Expression of Interest: GFFO End of Project Evaluation 21 views1 applications

Description of Project

With funding support from the German Federal Foreign Office, World Vision Somalia Program (WVS) has been implementing the project Integrated Emergency Response Project (funded by German Federal Foreign Office – GFFO**)** in Baidoa district of Bay region , East &South Darfur (Sudan), Northern Bahr el Ghazal and Warrap (South Sudan The project is being implemented in technical partnership with the South West State government represented by Ministry of Health and Ministry of Energy and Water Resources. The project is aimed at reducingthe vulnerability of crisis-affected people, especially IDPs, returnees and the most vulnerable host communities in Baidoa district. Specifically, the project focuses on improving access to food supplies to vulnerable affected population in IDPs and host communities(Food Security and Livelihood) through provision of unconditional multi-purpose cash transfers. The project focuses on improving emergency access to safe water, sanitation and hygiene **(**WASH) through construction of water systems, distribution of WASH non-food items, construction of sanitation facilities and conducting hygiene promotion. To support protection to the vulnerable individuals, the project focuses on conducting child protection campaigns, establishment of community help desks, establishment of child protection safe spaces, supporting foster families, provision of psychosocial support and provision of psychosocial support (PSS) dignity kits.In improving access to essential health care and nutrition services (H&N) for IDP communities and vulnerable host communities the project facilitates access to a minimum health care package through OPD and mobile clinic, promotion of clean birthing and reducing new born infection and enhancing the capacity of MOH, community structures and implementing staff to offer quality health care services and increasing coverage.

Existing secondary assessment findings shows that Somalia has 4.8 million people in need, with a significant concentration of needs in Bay and Bakool regions. (SomaliaHNRP2026)

The project targets a total of Somalia: 230,000 (146,277 IDPs and 83,723 vulnerable households/host communities HHs)

Endline Stakeholders

The endline evaluation findings are intended to inform multiple stakeholders that are involved directly and indirectly in the project implementation. The following stakeholders will be involved in the endline evaluation process:

• Community members that are involved in the project implementation in Somalia.
• Host communities, Internal Displaced Persons (IDPs)/refugees/returnees in Somalia
• Local and international humanitarian organizations operating in Baidoa, Somalia
• Water Environment and Sanitation (WES) Department in Baidoa
• Ministry of Health (MoH) – Somalia,
• Local authorities in the implementation regions
• Local implementing partners for GFFO-MARDO
• World vision Somalia

Evaluation Purpose

The main purpose of this endline evaluation is to document and inform stakeholders (donor, and participants) of the relevance, coherence, effectiveness, efficiency, sustainability, coverage and inclusion and potential impact of the project interventions including the contribution of the project to changes and its interaction with the broader humanitarian context. The evaluation will provide practical recommendations and document the lessons learnt for adoption in other WV projects.

Specifically, key evaluation themes in line with OECD DAC criteria will be investigated during the evaluation process:

Relevance, coherence, effectiveness, efficiency, impact, coverage and inclusion and connectedness

The consultancy firm will also assess cross-cutting themes like protection, localization GEDSI as well as accountability to affected populations during the evaluation process. The pre-and-post project performance analysis with the baseline values compared against the end-of-project targets as well as significance of the change in the indicator performance will also be determined during the end-line evaluation.

The specific objectives of the evaluation will be:

1. To assess the extent to which the project has achieved the planned outcomes and outputs.
2. To establish whether, and to what extent, the project design and interventions have been relevant to the needs of the target populations in Somalia.
3. To measure the extent to which other interventions supported or undermined the intervention.
4. To assess the extent to which the sectoral components and protection interventions (WASH, Shelter cash transfer, Livelihoods, Health, and nutrition) were implemented vis-à-vis the criteria outlined, OECD DAC criteria of relevance, coherence, effectiveness, efficiency, impact and connectedness, and coverage.
5. To establish indications of the impact of the project interventions to the target participants.
6. To assess if the implementation of the short-term humanitarian activities has taken into account long-term and interconnected challenges?
7. To assess how the project coverage and involvement of people living with disability
8. To document lessons learnt and good practices that can be replicated in future projects

Scope of the evaluation

The endline evaluation will be conducted in Somalia Baidoa, where the project has been implemented. The evaluation will broadly assess the accomplishments of all the expected results (outcomes and outputs) as outlined in the project logical framework (logframe).

