occupied Palestinian territory: Consultancy for Final Project Evaluation

Organization: DanChurchAid
Country: occupied Palestinian territory
Closing date: 03 Jul 2016

1.Background of Project

DanChurchAid is an independent, faith-based non-missionary humanitarian and development non-governmental organization (NGO) with headquarter based in Copenhagen, Denmark.

DanChurchAid is rooted in the Danish National Evangelical Lutheran Church, but is active wherever we find the need is highest, regardless of religion, gender, political beliefs, race, and national or ethnic origins, handicaps or sexual orientation. Our work is based on a Christian view of humanity with respect for every individual’s rights and equal worth. DanChurchAid carries out its work within the objective: "To help and be advocates of oppressed, neglected and marginalized groups in poor countries and to strengthen their possibilities of a life in dignity”. DanChurchAid’s aim is to strengthen the world’s poorest people in their struggle for a life in dignity. For more information about DCA, please refer to our homepage http://www.danchurchaid.org.

DanChurchAid (hereafter referred to as ‘the Contracting Authority’) is undertaking a CBM funded project titled “Early recovery of livelihoods for vulnerable women disabled in the 2014 Israeli Offensive on the Gaza Strip."

DCA cooperate with Local partner in order to implement this project WAC is women affair is a women's organization based in Gaza playing an innovative and catalytic role in empowering women, advocating for women's rights and gender equality in the Palestinian sustainable development process. WAC is an independent and non-profit Palestinian NGO with the purpose of advocating women’s rights and gender equality through capacity development, information and innovative research and advocacy programs. While implementing its strategy to fulfil its vision, WAC is guided by international human rights principles including empowerment and participation, equality and non-discrimination and accountability to ensure justice and dignity for women.

WAC’s experience with women and gender issues and DCA’s experience on humanitarian issues and cash transfer programming and monitoring, will equip the project with a complementary set of assets and capabilities.

Overall objective:

To contribute in promoting community-based inclusive development for women with disabilities in the Gaza strip.

The specific objective for the project:

Enhanced livelihood opportunities and lives of women disabled in 2014 Israeli Offensive on Gaza Strip.

The project implemented by:

-Women Affairs Center- Gaza Strip (WAC)

Duration in months:

Duration Project is 9 months 1 September 2015 until the End of June 2016.

DanChurchAid works to address Gender Inequality. We have a policy document concerning this issue – see: http://www.danchurchaid.org/what_we_do/cross_cutting_policies

Target group:

This action seeks to contribute to Palestinian women’s social and economic empowerment through population´s resistance and resilience through greater access and utilization of basic livelihood resources and humanitarian assistance necessary for Women with disability who already had received financial support as an unconditional cash grant ($200 USD) to cover immediate needs. It was fully funded by DCA and was completed in December 2014. The second phase of project targeted 90 of the above 140 women with disabilities. They provided technical and vocational skills training. Small business training, livelihood improvement cash assistance. In addition, technical support and consultations provided to 45 women who benefiting from financial support for livelihood improvement. The financial support given to support the women and carried out the agreed business plans. The amount made available depend on the need identified. The selection of targeted women carried out by a committee formed from trainers, WAC team, and external independent development expert to ensure transparency in selection of beneficiaries. In addition, based on the assessment of abilities, skills and interests through structured interviews undertaken by external development expert identified vocational training and the relevant technical support provided to the target women to develop individual business or career plans.

Financial support given to women who want to set up small businesses. It also used for women to create job opportunities (for instance through internships). After receiving financial support, an external expert in small business management conducted field visits and provide technical consultations to women grant recipients.

2.Evaluation Objective, Scope and Intended Use

The purpose of the final evaluation is:

1- To assess project achievements, results-oriented monitoring and objectively verifiable indicators OVIs, progress/impact against all defined project measurement criteria.

2- To assess accountability through documentation and systemization of experience and the effectiveness of the partnership in relation to the project.

3- Promote learning from the experience and utilization of lessons learned for future projects.

4- In this evaluation, priority is given to assess the impact and the appropriateness of the implementation strategy. Further to that, priority will also be given to document best practices. All of this is intended to be used for future development of similar projects in Gaza and elsewhere.

