Organization:
Lutheran World ReliefCountry: Burkina Faso, Mali, Niger
Closing date:
02 Sep 2014•1.SUMMARY
The following are terms of reference for a final project evaluation for a three-country food security and resilience initiative in Mali, Niger and Burkina Faso that began following the Sahel food crisis that emerged in late 2011. The project was funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and is part of Lutheran World Relief\'s (LWR) larger resilience portfolio in the region. The purpose of this evaluation is to assess and document project contributions to enhanced resilience of project communities to climate-related shocks and stressors through LWR\'s approach of developing a strong social capital base through which human, physical, environmental and economic capitals are also strengthened. LWR seeks experienced evaluators to submit proposals, including thoughtful feedback on these Terms of Reference, by Monday, September 2, 2014, for work to take place between November 2014 and January 2015.
•2.CONTEXT
Over the last five years, the Sahel has faced several food crises, including the most recent that coincided with low production in 2011, resulting in a dramatic price increase for basic grains. Through the project, Resilience Plus: A Gender Sensitive Response to the Food Crisis in the Sahel, LWR set out to demonstrate its capacity to respond to emergency situations and assist communities to recover after disasters and manage risks in order to reduce future vulnerabilities.
In response to the Sahelian food crisis, Resilience Plus, a regional program implemented in Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger, combined short-term emergency assistance with essential programs to restore and rehabilitate productive assets to increase long-term resilience and reduce communities\' vulnerability to future shocks. Its goal was to meet immediate food and non-food needs by applying a cash-for-work approach and to increase communities\' productive assets (recovery and protection) with a view to reduce their vulnerability to future food crises.
Given the recent crisis in Mali, the project added an emergency and recovery component to its work in Mopti and extended the project in Niono with a new partner, (Faranfasi So).
The objectives of this project were:
•1) Provide immediate cash and/or resources to 97,440 community members in Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger to meet short-term food security needs and to protect and rehabilitate land assets;
•2) Sustain food security through increased agricultural yields and improved rural livelihoods for 47,500 small-holder food producers and processors; and
•3) Increase entrepreneurial opportunities for 10,900 women through improved post-harvest handling and processing of surplus crops traditionally marketed by women.
Illustrative project activities included the following:
•- Implementation of soil and water conversation activities through the cash-for-work approach, particularly in Burkina Faso and Niger
•- Lining of irrigation canals with cement in seven rice-growing villages in Mali
•- Access to inputs and credit to facilitate the organization and management of production campaigns
•- The production and multiplication of improved seeds
•- Collective marketing of production for beneficiaries and participants in project activities
•- Support for income generating activities for women, especially sheep fattening
•- Strengthening of technical, organizational and commercial capacities of project partnering organizations and their members
These Terms of Reference detail the final project evaluation\'s goals, approach and outputs expected upon completion. The final evaluation will concern Resilience Plus\'initial implementing partners, (the Fédération des Unions de Sociétés Coopératives (FUSC) in Mali, the Coopérative Agricole du Passoré (CAP) in Burkina Faso and Union Nazari in Niger).
•3.PRESENTATION OF LWR PARTNERS
3.1. Coopérative Agricole du Passoré (CAP)
CAP is based in Yako in Burkina Faso. It groups together six cooperatives throughout the region and includes over 3,000 agricultural producers. Before partnering with LWR, it had 12 years of experience in behavior change communication related to agricultural productivity. Project activities were implemented in the Passoré Province municipalities that were hardest hit by the 2011-2012 food security crisis, including: Arbollé, Bagaré, Bokin, Kirsi, Latodin, Samba and Yako.
3.2. Fédération des Unions de Sociétés Coopératives (FUSC)
Established in 2005, FUSC is comprised of rice producers in the Mopti region of Mali. The Federation\'s membership includes 9,000 producers. Resilience Plus targeted two of FUSC member cooperatives comprised exclusively of women.The project was implemented in the areas of Ténenkou, Djenné, Youwarou and Douentza in the Mopti region that were initially affected by Malian returnees from Libya and subsequently by the arrival of internally displaced people fleeing violence in northern Mali.