Evaluation criteria and Questions

The endline evaluation will be guided by the widely used and agreed OECD-DAC criteria for Humanitarian Assistance and Bond Evidence Principles criteria for evaluating humanitarian actions.

Criteria

Evaluation Questions

Relevance: The relevance of the project will be assessed by looking into whether the humanitarian action is tailored to local needs, increasing ownership, accountability, and cost-effectiveness accordingly.’

1. Were interventions tailored to IDPs, returnees, refugees, and the host community’s needs (men, women, children, and other vulnerable population segments), settings and locations?
2. To what extent were intended participants (beneficiaries, local stakeholders) involved in the design and implementation of the project?
3. Was the project or any of its interventions adjusted or adapted due to changes in the broader context or the needs of the targeted communities? If so, how were targeted communities or participants involved in this.
4. Did the activities contribute to the outcome and the objective of the project? Were there gaps in any sector, if yes, what are they and what more or different could WV and other stakeholders do to address the problem?
5. To what extent do the communities and people affected by crisis, consider the complaints mechanisms accessible, effective, confidential, and safe?
6. To what extent did beneficiary feedback influence project design and adjustments?
7. To what extent did do-no-harm, conflict-sensitivity and social cohesion figure in the design and implementation of the project and its activities.
8. To what extent were contextual risks and evolving needs considered and addressed during project implementation?

Coherence:

The extent to which the interventions of different actors are harmonized with each other, promote synergy, avoid gaps, duplication, and resource conflicts.

1. To what extent are current partnerships increasing or compromising synergy?
2. How and to what extent has the project engaged in effective coordination and strategic alignment with other actors to enhance complementarity and avoid duplication?
3. To what extent did the project complement or duplicate interventions of other actors in the same geographic and sectoral areas?
4. Which factors restricted coordination, and which supported it? Are there any coordination success factors that can be transferred to other situations?
5. To what extent are partners’ strategic mandates being leveraged effectively?
6. How relevant was the project to the priorities, strategies, and policies of the relevant government units?

Coverage and Inclusion

Evaluation of coverage will involve determining who is supported by humanitarian action, and why. What were the main reasons that the intervention provided or failed to provide major population groups with assistance and protection, proportionate to their need?

1. To what extent are the most vulnerable participants being reached by WV Somalia and partner interventions?
2. How successful has WV been reaching the most vulnerable groups in the most affected geographic areas?
3. To what extent has the affected population been properly targeted and reached proportionate to their needs by WV Somalia, and MARDO ?
4. To what extent were different groups especially people living with disability equally able to access services?
5. Did the project apply inclusive approaches (e.g., adapted communication, tailored assistance, physical accessibility, gender-sensitive processes)?

Effectiveness

The extent to which an activity achieves its purpose, or whether this can be expected to happen on the basis of the outputs.

1. To what extent have the intended outcomes (and use of output) been achieved by the end of the project?
2. To what extent did the project built local capacities and worked towards improving the resilience of communities and people affected by crisis human-made or disasters?
3. To what extent did the project build the local capacity, especially the local market vendors, clinics, health personnel (CHWS/CNVs) and the people affected by the crisis?
4. What factors are contributing to achievement/ non-achievement of planned project results? What are the main operational bottlenecks, what is causing them and how can they be addressed
5. Were IDPs, returnees, refugees and Host Community participants identified and assisted in a timely manner?

Efficiency:

This will assess the project outputs, both qualitative and quantitative, in relation to the inputs i.e. were inputs, staff, time, funding, equipment used in the best possible way to achieve outputs.

1. To what extent were the project components of Health and nutrition, WASH & NFI, Cash transfer, Food security & Livelihoods and protection interventions efficient?
2. To what extent was the project at local level efficient in terms of institutional capacity, staffing, local knowledge, and experience to implement the project’s targets?
3. To which extent was the budget properly planned/allocated to implement the activities?
4. To what extent were resources used in a cost-effective manner (value for money), considering outputs and outcomes achieved?
5. Were there alternative approaches that could have achieved similar results more efficiently?

Connectedness/ Sustainability

Connectedness refers to the need to ensure that activities of a short-term emergency nature is carried out in a context that takes longer-term and interconnected problems into account.

