Iraq: Consultancy for Project Evaluation

Organization: Danish Refugee Council
Country: Iraq
Closing date: 15 Jan 2017

Evaluation of ECHO Supported project – Provision of critical humanitarian support to conflict-affected, newly displaced and undeserved populations in Iraq

Country office DRC Iraq

Project area Erbil (Khabat, Gwer, Makhmour), Ninewa (Zummar and Qayarah) Baghdad, Diyala (Southern), Anbar, Babylon, Salah-Al Din

Application deadline 15 January 2016

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1. Who we are

Danish Refugee Council (DRC) is a humanitarian, non-governmental and non-profit organization founded in 1956 and is working in over 30 countries in the world. In 2003, following the advent of military operations in Iraq DRC was one of the first organizations to provide humanitarian assistance in Iraq, opening an office in Diyala and soon after in Basra. Since then DRC has been implementing programmes to improve the protection and promotion of durable solutions for displacement-affected populations in Iraq.

1.2. Iraq Context

From the beginning of 2014, the protracted internal fighting against armed opposition groups in Iraq has affected many parts of the country that includes Mosul, Salah-Al-din, Ninawa, Baghdad and Anbar governorates resulting in massive deterioration in the humanitarian situation. This is happening in a country that is already hosting a significant number of Syrian refugees with continued new arrivals. An estimated 3 million Iraqi people have been displaced across the country according to the IOM Displacement Tracking Matrix, December 2016 . The number of internally displaced persons is increasing further due to raging battles on different fronts notably Tikrit and the planned Mosul offensive against armed opposition groups.

Internally displaced persons in Iraq live in both camp and non–camps settings across the country with Kurdistan Region hosting a significant population. IDPs living in non-camp settings live in temporary shelters in schools, incomplete buildings, mosques and churches collectively. Secondary and tertiary displacement of these IDPs has become a norm. Through DRC’s presence in targeted areas, it has been assessed that a majority of displaced persons are women and children. The conflict situation combined with existing socio-economic barriers exposed women and children to several protection risks that require comprehensive response.

In response to several protection risks, DRC is implementing multi –sector responses to address protection risks of vulnerable displaced women and children across the country that includes distribution of Core relief items/Non Food Items, Food rations, WASH, shelter, Livelihoods, CCCM and Protection. DRC is a protection agency and the protection strategy focuses on both mainstreaming and stand -alone protection programmes to address high protection concerns.

1.3. The Project

With the support from European Commission’s Humanitarian Aid and Civil Protection (ECHO) in 2016, DRC has implemented “Provision of critical humanitarian support to conflict-affected, newly displaced and underserved populations in Iraq” project in response to the crisis in Iraq.

The project aimed at provide essential emergency Shelter, WASH and Protection services to conflict-affected, under-served and neglected populations and strengthen protection and CCCM coordination and implementation mechanisms.

2. EVALUATION OBJECTIVES

2.1. Broad Objective

The overall objective of this evaluation is to review DRC’s ECHO supported emergency response project focusing on the implementation strategy used, key achievements, challenges and lessons learnt. This evaluation is expected to contribute to increased response of internally displaced persons by generating evidence and knowledge of what works and what does not work in the Iraq context. This will inform decision making for immediate emergency responses in DRC Iraq. The evaluation will focus on the following evaluation criteria: relevance, efficiency, effectiveness, connectedness and impact.

2.2. Specific Objectives

• Evaluate the relevance of the project activities in terms of consistence with beneficiaries’ needs, country needs and organizational priorities as well as donor policies.

• Assess the efficiency of the project focusing on the conversion of inputs to outputs

• Assess the effectiveness of the project focusing on the extent to which the project objectives were achieved taking into account their relative importance.

• Evaluate the impact of the project.

• Document key lessons learnt in project implementation in terms of what works and what does not work.

3. EVALUATION KEY QUESTIONS

Key evaluation questions should be answered within the defined evaluation criteria as follows:

3.1. Relevance

• Are activities and outputs of the project consistent with the overall goal and attainment of objectives?

• Are activities and outputs of the project consistent with intended impact and effects?

• Does DRC have the required capacity in terms of staffing, local knowledge and experience in the area of operation to conduct relevant and appropriate response?

• Are there mechanisms in place to monitor whether the project has adapted to changes in the context and needs?

3.2. Connectedness/Sustainability

• How was the exit strategy planned? If there was no exit strategy, how did termination occur/ was planned?

3.3. Efficiency

• To what extent did the project utilize its resources and time efficiently?

• Were input materials purchased locally?

• Is direct implementation the best alternative? What other modalities can improve the balance between inputs and outputs?

3.4. Effectiveness

• Are the objectives and activities sufficiently clearly defined? And are they relevant to the context and the project’s outcomes?

• Has the project defined clear criteria for identification of PwSN and selection of beneficiaries in accordance with its objectives and DRC policy? If these exist, have they been applied consistently and are they aligned to the protection and humanitarian pre-set criteria?

• Is there an internal monitoring system and objectively verifiable (SMART) indicators in place to assess whether or not the objectives are achieved?

• What were the major issues influencing the achievement or non-achievement of the intended objectives?

3.5. Impact

• Has the project produced any intended or unintended, positive or negative impact to the beneficiaries, DRC’s People of Concern (PoC) and other affected population?

• Did the project respond to existing protection issues for DRC PoC?

• Do community members know what services exist and how to access them?

3.6. Lessons Learnt

• What lessons can we draw from this project?

• What activities can be replicated in another context?

4. SCOPE OF WORK

The main tasks of this consultancy include but are not limited to the following activities:

• Carry out a desk review of relevant project documents and the different sources of secondary data to leverage on already existing secondary data.

