CHARITY JOBS IN AFRICA

Organization: Diakonia Sweden
Country: Somalia
Closing date: 23 Sep 2013

TERMS OF REFERENCE – END OF TERM EVALUATIONDEMOCRACY AND HUMAN RIGHTS PROGRAMME – PHASE IVAn Integrated Approach to Enhance Democracy and Human Rights in Sool, Sanaag, Puntland and Galmudug1.0 INTRODUCTIONThe SIDA-funded Democracy and Human Rights Programme – Phase IV, titled “An integrated approach to enhance democracy and human rights in Sool, Sanaag, Puntland and Galmudug”, is a 3-year programme that started in April 2011 through March 2014, implemented by Diakonia through its partners in Somalia.The programme has an overall objective of promoting democracy, human rights and gender equality in North-East and Central-South Somalia; with the specific objective of empowering the community through the civil society to qualitatively participate in the democratisation process in Sool, Sanaag, Puntland and Galmudug.The programme, which is in its fourth phase, has the following results;1. Result 1: Local partners influencing the rights holders and duty bearers in adopting and applying the principles, practice and values of good citizenship and governance,2. Result 2: Local partner promoting peaceful co-existence,3. Result 3: Empowered community (both genders) participating in the democratisation process in Somalia,4. Result 4: Local partners effectively engaging in the democratisation process and advancement of human rights,5. Result 5: Improved programme development for Diakonia.

This fourth phase of the programme builds up on the previous three phases of the programme, which have focused on promoting democratic principles and values, culture, gender equality and human rights by increasing access to formal and non-formal education and training, vocational skills development, promotion of peace and civic education, awareness raising on emerging issues including HIV/AIDS, female genital mutilation (FGM) and gender equality and strengthening the capacity of civil society organizations and key local institutions involved in education and training, human rights and democracy initiatives in North East and Central South Somalia.The programme has been implemented through 12 local partner organizations, namely; Kaalo Relief and Development Organisation, Somalia Family Services (SFS), Youth Employment Summit – Somalia (YES Somalia), Samo Development Organisation (SDO), Puntland State University (PSU), We Are Women Activists (WAWA), Forum for African Women Educationists – Somalia Chapter (FAWESOM), Garowe Teacher Education College (GTEC), Gardho Women Network (Garwonet), Ilsan Women Coalition, Abyan Women Organisaionr and Female Education Centres Network (FECNET), and Ministry of Education (MoE) and Ministry of Women Development & Family Affairs (MoWDaFA).

2.0 CONTEXTSomalia: The Somali Republic is in the Horn of Africa, bounded to the north by the Gulf of Aden and in the east by the Indian Ocean. It shares land borders with Djibouti to the north-west, Kenya to the south-west, and Ethiopia to the west. The Somali population is one of the most homogeneous in the whole of Africa, in terms of culture, language and religion. Somalia is an arid country, having only 1.64% of its land arable. 80% of the population is nomadic or semi-nomadic pastoralists, whose mainstay is rearing goats, sheep, camels and cattle. In 2012, Somalia Transitional Federal Government (TFG) carried out elections and transitioned into the Somali National Government (SNG)Puntland state: The Puntland State, where the projects supported by Diakonia are mainly concentrated, is an offshoot of the protracted civil war in Somalia. When the country disintegrated into warring clan-based fiefdoms, the people from the former five regions of the Somali Republic in the north-eastern part of the country formed the Puntland State of Somalia in August 1998. A three-year Transitional Charter guaranteed separation of powers and envisaged a federal Somalia. In 2001, when the Transitional Charter expired, the Puntland Parliament approved a transitional constitution, which was passed in April 2012. The Puntland Constitution has stipulated and called for democratization, the formation of political parties, decentralization of powers to the districts, and convening of elections at the earliest possible time. The Puntland State established a Transitional Puntland Electoral Commission (TPEC), a nine-member commission mandated to steer the democratisation road map. TPEC has managed to enact the Puntland Constitution and regulate the establishment of 6 political parties. These political parties are expected to participate and provide contestants for local council and parliamentary elections in 2013.In order to provide for a smooth transition within the democratisation process, the Presidential term was extended by one year to January 2014, much to the chagrin of many opposition persons. This has led to friction between the current administration and members of opposition political parties.The most recent Puntland-specific data on the state of basic services is the community mapping exercise for Somalia carried out jointly by UNDP and the World Bank and published in 2008, indicates that with regard to Education; although primary schools are now to be found in a significant number of settlements (in an estimated 30% of settlements) – and some secondary schools – there are very few technical and tertiary institutions. Where educational facilities do exist they have been provided mainly by NGOs and the private sector.As for Health, throughout Puntland health facilities are described as ‘scarce’. They are poorly equipped and people have to travel long distances to reach them. There is an acute shortage of professionally trained health personnel. Less than 40% of settlements have access to trained midwives.In the water sector, in most areas, piped water is available to only 5% of the settlements. Most residents draw water from unprotected sources. Less than 50% of settlements have relatively easy access to water. On average, people have to walk 5.2 km to access water. Affecting all three of these basic services, transportation is a problem across the whole of Puntland.