1. To what extent was the project able to connect short-terms interventions to medium-term strategies and longer-term perspectives?
2. To what extent did the intervention connect humanitarian interventions to longer-term recovery and development pathways, including linkages with other relevant programmes?
3. Exit Strategy: To what extent are the capacity building recipients and local structures capacitated in contributing to an exit strategy? How feasible is the exit strategy considering the context and capacities?
4. What is the likelihood of the continuation of positive project outcomes beyond the end of the project (both by primary stakeholders and duty bearers)?
5. How does the project seek to safeguard sustainability?
6. Are there any factors threatening the sustainability of project outcomes? How does the project seek to mitigate these risks?
7. To what extent did the target group become more aware and resilient and less dependent on aid?
8. Are there any factors that might strengthen connectedness? Is there any action the project should take to promote these factors?

Impact: The project impact will be assessed by establishing to which extent the intervention has generated or is expected to generate significant positive or negative, intended, or unintended, higher-level effects?

1. Is the project contributing to systemic changes, (contribution analysis)?
2. What are the unintended positive and negative impacts of the implementation of the project?
3. If it has, what measures have been and can be taken to eliminate or reduce the negative impacts?
4. To what extent has the project contributed to longer-term changes in vulnerability, resilience, or service systems?
5. What effects (positive or negative, intended or unintended) can be observed or reasonably expected?

Lessons Learnt:

The Consultant will document challenges, programmatic lessons learnt and key recommendation for GFFO project improvement.

1. What are the key lessons learned that can inform future programme design?
2. What are the recommendations / best practices for improvement of the project or for other similar programs elsewhere in World Vision Somalia?
3. What mistakes should be avoided if the project were to be replicated?
4. Is there any identifiable harm caused by the project either for participants or non-beneficiaries?
5. What best practices are to be adopted for such projects/programs in future?

Endline Methodology

The survey methodology will be designed in alignment with end of project evaluation standards. It needs to take into account the baseline methodology as far as possible to ensure data comparison between baseline and endline values. Data disaggregation by the following social characteristics is expected: host, refugee, returnee, IDP as well as sex, age, and disability.

For triangulation, the evaluation will use both primary and secondary data sources as well as qualitative and quantitative data collection methods. Qualitative methods will involve interviews with project participants, partners, stakeholders, field visits, observations, desk review of project documents, and data review. Quantitative methods will involve household interviews through structed questionnaire. The primary data collection will include Key Informant Interviews (KII) with implementing partners (IP)- MOH and key stakeholders; a Most Significant Change tool (MSC); a beneficiary survey; and substantiating photos and videos.

The consultancy firm will provide a detailed plan of the proposed methodologies in an inception report. The proposed methodology should include an evaluation matrix to reflect evaluation questions, SMART survey methodology, sampling criteria, in particular data collection and analysis plan. WV will review the planned methodologies proposed by the consultant and provide feedback before the evaluation process begins.

The methodology used and the final report must adhere to the minimum standards of evidence quality outlined in the BOND evidence principles, including voice and inclusion, appropriateness, triangulation, contribution, and transparency. To demonstrate the impact of the project, the consultant will make use of three approaches as follows.

• Comparing the performance of outcome and impact level indicators at Baseline and Evaluation. The difference in the two (positive or negative) provides an indication of the change that has transpired because of the interventions of the project
  • Determining if the change proposed is significant with a 95% confidence that indeed there has been an impact of the interventions of the project when the baseline is compared with evaluation findings
  • Documentation of impact or most significant change stories to qualitatively complement the quantitative data collected. The consultant shall present and discuss the findings, conclusions, and recommendations with Field Offices, WVGER, and the partners and reformulate them if necessary and to identify key actions and methods to respond to these recommendations in future programming.
  • The consultant shall present and discuss the findings, conclusions, and recommendations with WV Somalia, WVGER, and the partners and reformulate them if necessary and to identify key actions and methods to respond to these recommendations in future programming.

GESI-Assessment

The consultancy firm will be responsible to integrate a GESI Assessment into the endline methodology, which needs to cover the following aspects:

Roles and responsibilities within households and communities, including productive and reproductive workloads and mobility.