• Develop an inception report detailing evaluation design and methodology, tools, workplan schedule and budget to carry out the whole assessment.

• Develop an appropriate sampling design and data collection strategy that endeavors to capture adequate data to answer all evaluation questions raised in the evaluation criteria.

• Conduct data collection, analysis and reporting using appropriate tools and approaches.

• Prepare a draft evaluation report and share with DRC for comments and feedback.

• Conduct a debriefing session with DRC Iraq to present key findings of the evaluation in one of the planned Senior Management meetings.

• Submit a final evaluation report to DRC Iraq, including all raw data, original field notes for all in-depth interviews conducted. DRC Iraq has sole ownership of all the final data and any findings shall not be reproduced or shared without the express written permission of DRC.

5. EVALUATION METHODOLOGY

The consultant or consulting firm will design an appropriate evaluation methodology based on a firm understanding of the expectations of the terms of reference as well as consultations with DRC Iraq Protection and Monitoring & Evaluation Departments. The evaluation methodology should use a multi-method approach to data collection to provide both the qualitative and quantitative picture as well as provide the much needed triangulation. The methodology should include desk studies and field visits if possible. The field visits should include interviews with target groups (beneficiaries, PoC, local leaders and authorities, local and International NGOs and donor representatives). The methodology should also make use of protection minimum standards and humanitarian principles as key reference standards for the evaluation process.

6. EVALUATION SURVEY DELIVERABLES

The ultimate deliverable of this consultancy will be an evaluation report presenting key findings as per the defined evaluation criteria. For the purposes of managing the evaluation process, the following interim deliverables are expected from the consultant:

• Inception report detailing evaluation design, methodology, tools, workplan and budget.

• Draft evaluation report presenting the findings for comments.

• Presentation of evaluation findings in one of DRC senior management meetings (modalities can be by Skype or in person).

• Final evaluation report incorporating comments from DRC. The evaluation report should include the following sections as minimum requirements:

o Executive summary and recommendations.

o Overview of the context (1-2 pages)

o Organization and programme background

o Evaluation methodology

o Evidence based conclusions on each of the sub-components, as outlined above

o Lessons Learnt

o Annexes –including TOR, framework/ work plan. Tools used, bibliography

• Presentation –power point on key evaluation results and recommendations

• Copies of datasets used in the evaluation process.

The reports will be reviewed for quality and final payments will be made upon submission of a satisfactory evaluation report that meets evaluation quality standards.

7. COVERAGE

The evaluation of project activities will be conducted through a desk review from DRC’s Erbil office in Kurdistan, Iraq. Field data collection will be conducted in project activity areas where it is accessible and secure. Furthermore, if security permits, the Consultant is expected to travel to central/ south Iraq. The evaluation will cover all activities implemented within the project in central/ south Iraq (Baghdad, Diyala, Anbar Babylon, Salah-Al Din governorates) and in northern Iraq (Erbil and Ninewa governorates).

8. TIME-FRAME

The evaluation is expected to commence in February 2017 and will take a maximum of 21 days which includes desk review, preparation, field data collection and report writing.

9. ROLE OF DRC IRAQ AND THE CONSULTANT

9.1. DRC Iraq

DRC Iraq will provide logistical support to the consultant while in Iraq, access to programme documents and will be the link between the Consultant and targeted communities and partners. DRC will also review the consultant’s proposal, tools and evaluation report.

9.2. The Consultant

The consultant will be responsible for all aspects of the entire evaluation process that includes travel and permit applications, evaluation preparation, data collection and report writing. The Consultant will also present the findings to DRC senior management. In addition, the Consultant will be responsible for all other responsibilities stipulated in other sections of this proposal.

CONSULTANT PROFILE

The Consultant is expected to meet the following criteria in order to be eligible for this work:

• At least 10 years evaluation experience in the emergency response sector and preferably in the Iraq context.

• Sound knowledge and experience of the Middle East context preferably the Iraq context.

• Strong knowledge and experience of designing evaluation approaches for protection of refugee and IDP focused interventions.

• Sound knowledge of evaluation approaches for emergency and recovery programmes.

• A good understanding of principles, legal and policy issues around protection of vulnerable displacement affected populations.

• A demonstrated high level of professionalism and an ability to work independently and in high pressure situations under tight deadlines.

RESPONSE PROPOSAL SPECIFICATIONS

Interested applicants must include in their application a detailed technical and financial proposal including the following components:

  1. Technical proposal

1.1. Understanding and interpretation of the TORs

1.2. Methodology and design issues to be used in undertaking the evaluation that meets methodology requirements above.

1.3. Time and activity schedule

  1. Financial Proposal

2.1. Consultant’s daily rate in USD

2.2. Other costs, including accommodation, travels etc.

  1. Personnel Capacity Statement

3.1. Relevant experience related to the assignment (Include evidence of work done)

3.2. CV(s) for Evaluators

3.3. Contact references for previous work done.

EVALUATION AND AWARD OF CONSULTANCY

DRC will evaluate the proposals and award the contract based on technical soundness and financial feasibility. DRC reserves the right to accept or reject any proposals received. Due to the large volume of applications we normally receive, only shortlisted applicants will be responded to.

Application procedures:

Proposals, and other supporting documents can be uploaded on the DRC application portal.

How to apply:

Application process
Interested? Then apply for this position by clicking on the apply button. All applications must include a cover letter explaining your motivation for applying for this position and an updated CV (no longer than four pages). Both must be in English. Applications without a cover/motivation letter will not be considered.
If you have questions or are facing problems with the online application process, please contact job@drc.dk
Applications close 15 January 2017.

Read more here:: ReliefWeb