Intended users of the evaluation

The intended users of the evaluation are the implementing partner, (WAC), the donor of the project, the CBM, and The Contracting Authority, DCA.

The evaluator is responsible for making the evaluation utilization-focused practice-oriented with concrete suggestions for improvements and replications of positive results and findings.

Scope of the evaluation:

The final evaluation should be conducted by the first of July (Mainly in July ) during the period between July 11 and 30 of July 2016, and it will cover the Specific geographical area of Gaza And specific target group , under the scope of the project.

The methodology of the final evaluation shall include questionnaire, interviews, and focus groups with stakeholders and community members, beneficiaries, meeting the partners’ staff, Contracting Authority\DCA project staff and finance staff, CBM and to attend some field activities.

The over-arching purpose of the external evaluation is to:

Assess the Quality, technical strength and effectiveness of the project, Measure the extent to which the response has been accountable to the affected populations (to Women with disability and their families) considering gender mainstreaming. Assess to which extent the resources were used efficiently during interventions , Explore the effectiveness of capacity building of key stakeholders and plans for Resilience and to and at the beginning of the response during design and implementation, Assess to which extent the interventions contributed to any short of long run impact in relation to the recovery phase and future planning, Recommend improvements for the longer-term strategies of the response programs focusing on program and management quality and accountability .

3.Evaluation Questions

The evaluation should prioritize 4 compulsory questions related to HAP, PANEL, programme impact and OECD-DAC evaluation criteria. In particular, the following questions should be addressed:

1) Does the project fulfil OECD DAC’s evaluation criteria?

EVALUATION QUESTIONS:

Based on the above scope – the evaluation should provide evidence and analysis on the following questions:

1.Project performance

·How relevant to the context and the need was the project approach and specific activities (training on vocational and small enterprises management, referrals and cash transfer) after the 2014 Gaza war?

oHow effectively was implementation carried out in comparison to the project proposal and work plan?

oTo what extent have CBM/DCA/WAC demonstrated good practices in its partnerships, ensuring proper coordination, quality programming, and gender sensitive, accountable and capture of learning throughout the project

oWhat evidence of sustainable changes at outcome level (intended and unintended) is available from internal (project) monitoring processes (OVIs) and external and independent validation exercises carried out by the evaluation team?

oComment on the appropriateness of the project's monitoring and follow-up processes in order to demonstrate results, capture learning and support real-time improvement within this project and more broadly within DCA/WAC work in Gaza.

2.Effectiveness of the project model and approach used.

·To what extent the approaches used in the project (resiliency-building, enterprising and inclusive behavior) is relevant, effective, and realistic in the context of Gaza and to what extent it gives the opportunity to address to address poverty and vulnerability in systematic way, especially for PWD?

·What was the relevance and impact of inputs provision for PWD and what impact (positive and negative) might this have for DCA/ CBM/WAC and others’ longer-term work with such groups. Was there more market-driven way in which this support could have been provided?.

· What do staff, partners and end users define as the critical achievements and challenges of the project approach, including their own skills and capacity (internally) as well as impact on the target groups?

·Comment on the added value of the Well-being measurement and how this can add value in light of the context and questions above.

3.Recommendations

·What can CBM/DCA/WAC do in future programs to increase its impact on livelihood for PWD in Gaza?. To what extent is it feasible to adopt these approaches as mainstream and what conditions and resources would be necessary to replicate or scale up these new approaches?.

·What might be some of the other ways in which cash-based interventions can support decreasing the vulnerability, looking at the context and based on evidence from within Gaza and elsewhere?

·specifically, what opportunities might there be to support and strengthen links between cash-based interventions and economic development programming & integrating the PWD into the community, e.g. enterprise (re)starts?

2) To what extent is the project rights-based and gender sensitive? What outcomes can be documented from using this approach in this project?

1-At the design, stage (was the project designed to be rights-based and gender sensitive) and at the implementation stage (did the project implement a rights-based approach). Use, for example, the following approach known as PANEL:

2-Participation: Have rights-holders (men and women) participated in project design, and implementation? What mechanisms for participation have been developed or used and how effective have they been at facilitating meaningful participation? How have rights-holders influenced the organization? How participatory are the partner organization (WAC) within their own organization?

With what results?