• Access to and control of assets, resources and opportunities, and obstacles in seeking services.
• Decision-making and power relations at household, community, regional and/or national levels.
• Needs, priorities, and perspectives, including practical needs and strategic interests of different groups and their ideas on appropriate and sustainable ways of addressing needs.
• Participation and leadership in community activities and associations,
• Leadership views on gender equality and social inclusion, preferred communication channels and barriers to women’s leadership.
• Knowledge, cultural beliefs, and perceptions including access to knowledge and social, religious, and cultural attitudes and norms which affect women, men, boys and girls, persons with disabilities and other excluded groups differently.
• Legal frameworks, laws or other barriers that prevent women and men, boys and girls, persons with disabilities and other excluded groups from having equal opportunities.

Detailed information can be found in the GESI Toolkit (will be provided).

Limitations

Several factors might limit the implementation of the evaluation and should be taken into consideration, including:

• Insecurity & Access: Possible cases of insecurity might occur in specific project sites that might limit travel or even lead to suspension of data collection in a country as a whole or in some parts of the country where the project is implemented

Logistics

The lead consultant will report directly to Regional MEAL Manager under the supervision of the project manager, Design Monitoring and Evaluation (DME Coordinator and World Vision Germany. WV Somalia will manage the contract and provide funding directly to the consultancy firm according to the terms specified in the contract. The consultancy firm should make the necessary arrangements and coordinate with the Regional Management Unit and FO staff before fieldwork to ensure that no issues arise during field data collection. Relevant contacts will be shared with the evaluator.

Quality and ethical standards

The consultancy firm will be responsible for ensuring that data collection and analysis approaches are designed to mitigate child protection risks and protect participants’ privacy and well-being by establishing and following credible, ethical evaluation principles. All documents and data acquired from documents during interviews and meetings are confidential and used solely for the evaluation. The deliverables and all material linked to the evaluation (produced by the consultant or the organization itself) are confidential and remain the property of the contracting party.

• The consultancy firm shall ensure that all research assistants are oriented on research ethics and child protection policy before the commencement of data collection.
• The consultancy firm shall ensure that each research team member adheres to research ethics and WV child protection policies.
• The consultancy firm shall ensure that all information collected is treated with all the confidentiality it deserves.
• The consultancy firm shall ensure that survey participants involved in the evaluation are well-informed of the evaluation objectives and their consent is sought before starting data collection. Participants will be informed of their rights to decline participation in the evaluation and will be free to withdraw from the process if they wish.
• Personally Identifiable Information (PII): Any technologies, digital platforms, or other methods employed should include sufficient data security and privacy protocols to ensure that PII is protected.
• The consultancy firm must familiarize themselves with the following ethical and protection guides (to be supplied to the selected lead evaluator):
  • WVI Child Protection Code of Conduct
    • WVI Guideline of Ethical Principles

Authority and Responsibility

The consultancy firm who will undertake the assignment will report directly to WV Somalia and WVGER who will oversee the assignment and work in collaboration with Regional MEAL Manager and Somalia Field Office. Regular consultation meetings will be arranged between World Vision Somalia field office, World Vision Germany and Regional Management unit and the consultancy firm as needed.

Consultancy firm Deliverables

The following deliverables are expected to be produced in English by the consultancy firm. All the Deliverables will be submitted to WV Germany, FO, and Regional Management Unit in soft copy (unless otherwise noted below).

Expected Deliverable

Description

1. Inception Report (IR): The IR should set out the planned design and methodology to meet the above-mentioned objectives and to answer the evaluation questions. Furthermore, the overarching evaluation questions should be specified further in the inception report.

The IR should also reflect the limits of the suggested design and methodology and could explore the feasibility for answering the evaluation questions and reflect on the ToR, describe the overall approach of the evaluation and how data will be collected by providing an evaluation matrix, drafts of suggested data collection tools such as questionnaires and interview guidelines as well as a tentative evaluation schedule. Evaluation mitigation plan on the limitations.

The inception report follows a standard outline which will be provided to the consultant after contracting and needs the approval of the contracting party.

Deadline: 4 days after the briefing meeting

2. Approved data collection tools: The evaluator shall develop and pre-test the data collection tools and have them approved by WVGER and Regional MEAL Manager before data collection, analysis, and interpretation. This should be shared together with the Inception report.

Deadline: 6 days after the briefing meeting

3. Training and Data collection: The consultant will train the data collectors to ensure they understand the methodology and supervise the team during the data collection.

Deadline: 7days

4.Validation meeting: An interim meeting, either online or face to face, to discuss the main, high-level findings of the draft report, including field offices project and program staff, Regional Management Unit and WVGER staff, once data collection has ended.

