Project Final Evaluation – Terms of Reference
UTTHAN/ UPLIFT Nepal: Promoting citizen empowerment and inclusive democracy in 2 Municipalities of Rautahat and Saptari district, Nepal
Project Final Evaluation – Terms of Reference
Welthungerhilfe, September 2021
1. INTRODUCTION ANDCONTEXT
|Project title:||UTTHAN/ UPLIFT Nepal: Promoting citizen empowerment and inclusive democracy in 2 Municipalities of Rautahat and Saptari district, Nepal|
|Project No.:||NPL 1054- 18|
|Project period:||01/08/2018 – 31/01/2022|
Deutsche Welthungerhilfe e.V. is one of the largest Non-Governmental Organizations in Germany operating in the field of Humanitarian Assistance and Development. It was established in 1962, as the German section of the “Freedom from Hunger Campaign”, one of the world’s first initiatives aimed at the eradication of hunger. Welthungerhilfe’s work is still dedicated to the following vision: all people have the right to a self-determined life in dignity and justice, free from hunger and poverty.
Welthungerhilfe (WHH) has been operational in Nepal since 2012, and currently managing different projects in nine districts under four thematic areas (sectors): food and nutrition security, WASH, Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR), and right to food and empowerment. WHH works hand in hand with civil society in Nepal to empower socially marginalized and economically poor citizens to reinforce their resilience and to ensure their right to adequate food and nutrition.
The project titled “UTTHAN/UPLIFT Nepal: Promoting citizen empowerment and inclusive democracy in 2 Municipalities of Rautahat and Saptari districts, Nepal” is being implemented in the two municipalities of Rajpur (Rautahat) and Dakneshwari(Saptari) in collaboration with our partner Aasaman Nepal (ASN), a Non-Governmental Organization working in the sectors of nutrition, education, community empowerment andrights-based approach. The overall objectiveof the project (Impact) is that ‘the living conditions of disadvantaged population groups in the areas of hygiene, nutrition and social protection in the communities of Rajpur, Rautahat District, and Dakneshwori, Saptari District,have improved through increased citizen participation.
Project Purpose (Outcome)
Citizen participation of disadvantaged population groups is strengthened through the institutionalisation of participatory and integrative development processes in two communities in the districts of Rautahat and Saptari.
- At least 50% of 13,000 targeted population annually access government services(health, social protection), supported by registers and household surveys.
- 30% of 13,000 targeted HHs in 19 wards and 2 MCs participate actively in local decision-making processes (e.g. periodic planning processes, public hearings, community platforms).
- 30 % of issues officially raised in periodic planning processes by local civil society representatives that were fully addressed by the local government by checking the minutes of meetings, attendance lists, annual plans, budgets and interviews.
Output 1: The capacities of local government representatives and selected public service providers are increased to apply participatory and inclusive planning processes and to deliver citizen friendly services in the target areas
- Three central government policies/programs (MSNP II, accountability and GESI framework) adapted to local context and implemented by local governments in Rajpur and Dakneshwari (up to EoP) and corresponding documents are available.
- 25% of 33 selected essential state services (health, social protection) have improved verified by Community Score Cards.
- At least 70% (15) out of the 21 local governments have established three annual participatory local development plans at 2 municipalities and 19 Wards (2019, 2020, 2021).
Output 2: Community Based Organisations (CBOs) and citizens are trained to actively participate in local development planning and decision-making processes
- 75% of 19 CBOs/ 2 Networks in target area have increased their organizational capacity, verified by reaching medium level as per Participatory Organizational Capacity Assessment Process (POCAP).
- At least 38 inclusive community action plans are presented to 19 wards for their integration into annual municipal plans.
Outputs 3: Socially marginalized and poor women are empowered and have more knowledge in hygiene and nutrition so that they can actively participate in local government and development processes.
- Total 50% of targeted women with increased knowledge on nutrition and hygiene issues.
- 50% of children between 6-23 months eat the minimum diet set as stated in the MAD.