Accountability: Has the project and ( WAC ) Women affair center made its commitments clear to the rights-holders and included/supported activities addressed to relevant duty-bearers? Are there mechanisms where communities can complain/present their grievances to the organization on the organization’s own support? With what results?

Non-discrimination: Has the project taken specific steps to include and address specifically discriminated groups? To what extent has the project/organization taken into consideration different gender interests? To what extent have discriminatory norms/laws and practices been addressed by the organization/project?

With what results?

Empowerment: Has the project facilitated rights-holders to claim their rights? Do beneficiaries feel better equipped to claim their rights?

With what results?

Linking: to what extent has, the project/organization used and abided by relevant international human rights and humanitarian law frameworks and sought access to justice for abuses and violations?

With what results?

3-To what extent does the project live up to the humanitarian accountability principles, in particular in relation to the Humanitarian Accountability Partnership’s Benchmark 3 (Sharing information), Benchmark 4 (Participation) and Benchmark 5 (Handling complaints)? See the “2010 HAP Standard in Accountability and Quality Management” for more information.

4- Does the project contribute to achieving the DCA programme goal?

This project contributes to the DCA Program Objective 3, Palestinian population´s resistance; resilience is strengthened through greater access to and utilisation of basic livelihood resources and humanitarian assistance necessary for sustaining communities on their land, and preventing forced population transfer.

A) Has the project contributed to the programme goal? If possible, choose between:

a. Significantly contributed

b. Contributed

c. Contributed only somewhat

B) What are some specific changes that have happened contributing to this?

4.Methodology

It is expected that the consultant will develop a detailed methodology for the evaluation to be approved by WAC\DCA within a week of signing the contract.

However, the following general principles should guide the approach chosen in keeping with DCA´s approach to evaluation:

· Learning focused and utilization focused: ensure that the approach takes into account throughout the intended final use and the needs of the primary intended users in order to maximize utilization of the findings and recommendations

· Participatory: includes key stakeholders, rights-holders, other NGOs and back donors, as relevant. There must be meaningful and appropriate contact with the rights-holders.

· Gender-sensitive and rights-based commitment: must allow an understanding of the degree to which different gender interests and rights-based approach were taken into consideration in project activities and organizational development support

· Appropriate and ethical: methodologies used should be appropriate to the context and not involve risk to rights-holders.

· Partnership-oriented: it must provide feedback about the relationship between DCA and the partner WAC and the relevance and effectiveness of the partnership for mutual learning.

· The participation of beneficiaries – especially Women with Disability – should underpin the research methods used for this evaluation. The evaluation team must be prepared to work with women to ensure their voices are heard and represented in the evaluation. Effort should be

In addition to these key principles, it is important that the methodology chosen and presented in detail by the consultant be:

Appropriate for addressing the key questions:-

· Will lead to results and findings that are believable, credible and valid to primary intended users

· Is practical, cost-effective and ethical

· Includes data creation or data collection among the final beneficiaries or rights-holders

· Is effective in assessing the support to organizational development provided through the project´s lifetime.

Compile and review of existing documentation – All documentation will be made available to the evaluator. The evaluator will collect and produce additional documentation. An electronic folder with all relevant documentation organised in a logical manner will have to be included with the final report.

Interview and group discussions - In preparation for the evaluation, the WAC will prepare a tentative list that included all of individuals and groups for the evaluator to select formal to meet / interview. The evaluator may choose to include additional interviews before or during the visit to Gaza.

Priority will be given to open ended interviews and discussions with individuals. More structured approaches may be taken into use if found relevant by the evaluator. With regard to impact monitoring and documentation of best practises, it is recommended to make use of methodologies such as Most Significant Changes.

5.Limitations

In this Period, there is No more aerial bombardment or shelling by the Israeli armed forces and political situation is stable.

6.Evaluation Team and Management Responsibilities

· Work will take place in Gaza and DCA will responsible for all logistic issues.

· The evaluation report should be written in English.

· Permits to enter Jerusalem and Gaza will not be provided.

· All documents and information exchanged between the Contracting Authority and potential external evaluation candidates is to be kept strictly confidential and is not to be disclosed in any way, shape or form to any other third party without the expressed written permission of the contracting Authority.