Deadline: 4 days after the field data collection is completed

5. Draft Endline Evaluation Report: Template will be provided.

The consultant will prepare a draft evaluation report with details of findings, recommendations and lessons learnt for review to WVGER, Regional Management Unit, FO, and partners.

Deadline: 6 days after the field data collection is completed

6. Final Dissemination workshop

A virtual meeting to present and discuss the main findings of the draft evaluation report with the WVGER, Regional Management Unit, project staff and the WV Somalia staff.

Deadline: 3 days after feedback on the draft report

7. Final End-line Evaluation Report:

The consultant will share a final evaluation report after incorporating the comments from WVGER, FO, Regional Management Unit, and project partners.

Deadline 5 days after feedback on the draft report

Time plan

The duration of assignment will take 34 workdays including preparation, data collection, analysis, and reporting. The consultancy firm should be able to undertake some of the tasks concurrently to fit within the planned time frame without compromising the quality expected.

Expected Qualifications of Consultant

This evaluation assignment is open to consultancy firms with sound experience in the services outlined above. To be considered for the services described herein, the consultancy firm must meet the following criteria:

1. The firm should have multidisciplinary professionals whose combined expertise in Post-graduate qualifications in Public Health, Development/Humanitarian or Development studies, Sociology, and a qualified team member with experience in assessing Protection, Health & nutrition, WASH, and/or Food security & Livelihoods programmes or relevant area.
2. The team should have proven experience of carrying out end-line evaluations focusing on fragile contexts as well as on multi-sectoral projects in host communities /IDP/refugee settings.
3. Strong experience and training in relevant evaluation methods (participatory methods, qualitative methods, and surveys).
4. Strong analytical, reporting, and communication skills capable of producing high-quality, evidence-based documents
5. Have a good knowledge of data collection software (such as Kobo, ODK) and statistical packages (such as SPSS, and STATA)
6. The team should have expertise and experience in social science research, including mixed methods and notably quantitative and qualitative primary data collection methods.
7. Minimum of 5 years of experience evaluating development and/or humanitarian programs implemented by international aid organizations; experience of evaluating German-funded or European union programs is an advantage.
8. Proven experience in organizational learning and development of international NGOs.
9. Knowledge of the Somalia political and cultural contexts
10. Fluent in English

Tender

Interested consulting firms or teams should submit the following:

1. A technical and financial offer
2. The technical part of the offer should include a proposal to the consultancy firm understanding of the Terms of Reference with specific attention to the objectives of the assignment and how the objectives will be measured.
3. A clear description of the overall design and methodology of the endline evaluation.
4. A short cover letter, outlining the understanding of the assignment and general remarks of the methodology.
5. A work plan with timeline.
6. The financial part includes a proposed budget for the complete evaluation. It should state the fees per working day (plus the respective VAT, if applicable), the number of working days proposed and the level of effort for each member, and any other costs.
7. Proof of professional registration and taxation is also required (e.g., by providing the evaluator(s) tax number).
8. CV with references of all team members
9. At least 2 sample evaluation reports conducted by the lead consultant in the last 12 months for assessing the quality of work of the lead Consultant. (Please anonymize the sample report by deleting (if any) personal and confidential data due to confidentiality issues before submitting it.)
10. A list of 2-3 references from previous assignments.

Selection Criteria

The Selection of the consultancy firm will be made based on cumulative analysis (i.e., mandatory requirement and technical qualifications). The following ranking criteria will be considered for the contract granting:

More Details to be provided in full ToR upon Expression of Interest.

We hereby invite Expression of Interest from registered, approved and reputable consultants to provide above-named services to World Vision Somalia.

How to apply

IMPORTANT NOTES

1. Interested bidders must be registered to provide consultancy services in their respective countries.
2. Request for Proposal documents will be available Free of Charge to all interested bidders who express interest by filling the form provided in this link https://forms.office.com/r/9u4iRLC6rs by 5:00 PM Sunday 07th June 2026.
3. Instructions for submission of completed proposals shall be indicated on the Request for Proposal document.
4. Nothing in this Expression of Interest shall be construed to give rise to contractual obligations with World Vision.
5. World Vision, may at its absolute discretion, suspend or defer this EOI process.

“World Vision reserves the right to accept or reject any Bid and is not bound to give reasons for its decision”