.png)
May 4, 2016
Solidarites International
Terms of Reference
Final Project Evaluation: “Emergency responses to disaster affected population of IDPs and host community in South Somalia”
Terms of Reference
Country: Somalia
Project title: Emergency responses to disaster affected population of IDPs and host community in South Somalia
Location: Dhobley, Afmadow district, Lower Juba region, Southern Somalia
Starting date: 15 May 2016
Duration of the field mission: 14 days
Time dedicated to the desk review: 3 days
Time dedicated to report writing: 5 days
Under responsibility of: Country Director
1. Presentation of Solidarites International
Solidarites International (SI) is a humanitarian non-governmental organization which provides humanitarian assistance to population affected by natural disaster or man-made crisis.
For over 35 years, SI has concentrated its action on meeting three vital needs: Water, Food and Shelter. In the Horn of Africa, SI is currently implementing Food Security, WASH and resilience building programs in Somalia and Kenya.
SI has been working in South-Central Somalia since 2007, with a temporal closure of Lower Juba base in April 2014 due to funding gap. SI has since re-opened the Lower Juba operations with an office in Dhobley.
The main focus of SI in Somalia is to address the immediate needs of vulnerable disaster affected IDPs (due to conflict or natural disasters) and host communities with WASH and Food security emergency response.
It also seeks to strengthen community coping mechanisms and recovery of disasters affected populations to withstand future shocks.
In SI programming, community recovery is improved through activities such as rehabilitation and improvement of existing water sources, provision of ceramic filters, and construction of latrines, hygiene promotion, farming support (seeds, tools and training), animal health support, and diversification of livelihood opportunities.
Emergency lifesaving activities include water vouchers, food vouchers, hygiene promotions, NFI kits and contingency stocks to populations most affected by acute and recurrent shocks.
The targeted beneficiaries of this program include IDPs, returnees, urban poor and pastoral dropouts in Dhobley town, Diif, Dhagah and Da’as settlements in Afmadow district, Lower Juba region of Southern Somalia.
2. Presentation of the Programme
Background: Lower Juba region of Southern Somalia experiences a myriad of challenges including recurring drought, conflict between Jubaland forces/AMISOM forces and armed groups, food insecurity, livestock diseases, water shortages and poor infrastructure.
Moreover, with more refugees forecasted to return, humanitarian needs are expected to increase. Lower Juba (LJ) region is among the areas worst hit by drought and conflict in the country.
This follows 2 consecutive seasons of below average rains (though with some slight improvement in the GU rain season in 2015), and escalated insecurity due to AMISOM offensive operation in the region along with local government tensions or disputes.
The effect has been massive displacement of population, increased acute food insecurity, high malnutrition rates, drastic decline of income sources, widespread acute water crisis and inflated risks of disease outbreaks as well as potential for high influx of IDPs.
Project outline
Principal objective: Contribute towards addressing the acute and protracted needs of disaster affected populations in South Somalia
Result 1: Disaster affected new, protracted IDPs and vulnerable host communities in South Somalia have improved access to safe water, sanitation and have adopted key hygiene practices through emergency Preparedness, response and community capacity building support.
Activities
A.1.1. Emergency water vouchers during period of acute water crisis
A.1.2. Provision of NFIs A.1.3 Rehabilitation of water catchments and construction of infiltration wells
A.1.4.Training of WUC of rehabilitated water catchments
A.1.5. Construction of emergency latrines
A.1.6: Hygiene promotion campaigns and sessions
Result 2: Disaster affected new IDPs and vulnerable host communities in South Somalia have increased access to food and income sources through emergency support, diversification and strengthening of livelihood sources
Activity A.2: Provision of emergency food vouchers over three months lean period
Result 3: A mechanism of emergency preparedness and response
Activity A.3: Disaster preparedness, Protection of livelihoods, assets and critical facilities
3. Purpose of the Evaluation
The purpose of this final evaluation is to:
- Assess and evaluate the results of the project and its impact on the targeted populations.
- Draw lessons from the experiences and challenges faced by SI teams, as well as set up recommendations for future programming.
- Measure the indicators against the initial targets.
- The evaluation should further look into the relevance, timeliness and effectiveness of the action undertaken by SI in Lower Juba.
- The evaluation should asses the level of attribution of the action and to what extent activities undertaken are sustainable.
- Assess overall management of the action.
The evaluation will focus on the operation’s approach, the implementation process and the performance of the project.
The project should be evaluated through the following OECD/DAC criteria: relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, impact, sustainability, and attribution.
Lessons learned and recommendations for maximising impact and improving the efficiency, effectiveness and sustainability of emergency programming should be listed.
Furthermore, SI strategic orientation for emergency programming in Lower Juba/Afmadow district should be proposed.
The evaluation must answer the non-exhaustive list of questions below:
Relevance
- To what extent are the objectives of the programme still valid?
- Are the activities and outputs of the programme consistent with the overall goal and the attainment of its objectives?
- Are the activities and outputs of the programme consistent with the intended impacts and effects?