· The external evaluator should also provide an amount required to undertake the consultancy according to the best estimate of the external evaluator. The amount should include ALL COSTS that the external evaluator will incur in the process of undertaking the consultancy. The amount required should be in EURO, excluding VAT.

· Highlight issues that could arise and are relevant and potentially of concern to the contracting authority, its partners and the donor agency relative to the work of the project

· The Contracting Authority will provide the evaluator with the contact info of partner and stakeholders and the evaluator is responsible for the direct communication with them.

· The evaluator must not compromise the values of DCA and should adhere to the Guiding Principles for Evaluators of the American Evaluation Association.

Professional Qualifications of the Team

Required qualifications:-

· Bachelor's degree in social science, familiarity with statistical methods.

· Proven expertise on the subject matter and the cross cutting issues such as Rights Based Approach and Gender.

· Proven experience from NGO and CBO based development assistance in the Palestine.

· Best practice for disability inclusive development.

· Fluency in both Arabic and English language is required .

Experiences from work with similar projects in the NGO sector.
Experiences from work in the Palestine or the MENA region.

Preferred qualifications:-

· Proven evaluation skills such as indicator development, sampling, participatory evaluation methodology, appreciative enquiry methods, focus group interviews, etc.

· Proven team leader and report writing skills

· Experience with faith based organizations in general and DCA in particular is an asset

Experiences from development / implementation of humanitarian projects in the same Livelihood.
Familiar with or experiences with the humanitarian cluster coordination system and common standards used in humanitarian work (SPHERE, HAB etc.)

Meetings and workshops

As the evaluation is utilization-focused, the following meetings are expected at both baseline and end line at minimum:

· 1. Initial meetings with all intended users.

· 2. Follow-up meetings with the same group of intended users.

7.Management of the evaluation andlogistics

WAC will manage this Evaluation through its office and staff in Gaza. The WAC team will provides the managerial and technical support to facilitate successful evaluation.

The Evaluation team will be responsible for:

· Drafting, agreeing and finalizing the evaluation methodology; agreeing a timeline for review and sign off on all deliverables with the Commissioning and Evaluation manager.

· Recruiting evaluation team in order to assist the Evaluation Manager as required, including recruiting. Conducting and managing the desk review

· Drafting questionnaires and designing data collection tools, with a particular emphasis on Women .

· Leading data collection and data analysis.

· Drafting the evaluation report and circulating for feedback and comments.

· Finalizing the report and submitting this, along with all primary data, to Women Affair center office in Gaza.

· Conduct appropriate dissemination of evaluation results to relevant stakeholders, to include conducting a dissemination workshop with the Gaza team.

The WAC team members will be responsible for:

· Participating in the desk review as directed by the Evaluation Manger.

· Supporting the Evaluation Manager in designing data collection tools.

· Provide the Evaluation team all the needed documents.

· Providing all necessary documentation, including stakeholder names and contact details to the evaluation team members.

· Participating in and providing technical input into, data collection and analysis. Including in preparation for a dissemination workshop.

· Submitting all raw data to the evaluation team leader.

DCA will be responsible for:

· Finalizing the Terms of Reference.

· Reviewing and signing off on evaluation methodology.

· Providing administrative and logistical support to WAC and Evaluation Team,

· Providing feedback to the initial draft of the Evaluation Report, and a management response to the final draft of the Evaluation Report.

· Participate in final dis dissemination workshop.

· Submit the final report and the recommendation with CBM.

· Highlight issues that could arise and are relevant and potentially of concern to the contracting authority, its partners and the donor agency relative to the work of the project

8.Expected Results

.The following completed documents are the expected outputs of the evaluation:

1. Final report: The final report should convey the broader findings and lessons learned from the response projects. It should discuss strengths and areas for improvement that concern technical strength of the programs, coordination and the extent to which Project managed (or didn’t) to impact the lives of Women, their families and communities. It should also reflect on the extent to the needs of the affected Women in terms of quality and quantity of offered services, as well as feedback from beneficiaries.

2. Debrief/presentation with DCA staff in Gaza and Senior Management Team In CBM.

3. Final report format

· The suggested evaluation report format is outlined below.

· Cover Page

· Table of Contents

· List of Acronyms

· Executive Summary: must be a standalone summary, describing the evaluation, main findings of the evaluation, and conclusions and recommendations. This will be no more than 3 pages in length.