3.3. Union Nazari
Union Nazari, headquartered in Illéla in Niger, began in 2010 with 4 groups of agricultural producers and 18 women\'s groups involved in growing vegetables. It has collaborated with partners such as Qatar Charity and the French Development Agency. Resilience Plus was implemented in four municipalities located in the Badaguichiri watershed of the Tahoua region (Illéla, Badaguichiri, Tamaské and Bambeye). The Tahoua region is among the regions with the highest food insecurity, where 33.8% of households are severely affected by this insecurity.Duties: •1.GOAL AND PURPOSE OF THE EVALUATION
The purpose of this evaluation is to assess and document project contributions to enhanced resilience of project communities to climate-related shocks and stressors through its approach of developing a strong social capital base through which human, physical, environmental and economic capitals are also strengthened. Consequently, it is anticipated the evaluation will contribute to LWR\'s evidence base around the effectiveness of this approach for improved future project design.[[1]](http://lwr.iapplicants.com/%22#_ftn1)
•2.EVALUATION QUESTIONS
The evaluation should focus on the following key questions:
•1. Should another climate-related shock or stressor occur, is there evidence that project targeted households are in a stronger position to weather those shocks or stresses compared to before the project began?
•2. What evidence is there that successful strengthening of social, human, physical, environmental and economic capitals has contributed to ensuring households and communities are more resilient to future shocks and stressors?
•3. What evidence is there that the project\'s attention to gender and women\'s empowerment has translated into strengthened resilience at both household and community levels?
•4. What overall changes have occurred in the community as a result of the project, planned or unplanned, and what are the determining factors which characterize or influence those results?
•5. What difficulties were encountered and lessons learned relative to project implementation strategies and approaches, including LWR\'s resilience-building and accompaniment approaches, communities\' management of activities and project information sharing practices?
•6. What is the evidence of the sustainability of project outcomes? What factors or activities contributed to the sustainability of these outcomes?
•7. What are specific recommendations for replicating and/or scaling up similar project interventions, approaches and results?
Responses to the following questions about the following variables used to analyze resilience should also be addressed:
•1. Economic capital •- What is the level of change in household income and assets?
•- Has there been a change in production and yields at the household level of millet and okra in Niger, rice in Mali and millet/sorghum in Burkina Faso?
•- What are the determining factors for these changes, including the role of the community-based partner organizations? Are there unanticipated positive or negative changes? Which ones and why? •2. Physical capital •- How have project investments in warehouses and animal feed banks contributed to generating and safeguarding household productive capital?
•- What is the level of use and management of infrastructure created through the project by community-based organizations and their members?
•- What are the determining factors for changes, including the role of the community-based partner organizations? Are there unanticipated positive or negative changes? Which ones and why? •3. Environmental capital •- How have project investments in soil and water conservation structures contributed to generating and safeguarding household productive capital?
•- What are the determining factors for changes, including the role of the community-based partner organizations? Are there unanticipated positive or negative changes? Which ones and why? •4. Capital social •- What is the level of resource mobilization within the community?
•- What is the type and quality of services provided by the community-based partner organization to its members?
•- Has the status of vulnerable groups, particularly households without resources or capital and women, changed? How and why?
•- What are the determining factors for these changes, including the role of the community-based partner organizations? Are there unanticipated positive or negative changes? Which ones and why? •5. Human capital •- What is the level of implementation and use of the project\'s soil and water conservation as well as animal and crop husbandry techniques?
•- What is the current capacity of community-based partner organization to meet its members\' coaching and training needs?
•- What are the determining factors for these changes, including the role of the community-based partner organizations? Are there unanticipated positive or negative changes? Which ones and why?