- MDD-W: 50% of women receiving Minimum Dietary Diversity.
- Number of women participating in community decision-making increases by 50%.
2. EVALUATION PURPOSE
Evaluations are an integral and standardised part of Welthungerhilfe’s efforts to improve the quality and impact of its work by ensuring continuous learning, inform decision makers and promoting accountability.
This external final evaluation is intended to measure the impact of the project, identify project achievements to draw out lessons learned and recommendations, and to provide strategic guidance and sustainable exit from the communities.
- Assess the effectiveness, efficiency and relevance of the project.
- Assess the effectiveness of the tools and approaches used during the project.
- Assess the progress made against the project purpose and results by reviewing the potential impact and the sustainability of the project activities.
- Draw lessons learned and use them for improving programs within Welthungerhilfe Nepal.
In addition to this, the project will be evaluated from different aspects as per OECD/DAC criteria of relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, impact, and sustainability. The study will also further assess project management, project activities, integration of results, reflection of coordination, partnerships with the local government, integration and coordination among the implementing partners.
3. SCOPE OF THE EVALUATION
Welthungerhilfe has planned an external final evaluation of the project “Promoting citizen empowerment and inclusive democracy in 2 Municipalities of Rautahat and Saptari districts, Nepal” that was implemented between 01/08/2018 – 31/01/2022.The study will be conducted in Rajpur, Rautahat district, and Dakneshwori, Saptari district.
The proposed evaluation aims at identifying project achievements with a focus on behaviour change on nutrition, governance and empowerment, rights-based approach, lessons learned from the success/failure of the project, major challenges that can be useful to design similar projects in the future.
4. USERS OF THE EVALUATION
The primary users of this evaluation report are project team (includes WHH and ASN staff), MEAL Officer, WHH senior management and WHH HQ. Furthermore, the evaluation results and recommendations will be disseminated to secondary stakeholders such as donor, local/federal government, including sectoral development partners, if applicable.
5. EVALUATION QUESTIONS (AND CRITERIA)
The evaluation will focus on the following areas.
- How far the project objectives were consistent with national priorities, the needs of target groups, and donor policy?
- Did the tools and approaches applied in the project facilitate the improvement of the living conditions (hygiene, nutrition and social protection) of disadvantaged population in the working area?
- How relevant were the project interventions in the socio-economic context of the project areas?
- How relevant are the project strategies and activities as perceived by the target groups and other community stakeholders?
- Were the inputs and strategies identified, and were they realistic, appropriate and adequate to achieve the results?
- How the programme complements and enhances, rather than duplicates and hinders, related activities carried out by other organizations, governments, and donors?
- To what extent and how does the project respond to the needs and priorities of the main stakeholders and the project participants?
- To what extent are all relevant stakeholders appropriately informed and updated on the activities / approach/strategy of the project?
- What are the major outputs and outcomes of this project? How is the progress in comparison to the relevant baseline data?
- To what extent have the intended outcome and results (and use of output) been achieved?
- To what extent is the target groups reached?
- Whether the planned benefits have been delivered and received, as perceived by the key beneficiaries, donor, the responsible local/provincial/federal government authorities, and other interested parties?
- To what extent did the knowledge and skills of nutrition behaviour change among the target groups?
- To what extent did the project contribute to community empowerment and the engagement of citizens with service providers?
- Was the target group aware and engaged in the Participatory Planning Process?
- How effective were the tools/approaches (LANN+, POCAP, ReFLECT and Community Score Card) used in the project?
- What are the intended and unintended results of the project?
- To what extent has the project’s MEAL system been used to adjust interventions and improve the achievement of outcomes and mitigate risks/negative results?
- How efficient was the project in terms of effective utilization of the project resources, cost-efficiency, and reaching target groups?
- Were the project resources utilized as planned?
- Did project activities overlap and duplicate other similar interventions (funded nationally and/or by other donors? Are there more efficient ways and means of delivering more and better results (outputs and outcomes) with the available inputs?