3.0 PURPOSE OF THE END OF TERM EVALUATIONThe evaluation is intended principally for learning purposes, accountability purposes and assist in charting the future of the programme. It is expected to generate relevant findings, lessons and recommendations that will guide and inform the future of the Somalia Country programme, in relation to the new Swedish Results Strategy, and the Democracy and Human Rights programme, in particular.

4.0 OBJECTIVES OF THE END OF TERM EVALUATIONThe overall objective of the evaluation is to provide Sweden, Diakonia, local partners, stakeholders and project beneficiaries with necessary data and information for making informed decisions regarding the performance of the Democracy and Human Rights Phase IV programme in terms of its efficiency, effectiveness, impact and sustainability, and also to take appropriate action on any required changes in the programme design, development and implementation strategies for the future.

5.0 SCOPE OF THE END OF TERM EVALUATIONThe end of term evaluation will cover the Phase IV period (April 2011 – March 2014) of the programme with reference to the previous three phases. All the different project components and activities stated in the original logical framework will be assessed. The standard criteria on evaluation namely: relevance, efficiency, effectiveness, sustainability and impact will be used to structure the evaluation.The evaluation will have to take into account that it takes place before the end of Phase IV - September-October 2013. This will have an impact on measurement of the results of the programme.

Key issues to be looked into should include, but not limited to;5.1 RelevanceThe analysis of relevance will focus on the extent to which the programme design effectively and appropriately:? analyzed the project’s coherence with the local partner needs and polices and government development needs,? identified key stakeholders and target groups (including gender analysis and analysis of vulnerable groups), assessed institutional capacity issues and effectively promoted local ownership,? clearly and accurately identified real problems,? analyzed lessons learned from past experience and ensured coherence with current/ongoing initiatives,? provided a clear analysis of strategy options and justified the recommended implementation strategy,? established a clear and logically coherent set of project objectives (goal, purpose, outputs, results) and a set of indicative activities for delivering each project output,? developed a clear and useful logical framework matrix with supporting activity and resource/cost schedules,? analyzed assumptions and risks,? established appropriate management and coordination arrangements,? established appropriate and effective monitoring and evaluation systems,? provided an analysis of sustainability issues – including the financial and economic sustainability of the proposed measure, environmental impact, benefits to both women and men and the use of appropriate technology.? For the Future: The evaluation will seek to identify and advise on what is relevant in the design of a future programme, including thematic areas of focus and geographic focus. This should be done with the new Swedish Result Strategy for Somalia in mind.5.2 EfficiencyThe efficiency criterion will inform on how well the various activities transformed the available resources into the intended results, in terms of quantity, quality and timeliness. This will focus on issues such as;? the quality of day-to-day management, for example in (i) management of the budget (including whether an inadequate budget was a factor); (ii) management of personnel, information, property, etc, (iii) whether management of risk was adequate, i.e. whether flexibility was demonstrated in response to changes in circumstances; (iv) relations/coordination with local authorities, institutions, beneficiaries, other donors; (v) respect for deadlines,? costs and value-for-money: how far the costs of the programme were justified by the benefits _ whether or not expressed in monetary terms in comparison with similar programmes or known alternative approaches, taking account of contextual differences;? local partner contributions, if any,? quality of monitoring: its existence (or not), accuracy and flexibility, and the use made of it; adequacy of baseline information.? For the Future: the evaluation will seek to advise on the most efficient way of transforming similar resources into tangible results.5.3 EffectivenessThe effectiveness criterion will inform on how far the programme outputs were used, and the programme purpose realized. This will focus on issues such as;? whether the planned benefits have been delivered and received, as perceived by all key stakeholders (including women and men and specific