•6.METHODOLOGY OF THE EVALUATION
This evaluation will be based on a study that is both descriptive and analytical. For each finding or conclusion, the evaluation will describe the specific methods for data collection and analysis used and detail how, why and what determining or contributing factors led to each finding or conclusion as well as cite applicable factors related to the sustainability of favorable project outcomes. The evaluation will be conducted in the project intervention areas including: the Passoré Department in Burkina Faso, the Tahoua region in Niger and the Mopti region in Mali.
Existing information sources are: the approved project and cost proposals, the monitoring and evaluation plan, activity reports, project studies and evaluation reports, training reports, etc. The consultant can also identify other external secondary sources of information (municipalities, local technical service departments, etc.).
Evaluation participants are: the LWR offices in Baltimore, Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger; LWR partners (Union Nazari in Niger, FUSC in Mali and CAP in Burkina Faso), project coordination teams, local technical service departments, municipal authorities, leaders and members of the involved community-based organizations, and targeted communities, including producers and households (direct beneficiaries and those who have not benefited); etc.
The investigative work should take into account the participatory character of project\'s overall process and enable communities and local actors to play a leading role in the analysis and assessment of the results. The M&E plan and the logical framework have defined many of the variables that must be taken into account to assess performance of implemented components or activities. Thus, the methodology will include a document review of reports and other available documents or media provided by LWR or the project team, polls, surveys and/or interviews with partners and participants in the field and data processing and reporting.
To ensure better representation of results, investigations will also include households not benefiting from project activities. This will enhance the quality of collected data and also allow for analysis that is more objective in terms of project performance.
•7.SERVICES PROVIDED FOR THE EVALUATION
The service provider will work in close partnership with LWR to develop the methodology and appropriate tools used to respond to these key questions.
•· Before starting the study, he or she will prepare a detailed evaluation plan, including a specific proposed methodology, tools, distribution of tasks and a final implementation schedule. (English or French)
At the end of the study, he or she must present a descriptive and analytical summary of the responses to the questions listed above. For this purpose, he or she will prepare the following documents:
•· An aide-memoire submitted to each country at the end of the mission. It will include a summary of the main findings and preliminary conclusions. This aide-memoire will also be based on conclusions and recommendations drawn from debriefing meetings, to be organized by the consultant at the end of each stage of data collection. (English or French)
•· The interim report, including a maximum of thirty-five pages excluding annexes, will include quantitative and qualitative information to enable better use and understanding of the evaluation\'s findings. The interim report will take into account the comments and observations made on the aide-memoire. This report should be submitted no later than 10 days after the end of the mission. An LWR-suggested outline for the report will be provided. (English)
•· Submission of the interim report should be followed by a debriefing meeting during which the consultant should make a PowerPoint presentation of the findings. Thus, the consultant will include this debriefing meeting in the proposal. It will be held either via webinar or on site at LWR Baltimore, with participation of the teams from the three countries (Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger), as appropriate, via Skype. The date will be agreed upon and set during the preparatory stage. (French)
•· The consultant will prepare the final report, ensuring inclusion of comments sent by LWR. Three hard copies and a backup electronic copy of this report will be submitted to LWR within a maximum of eight days. (English)
•· An executive summary of two pages to present the main conclusions and lessons learned. This summary will be used by LWR to share information within LWR and with its various partners. (English and French)
•· Facilitation of a meeting to present final results to staff from LWR/WARO and Baltimore. This presentation can be conducted remotely via webinar or in person in Baltimore. (English and French)
[[1]](http://lwr.iapplicants.com/%22#_ftnref1) More information on LWR\'s resilience programming in the Sahel can be found at: http://programs.lwr.org/resilience Qualifications: •6.PERIOD AND LENGTH OF MISSION
The estimated duration of the mission along with the writing of the final report is approximately 45 actual working days. The evaluation is planned to begin as of November 3, 2014 and should be completed no later than January 31, 2015. It should be noted that the signing of an evaluation contract will be subject to LWR approval of the final methodology and data collection and analysis tools.