- To what extent was the project flexible to address the unforeseen situation (such as COVID-19 pandemic)?
- What were the major factors (including implementation approach) influencing the efficiency and non-efficiency of the project interventions?
- How did the project financial management processes and procedures affect project implementation? What are the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats of the project’s implementation process?
- How efficient is the overall management set-up of the project; in other words, how suitable are the management arrangements in place?
- Have coordination structures and competencies of other organisations been made use of during project evaluation?
- What is the likelihood of continuation and sustainability of project outcomes and benefits after completion of the project?
- To what extent will project achievements, results and effects be expected to continue after donor funding ended?
- To what extent are the target groups/intermediary organizations capable and prepared to receive the positive effects of the project interventions without donor’s support in the long-term?
- How effective are the exit strategies, and approaches to phase out assistance provided by the project?
- What were the major factors (including implementation approach) influencing the achievements or non-achievements of sustainability of the project?
- Describe key factors that will require attention in order to improve prospects of sustainability of project outcomes and the potential for replication of the approach?
- What type/nature of modalities need to be adapted to be even more conducive for future projects?
- What sorts of follow up intervention are taken up by the local government for nutrition initiatives and strengthening the local governance?
- Is the project contributing to improve the living condition (hygiene, nutrition and social protection) of disadvantaged population in the working area?
- What are the recommendations for further strengthening and sustaining positive change and for mitigating any negative effects perceived?
- What are the major factors that influenced the potential achievements or non-achievement of project impact?
- How well the project has been successful in meeting its desired objectives and how far has the results been achieved.
- What factors contributed to the success of the achievements, and (or) what factors prevented anticipated achievements from being realized?
6. EVALUATION DESIGN ANDMETHODOLOGY
Welthungerhilfe shall guide and oversee the overall direction of this external evaluation. The evaluation will provide quantitative and qualitative data through the following methods:
- Desk study and review of all relevant project documents, annual work-plans, annual project reports, baseline data and available data.
- Develop evaluation methodology and tools:
- Identify sampling strategy including sample size.
- Develop main research questions and relevant tools, checklists, data collection formats.
- Collection of data from different sources including field work in the project areas:
- Collect relevant quantitative as well as qualitative data from secondary information.
- Collect primary data from field using different tools and techniques as agreed during the planning process.
- Discussion with stakeholders and project staff of all project components.
- In depth interviews to gather primary data from key stakeholders using a structured methodology.
- Focus Group discussion with project target groups and other stakeholders.
- Interviews with relevant key informants.
- Observations during field visits using checklist.
- Collect stories of change.
Please note that HHs survey is not required since comprehensive data will be already available
- Data analysis and draft report preparation.
- Carry out data analysis in line with the evaluation objectives.
- Prepare draft report as per the agreed reporting structure.
- Share the draft report for comments.
- Address the comments/suggestions from the project team and produce final report.
Please note that the evaluator(s) should adhere to WHH SOPs for development project in context of COVID-19 and government protocols regarding COVID-19 prevention.
7. Managerial arrangements/roles and responsibilities
The evaluation is commissioned to external consultant(s)/consulting company. The roles of Welthungerhilfe together with the implementing partner are:
- Review of the inception report, evaluation tools (including qualitative and quantitative), methodology, sample size, etc.
- Provide logistics coordination/support on field itinerary to the evaluator(s).
- Share project specific documents: progress reports, proposals, baseline and monitoring data etc.
- Organize debriefing meetings with consultant(s) after field level data collection and provide inputs if the information is sufficient to address the evaluation questions.
- Assign WHH focal person (as identified by WHH) as a primary contact person to respond/address the questions/remarks.
Deliverables and reporting deadlines.
The following deliverables are expected to be produced by the evaluator(s):
- An inception report (outlining the methodology, operationalization of questions and planned procedure and approach to the evaluation) in English.
- Debriefing session and notes: De-briefing session shall be conducted with the project team at the end of field mission that aims at outlining the most important preliminary findings and recommendations with written summary notes of 2–4 pages (in English).