vulnerable groups),? in institutional change; whether behavioural patterns have changed in the beneficiary organisations or groups at various levels; and how far the changed institutional arrangements and characteristics have produced the planned improvements (e.g. in communications, productivity, ability to generate actions which lead to economic and social development); if the assumptions and risk assessments at results level turned out to be inadequate or invalid, or unforeseen external factors intervened, how flexibly management adapted to ensure that the results would still achieve the purpose; and how well it was supported in this by key stakeholders – partners, government, donor and Diakonia,? whether the balance of responsibilities between the various partners was appropriate, which accompanying measures were or should have been taken by Diakonia, and with what consequences,? how unplanned results may have affected the benefits received,? whether any shortcomings were due to a failure to take account of cross-cutting or over-arching issues such as gender, environment and poverty during implementation.? For the future: the evaluation will seek to inform on the most effective way of achieving results.5.4 ImpactThis criterion will refer to the relationship between the programme specific objective (purpose) and the overall objective (goal); with a focus on the extent to which the benefits received by the target beneficiaries had a wider overall effect on larger numbers of people in the region or in the country as a whole. The following aspects will be analysed;? to what extent the planned goal have been achieved, and how far that was directly due to the programme,? to what extent the political, social and economic development can be attributed to the programme,? in institutional change; how far enhanced economic and social development resulted from improved institutional capabilities and communications,? if there were unplanned impacts, how they affected the overall impact,? how all gender-related and poverty related impacts were achieved? assess Diakonia value addition in the programme, especially in partner/CSO capacity development and general accompaniment processes. How have we used (or not used) Diakonia’s strategies for change, especially in connecting the different phases of the programme?? For the future: the evaluation will advise on the design and development of a realistic specific objective for a new programme, taking into consideration how much of the impact can be attributed to programme’s direct intervention5.5 SustainabilityThis criterion will focus on whether the positive outcomes of the programme at purpose level are likely to continue after external funding ends. Issues to be looked into include;? ownership of objectives and achievements, e.g. how far all stakeholders were consulted on the objectives from the outset, and whether they agreed with them and remained in agreement throughout the duration of the programme,? policy support and the responsibility of the beneficiary institutions, e.g. how far donor policy and national policy corresponded, and the effects of any policy changes; how far the relevant national, sectoral and budgetary policies and priorities affected the programme positively or adversely; and the level of support from external actors – governmental, public, business and other civil society organizations.? institutional capacity, e.g. the degree of commitment of all partners (e.g. through internal policy and systems; the extent to which the programme embedded local partner institutional structures; how far good relations with exist with donors, stability of partner organizations, funding capacities; whether the partners appear likely to be capable of continuing the flow of benefits after the programme ends (are they well-led, with adequate and trained staff, sufficient budget and equipment?),? the adequacy of the programme budget for its purpose;? socio-cultural factors, e.g. whether the project is in tune with local perceptions of needs and of ways of producing and sharing benefits; whether it respects local power-structures, status systems and beliefs, and if it seeks to change any of those, how well-accepted are the changes both by the target group and by others; how well it was based on an analysis of such factors, including target group/ beneficiary participation in design and implementation; and the quality of relations between the external programme staff and local communities,? whether cross-cutting issues such as gender equality, environmental impact and good governance; were appropriately accounted for and managed from the outset of the project? For the future: the evaluation will advise on the design and development of a coherent sustainability plan for a similar programme.