· Main Body: The main body of the evaluation report shall elaborate the points listed in the Executive Summary. It will include the following sub-sections:

· Background Information

· Methodology

· Evaluation Strengths and Limitations

· Findings & Analysis of Project Results

· Best Practices and Lessons Learned

· Conclusions and Recommendations

· Annexes

9. The report should not exceed 30 pages of length (plus annexes). The report should be written in English. **Duration and Phasing

DCA will agree on a specific time frame with due dates for each deliverable with the Evaluation Team Leader. The generic period with deliverables is included below:

Task

Number of Days

Expected Dates

Planning Meeting with The DCA and agreed in the time plan

One Day

11of July

Submit finalized evaluation methodology and action plan;

5 Days

17 of July

Desk Review, Finalize data Designing tools including survey/questionnaire and focus group leading-questions

3Days

20 of July

Collect data from all selected stakeholders

7days

20-26 of July

Draft report

One Day

28 of July

Final report and dissemination, Debrief/Presentation

One day

30 of July

How to apply:

DEADLINE for submission of offers is Sunday the 3^rd of July 2016. Offers must be submitted through email to info.palestine@dca.dk

1.Costs and payments

Please submit the proposal in EURO

Currency

Amount

Global Remuneration (fees only)

EURO

Other Expenses

EURO

VAT or other professional tax on services

EURO

· Consultant costs : fee alone , and all other expense along ( airfares, accommodation, visa fee, local transport, etc.)

· RO and partner travel and accommodation costs

· Please indicate VAT separately.

If the consultant is not able to provide VAT invoices, we will deduct the required percentage upon the Palestinian Income Tax law.

Consultant will be paid:

50% of the contract value upon signing the contract
50 % of the contract and variables referred as “other costs” value upon submitting the draft report and approval of the final report by the contracting authority and submitting the payment request by the consultant.

DEADLINE for submission of offers is Sunday the 3^rd of July 2016. Offers must be submitted through email to info.palestine@dca.dk

Criteria

The evaluation of the applicants will be based on 60 % technical and 40 % financial scoring.

Any technical offer collecting less than 75 points will be considered not compatible with the technical criteria of the contract and thus be excluded.

Candidate no.:

Maximum points

Score

Score after interview (if amended)

Score

Score after interview (if amended)

Significant experience in women economic empowerment, livelihoods/development improvement interventions (especially related to microenterprise development and entrepreneurship)

Experience in gender issues, right based approach and women/disabilities inclusion interventions.

Experience in projects evaluation

Experience in qualitative data analysis, research, report writing and communication skills.

Subtotal on expertise

Candidate's strong understanding on Right based approach , International humanitarian law and Human Rights, economic empowerment, humanitarian response and Organisational capacity development in Palestine.

Proposed methodology and time frame including plan for methods and tools for data collection against indicators.

Subtotal on Methodology

TOTAL TECHNICAL SCORE

100

2.Attachments

The final evaluation report will include reference to all documents, which make up the cooperative agreement between DanChurchAid (the Contracting Authority) , the CBM (the Donor agency). And Women Affair center Special attention will be given to the following documents in the process of preparing the deliverables associated with this consultancy:

The Cooperation Agreements.
The proposal and all related documents.
Baseline survey.

List documents that need to be known to the evaluation team in advance of the mission, such as project description, logical framework or theory of change documents, most recent reports, recent financial report or audit documents, any previous assessment, review, evaluation report (as applicable).

If applicable include CBM position paper on topics relevant to the evaluation (gender, child safeguarding, DID) and the focus of the project/programme to be evaluated, evaluation standard and quality criteria for external consultants.

Include the stakeholder analysis matrix and the outline/template of the evaluation report.

Appendix 1: Stakeholder Analysis for Evaluation.

You could use a matrix like this to examine stakeholders involved in the project, and determine whether and how they could contribute to the evaluation, through interviews, surveys and meetings.

Please list all current and potential external and internal stakeholders including beneficiaries that contribute or influence the success of the proposed project(s)[1] being evaluated.

Stakeholders

What is their interest and contribution in the proposed project?

What is their power and influence in the project (1-5 rating, 1=low, 5=high)

Will the project involve / these stakeholders in the evaluation? How?