- To what extent were the objectives achieved / are likely to be achieved?
- What were the major factors influencing the achievement or non-achievement of the objectives?
- Were activities cost-efficient?
- Were objectives achieved on time?
- Was the project implemented in the most efficient way compared to alternatives?
- Were activities integrated or complementary to activities led by other actors working in the area?
- What has happened as a result of the project?
- What real difference has the activity made to the beneficiaries?
- To what extent and how were the key stakeholders involved in the project?
Key stakeholders include (but are not limited to):
- Beneficiaries
- Regional ministries
- Other NGOs
- Community leaders
- DC
- What is the best way to monitor and measure the impact of Food voucher activity on beneficiaries?
- Were the beneficiary feedback mechanisms functional and adequate especially regarding Food voucher and NFI distribution?
- Was the size and scope of the action significant enough to make a difference at community level? i.e. what size and scope of programme would have an impact beyond household level to community?
- What were the major factors which influenced the achievement or non-achievement of sustainability of the project?
- Has the project been adapted appropriately to changing needs or context?
- Which components of this project can be scaled up in the future programming to sustainably contribute to the resilience of target beneficiaries?
Finally, the evaluation should assess how the implementation of the programme is respectful of standard ethics of humanitarian practice vis-à-vis the SPHERE handbook, the Code of Conduct for the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies and the Do No Harm principles.
5. Evaluation Process and Methods
The evaluation methodology should be clearly outlined in the report. Methodological appropriateness, relative to the evaluation"s primary purpose, focus and users, should be clearly explained, pointing out the strengths and weaknesses of the methods.
A description of the overall flow of the evaluation process (i.e. sequence of the key stages) should be given in the evaluation report.
The evaluation approach and the methods used (advantages compared to other methods) to collect and analyse data should also be described.
The evaluation team disposition (including sectoral expertise, history in Somalia/Lower Juba local knowledge and gender balance) and its appropriateness for the evaluation should be outlined.
The evaluation should triangulate findings from the baseline and monitoring surveys conducted within the project period on specific activities such as: pre and post KAP surveys, PDM reports, Project Implementation Plan, activity reports, other project monitoring tools used.
The evaluation report should also present the key constraints to carrying out the evaluation (e.g. security, lack of access to key information sources, use of translators), and the effect of these constraints.
Whenever secondary sources will be referred to, the evaluator should indicate the level of reliability of the given information.
After the field work, the evaluation team will present and discuss with the project team on the preliminary findings and the proposed recommendations.
A de-briefing presentation and discussion of the key findings and proposed recommendations from the evaluation will be done with coordination team in Nairobi for feedback.
A first draft of the evaluation report should be shared with SI’s coordination team for review and feedback before a final version is sent to the donor.
6. Procedures and Logistics
- The evaluation team must comply with Solidarites International’s rules and procedures related to security and relations with the media.
- The evaluation team must respect the ethics related to evaluation practice
- Logistics, movement and security would be provided and organised by Solidarites International team.
- The consultant will cater for the cost of his/her meals and for the enumerators involved in data collection at field level.
The evaluation report should include at least:
- One narrative report (max 40 pages), including an executive summary (3 pages maximum);
- Summarised document with clear description of methodology, including rationale, sampling frame and tools;
- A separate table summarizing the main findings and the lessons learned;
- A separate table showing the different recommendations for future implementations;
- Relevant maps and photographs (with dates, location and short description) of the assessed zone and programme;
- A Power point presentation of the main findings and recommendations of the evaluation must be submitted to SI in order to facilitate dissemination of the results of the evaluation to stakeholders.
- Project proposal
- Activity reports
- Current organizational chart
- Last Activity Progress Update of the programme
- Existing Monitoring and Evaluation tools/framework(including ECHO AND CIAA monitoring tools)
- Baseline, end-line, KAP and PDM reports
- Relevant maps
- Security guidelines
- University degree (preferably Master’s degree) related to agriculture, livelihoods, project management, disaster risk management, WASH, public health or other relevant field;
- Minimum of 5 years of proven experience in evaluating Emergency/DRR/resilience/livelihoods programmes
- Minimum of 5 years of proven experience in working with WASH/livelihood emergency programs
- Proven experience of project evaluation or assessment tasks in similar context (Somalia)
- Strong methodological capacity and clear report writing capacity
- Excellent communication skills
SI strongly prefers the use of mobile data platforms for data collection which will be provided for by SI.
10. How to Apply
Please send your proposal, highlighting the following:
- A brief introduction of bidding firm or person, including the relevant CVs
- Your understanding of the ToR through a technical proposal
- Proposed methodology and approach
- Proposed work plan
- Confirmation of the availability of the consultant and his/her team members
Please indicate the title of the consultancy you are applying for in the subject of your email (Final Project Evaluation: “Emergency responses to disaster affected population of IDPs and host community in South Somalia”).
Proposals will be reviewed as they are received.
Only short-listed applications will be contacted.
No comments:
Post a Comment