6.0 METHODOLOGYThe methodology of the evaluation should use a mix of qualitative and quantitative approaches, and should consider the following;
Documents Review – These will be myriad of documents deemed relevant to the evaluation of the programme and will include; proposal documents, technical reports, partner reports financial reports, audits, sector plans from government, contracts, secondary document from other stakeholders relevant to the programme.Focus Group Discussions - Focus Group Discussions will be held at partner level and beneficiary level.Semi-Structured Interview (SSI) - SSI will be carried out with selected partners and beneficiaries and government institutions.Observations - Careful and systematic observation in places where the evaluation team will engage beneficiaries and partners organizations.Key Informant Interviews - This method is important to capture the views and professional opinions of people who know about the circumstances on the ground. This will include project officers, heads of partner organizations, government officials etc.Most significant change stories - It is suggested that the consultants should collect stories of change from identified beneficiaries of the project. The stories will focus on what the project beneficiaries consider to be the most significant change brought by the project in their lives, capacities or way of operating.Primary Data analysis - Data gathered using various methods and tools have to be collated, analyzed and interpreted systematically. The evaluators will be expected to come up with detailed data/information analysis methods. It would be possible to utilize social science data analysis software such as the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences

7.0 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIESThe consultant(s) will be responsible for leading the evaluation and producing the evaluation report. Diakonia programme staff will support the consultant(s) to mobilize and coordinate the logistics and data collection process (if any). Diakonia will organize the verification workshops/meetings.The consultant(s) will report to the Diakonia Country Manager – Somalia in Nairobi.
The consultant(s) will meet separately with the Swedish Embassy in Nairobi to present preliminary findings. The Diakonia Country Representative in Garowe, Puntland, will provide management and day supervision and support to the evaluation team whilst in Puntland. Diakonia Monitoring, Learning and Evaluation Manager in Nairobi, will provide overall quality assurance of the evaluation.Collation of feedback on the findings and recommendations from the evaluation will be done by the Country Manager – Somalia.

8.0 OUTPUTS/DELIVERABLESThe consultant(s) should deliver the following outputs and services;? A technical proposal with a proposed evaluation framework/design and a description of the evaluation team,? Upon signing a contract submit an inception report detailing the evaluation design, methodology and data collection tools to be discussed and agreed upon with Diakonia,? Plan and carry out the evaluation process,? Produce a draft report of the evaluation,? Facilitate a validation workshop in Garowe on the basis of the draft report,? Submit a final evaluation report incorporating comments from the Diakonia and other stakeholders,? The consultant(s) should submit the final report in soft and 3 hard copies.

9.0 ENVISAGED TIMEFRAMESThe following are the envisaged timeframes, which might or might not run concurrently; Activity Man days Datesa. Consultative and briefing meetings at Nairobi level 1 Augustb. Identification and review of project documents 2 Septemberc. Development of evaluation tools, preparation and submission of inception report. Incorporation of comments 2 Septemberd. Field work in Puntland (training of enumerators, pre-testing tools, data collection & debriefing) 12 September - Octobere. Dissemination and validation workshop in Puntland 1 Octoberf. Debriefing at Nairobi level 1 Octoberg. Revision, finalization of the report, submission and approval 2 November Total 21

10.0 TERMS AND CONDITIONSLogistics: The consultant(s) travel from base to the field and back after the end of the contract (including airport tax), food, and accommodation will be covered by Diakonia.Tax and insurance: The consultant(s) shall be responsible for their income tax and/or travel and other insurance during the assignment.Code of conduct: The consultant shall be required to sign and abide to Diakonia’s Code of Conduct, which can be found at http:///www.diakonia.se Additional terms and conditions of service shall be spelt out in the contract.

How to apply:

Applications will be made in soft copy including CVs, testimonials and sample of previous work. The applications should be submitted on or before 23rd September 2013 and via email to Stephen.ndichu@diakonia.se All applications should include the following;? Cover letter (maximum 1 page)? Technical proposal (max 8 pages): The technical proposal should include (i) brief explanation about the Consultant with particular emphasis on previous experience in this kind of work; (ii) profile of the Consultant to be involved in undertaking the evaluation, (iii) Understanding of the TOR and the task to be accomplished, (iv) draft evaluation frame work and plan? Samples: At least two samples of previous work i.e. end of term evaluation of similar programmes preferably in Somalia or similar context.