kanuri would be an added advantage.
• Extensive knowledge of qualitative and quantitative data collection methods and analytical methods and techniques.
• Experience in generating strategic, informative, and action-oriented recommendations to CRS project staff and strategic management.

Consultancy deliverables

The consultancy will provide a full report, not to exceed 25 pages, excluding title page, list of acronyms, table of contents and annexes. The report should be structured in accordance with the following guidelines:

• Cover Page • List of Acronyms

• Table of Contents which identifies page numbers for the major content areas of the report.
• Executive Summary (1 page) should provide an accurate reflection of the most critical elements of the report, including the evaluation purpose and questions, background information, methods, limitations, findings, recommendations, and conclusions. It should only include information found elsewhere in the evaluation report.
• Tabular summary of results presenting endline findings in table form against the program baseline indicators included in the IPTT.
• Introduction: Describe the project’s scope, locations, timing of endline data collection. This should include the objectives of the study
• Methodology: sampling method including strengths and weaknesses of method used, confidence intervals, inclusion/role of stakeholders and staff, rough schedule of activities, description of any statistical analysis undertaken, including justification and software package used. The discussion of any random sampling used should include details on how the random respondents were identified and invited to participate. This section should also address constraints and limitations of the evaluation process and rigor. The methodology section should also include a detailed description of data collection techniques used throughout the evaluation.
• Detailed findings: A presentation of the findings in response to endline questions, and the program objectives, as appropriate. Endline values must be presented in quantitative format as required by the IPTT, complemented by descriptive analysis.
• Synthesis and programmatic implications: Additional analysis of the data and results, drawing out programmatic and organizational recommendations, lessons learned, and best practices for planning or modifying program design. Everything presented in this section must be directly linked back to the information presented in the Results section of the report. Recommendations must be relevant to program and context and must include concrete and realistic steps for implementing or applying the recommendation. Recommendations that are not directly tied to Results can be included in an Evaluator Comments section of the report.
• Report annexes:
  • Updated Indicator Performance Tracking Table (IPTT)
  • List of stakeholder group consulted with number, type and date of interactions
  • Data collection instruments in English, including developed and used
  • Photos
  • TOR
  • Other special documentation identified as necessary or useful.