- Evaluation report as draft and final shall be in English language. Evaluator(s) shall submit the draft report at the latest two weeks after the last field mission, 35 pages maximum including executive summary, but excluding the front page, table of contents and annexes. The deadline for submission of final report to Evaluator(s) is by latest 2 weeks after the submission of the draft report and feedback received by WHH and partners. A standard outline for the evaluation report will be provided to the evaluator(s).
- A summary of evaluation report (max 2-3 pages) in English.
- The final report needs the approval of the contracting party. In case of dissent there should be documentation of the matter.
- Draft management response; integration of the recommendations into WHH “management response” form, together with the final version of the evaluation report in English.
- The evaluator(s) should provide a digital file with up to 10 photos of the evaluation, including photos related to the evaluation process (e.g., of group discussions, interviews, final workshop). The photos should be submitted in a JPEG or GIF format. The informed consent of the persons is a prerequisite.
9. Resources and available data
Project monitoring data, beneficiaries´ data and related studies are documented in the project and could be used as sources for triangulation and verification of evaluation data. The project team will provide baseline report, progress reports, interim reports, learnings documents, case studies, and survey reports/raw data to the evaluator(s).
10. Time frame / schedule
The evaluation is expected to be accomplished by30 December 2021 (deadline for submission of the final approved evaluation report). The assignment will be effective in action from the day of signing of awarded contract.
All documents and data acquired from documents as well as during interviews and meetings are confidential and to be used solely for the purpose of the evaluation.
The deliverables as well as all material linked to the evaluation (produced by the evaluator(s) or the organization itself) is confidential and remains at all times property of the contracting party.
12. Expertise of the evaluators
The evaluators are required to have the following expertise and qualifications:
- The team leader must have at least Master’s degree in development studies, monitoring and evaluation or equivalent degree.
- The team leader must have knowledge of evaluation methods and techniques (OECD DAC), including a thorough understanding of data collection, evaluation methodologies and design, and strong qualitative and quantitative research skills; +5 years of working experience in development project monitoring and evaluation.
- The team leader must have prior work experience with or working for international development organizations and familiarity with development and humanitarian programmes/issues.
- The team leader must have skills and experience in nutrition, governance and community empowerment
- The composition of the team of experts should be balanced to enable complete coverage of the different aspects of Consultancy as set out in these terms of reference.
- The evaluators must have good command in both writing and speaking in English languages.
13. Technical and financial offer
Applicants needs to provide the technical and financial offers.
The technical part of the offer submitted by the consultant/consulting firm should comply with the Term of Reference. It should also include a brief description of the overall design and methodology of the evaluation and a workplan.
The financial offer includes a proposed budget for the complete evaluation. It should state the fees per working days proposed and other costs including tax/VAT.
Proof of professional registration and taxation is also required (e.g., by providing the evaluator(s) tax number).
Following are the key consideration while preparing the budget:
- All insurances are the responsibility of the evaluator(s).
- Soft copies of relevant documents will be provided by Welthungerhilfe.
- Welthungerhilfe and partner staff will facilitate community entry.
- The budget should include all costs (i.e., anything needed to accomplish the assignment including, for example, refreshment and transportation costs for participants at FGDs if deemed necessary).
- Laptops need to be provided by the evaluator(s).
Deadline for proposal
The interested and qualified consultant(s)/consulting firm must submit their technical and financial proposal, including legal documents (registration & tax clearance in case of consulting firm and Vat registration) and CVs of key personals with by 17:00 hours (COB) dated 04 October 2021 via email address email@example.com
Please note that the selected consultant(s)/consulting firm shall adhere to WHH SOP for projects implemented in the context of COVID-19 and to government protocols for COVID-19 prevention. The field plan may differ considering the current COVID-19 scenario.
Only short-listed applicants will be contacted for further evaluation process. Welthungerhilfe Nepal reserves all the rights to reject any or all application without assigning any reasons.