Activities Approximate period Responsible Party Evaluation plan
•- Methodology/Sampling
•- Schedule
•- Investigation and analysis tools 1 month before the start of the evaluation Consultant Preparatory stage
•- Refinement of methodology
•- Development of data collection/processing tools
•- Setting the final schedule for implementation Beginning of November 2014 Consultant
LWR Data collection in Niger
•- Investigation
•- Aide-memoire Mid-November 2014 Consultant
LWR-Niger
Nazari Data collection in Burkina Faso
•- Investigation
•- Aide-memoire Beginning of December 2014 Consultant
LWR-Burkina
CAP Data collection in Mali
•- Investigation
•- Aide-memoire Beginning of January 2015 Consultant
LWR-Mali
FUSC Synthesis stage
•- Data processing
•- Outline of the Synthesis Report Mid-January 2015 Consultant Analysis of report by LWR End of January 2015 LWR Review and delivery of final report Not later than January 31, 2015 Consultant
•7.EVALUATOR QUALIFICATIONS AND APPLICATION PROCEEDURES
The evaluator should meet the following minimum criteria:
•· Have an advanced degree (as least a Master\'s) in social sciences, agronomy, economics, agro-economics or the equivalent;
•· Have a solid background in diagnostic and strategic review and the monitoring-evaluation of development programs;
•· Have a good working knowledge of the quantitative and qualitative methods used in evaluation/research;
•· Have proven experience in evaluating and capitalizing on projects and programs, especially in the area of food security, emergencies and natural resources management;
•· Demonstrated experience and broad understanding of the discussions and methods for programming resilience in a humanitarian-response and development context, and more specifically regarding the measurement and analysis of resilience;
•· Demonstrated experience conducting project evaluations with international humanitarian and/or development agencies and the ability to provide references and work samples upon request.
•· Experience in mobilizing local communities and community development organizations as well as an excellent understanding of participatory approaches;
•· Excellent oral and written communication skills in French and English; and
•· Have demonstrated competence in analysis, reporting and synthesis.•8.COMPOSITION OF THE TENDER
•a.Question Period
Interested consultants or consulting teams may submit questions about these TOR to LWR up until noon EST on Friday, August 22nd. All questions should be directed to Ortencia Arellano atoarellano@lwr.org. Questions may be submitted in English or French. LWR invites feedback and revisions to these Terms of Reference that reflect alternative methodologies for assessing its project\'s contributions to household and community resilience while yet simultaneously meeting the objectives of the evaluation.
•b.The Tender
Tenders should include a technical and a financial offer:
• i. (i) the technical tender will present the service provider and his/her similar experiences by identifying references (organization/agency, contact person, telephone/email contact information, deliverables, etc.); demonstrate a firm understanding of the TOR and the services solicited, a proposed evaluation methodology, including a proposed sampling framework and justification for it; schedule of activities; the service provider\'s organizational structure; and CVs of the main individuals, duly signed by the relevant persons; and
• ii. (ii) the financial tender will detail all expenditures, including but not limited to fees, allowances and incidentals, travel expenses, supplies necessary for delivering the evaluation.
Note: Only the individual(s) who has/have included CV(s) in the invitation to tender is/are authorized to conduct the field study. In case of non-compliance with this clause, LWR reserves the right to cancel the contract.
•c.Selection will be based on the following criteria:
- Responsiveness to these TOR;
- Proposed methodology;
- Qualifications, experience and skills (especially experts\' CVs);
- Cost of services; and
- Deadlines and modalities for implementation (sampling, tools, timetable).
LWR reserves the right to postpone or cancel the selection process without prior notification or consultation with bidders.
How to apply:All proposals should be submitted electronically, in English or French, to Ortencia Arellano (oarellano@lwr.org) and Marie Aughenbaugh (maughenbaugh@lwr.org) no later than midnight EST on Tuesday, September 2nd, 2014.