TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR AN EXTERNAL EVALUATOR

1.    Background and Context

1.1. Description of the project.

Muloma Women’s Development Association (MUWODA) has been implementing a UN Trust Fund, project: Engaging Men Through Accountable Practice” (EMAP) in 36 selected communities of the three districts of the Eastern Region of Sierra Leone. EMAP is a “gender transformative intervention that was developed by  International Rescue Committee (IRC )to engage men in preventing Violence against women and girls (VAWG) in post-conflict countries” the intervention challenging deeply held traditional beliefs and practices and the power structures that support them, and has been demonstrated to reduce men’s intimate partner violence against women and girls. The project aims to prevent and end harmful attitudes behavior and social norms that contribute to Violence against Women and Girls (VAWG,) with a view to preventing VAWG and increasing gender equality in the homes and communities of three districts of the Eastern Region of Sierra Leone. The intervention, which has a three year duration started in March 2017 and is expected to be completed in March 2020. Currently, a total of about 97% of project activities have been completed in all 36 communities. An estimated 45% of women in Sierra Leone experience violence including Female Genital Mutilation (FGM), rape, etc. However, the intervention specifically targets intimate partner violence. The project targets 600 women and girls (25 per community) between the ages 18-60 years, mostly from rural communities as the primary beneficiaries who will benefit from a safer household and community. The secondary beneficiaries will include religious leaders (48); chiefs/local authorities/decision makers (120); community Gender committee (120) and men boys (1,008) The aim of the Evaluation is to conduct an assessment of the EMAP project in the three districts of Sierra Leone in a systematic and impartial way:-

Ø  To understand why- and to what extent –intended and unintended results were achieved  by examining the results  chain , processes, contextual factors and causality using appropriate criteria such as relevance , effectiveness, efficiency, impact and sustainability as well as the cross-cutting gender equality and human right criteria.

Ø  To identify key lessons and promising or emerging good practices in the field of ending VAWG.

 

1.2.Strategy and theory of change (or results chain) of the project

Results chain (Project Planning Matrix-PPM)

Result Chain

 

 

 

 

Planned/Unplanned outcomes and impacts

Impacts

To which higher developmental benefits achievement of one or several SDGs does the project contribute?

Outcomes

Which direct benefits do the achieved project outputs have for the beneficiaries or partners?

Use of output

How are project outputs used by the different beneficiaries (women, men, households, organizations. etc.

 

 

Outputs

What should the project produce

and what should be made available to the beneficiaries in order to achieve the project purpose?

 

Activities

 

Inputs

Women and girls between the ages 18 to 60 years in 24 communities in six chiefdoms of the Eastern Region of Sierra Leone. Feel safer from Gender-Based violence including intimate partner violence

Overall goal

 

Assumptions Risks

Engaging Men Through Accountable Practice” (EMAP)

Project

 

The direct beneficiaries efficiently use the services provided MUWODA, apply acquired knowledge and understanding to change attitudes, behavior and practices to reduce/ prevent VAWG and gender inequality.

Purpose

1.              Men in 24 communities in 6 chiefdoms of the Eastern Region of Sierra Leone better support gender equitable norms and non-violence against women and girls including non-intimate partner violence by project end.

2.              Traditional community leaders and religious groups better support gender equitable norms and non-intimate partner violence in 24 communities in 6 chiefdoms of the Eastern Region of Sierra Leone by project end.

3.              Women and girls pursue their potentials and have confidence and/or are equipped with knowledge to report Gender-Based Violence including IPV in 24 communities in 6 chiefdoms of the Eastern Region of Sierra Leone by project end.

Outcomes

Outputs for outcome 1:

1.1.         Project staff acquire the skills to effectively guide men to move through the various stages of individual behavior change and recognize the harmful effects of VAWG and gender inequality by project end.

1.2.         Men and boys acquire knowledge and understanding of the root causes of VAWG and gender inequality which influences changes in their attitudes, behavior and practices by project end.

Outputs for Outcome 2:

2.1.         Traditional community leaders and religious groups acquire knowledge and understanding of the root causes of VAWD and gender inequality which influence their individual attitudes, behavior and practices by project end.

2.2.         Traditional community leaders and religious leaders “acquire skills to advocate” and promote legal and human rights of VAWG.

Outputs for Outcome 3:

3.1.         Women and girls acquire an in-depth knowledge and understanding of their legal/human rights and the root causes of VAWG and gender inequality.

3.2.         Women develop leadership and appropriate communication skills to assert their rights and improve their confidence to report all forms of VAWG (sexual physical, economic, emotional violence, harmful traditional practices, etc.).

3.3.         Women and girls are provided safe space to identify and discuss their concerns and priorities for collective action and support.

Outputs

Detailed Work plan available upon request

•                EMAP Pre-implementation induction meeting.

•                Recruit local consultant to adopt EMAP training tools and train project staff.

•                Two sets of refresher training on EMAP concept.

•                Implementation of Men’s Curriculum in 24 communities.

•                Three sets of review and planning meetings on Men’s curriculum sessions.

•                Training of community and religious leaders on their roles and responsibilities in preventing VAWG.

•                Interface meeting with local authorities/stakeholders led by MSWGCA.

•                Regular community review meeting with stakeholder/leaders.

•                Recruit local consultant to design and train gender committee.

•                Quarterly inter-community/chiefdom/inter-chiefdom gender meetings.

•                Women’s curriculum discussion sessions in 24 communities; meetings with stakeholders/women’s groups/community members; recruit WDGs members and celebration of curriculum closing ceremonies.

•                Three sets of review and planning meetings on women’s curriculum sessions.

•                Regular feedback meeting in 24 communities to integrate women’s priorities.

•                Conduct radio discussion and jingles.

•                Conduct joint monitoring through the curriculum sessions.

•                Conduct a final external project evaluation.

•                Recruit consultant to design and conduct baseline data collection/analysis.

•                Training of baseline survey team.

•                Base-line survey collection and analysis of baseline data.

•                Collection and analysis of monitoring data and results.

•                Annual review meeting with key stakeholders.

•                Mid-term project review meeting.

•                Women’s reflection survey at the end of every men’s curriculum session in the community.

•                End of year project evaluation and planning meeting.

•                Conduct a final project audit.

Activities

UN Trust Fund’s contributions, MUWODA contributions

Inputs

 

 

 

 

1.3 The geographic context and the geographical coverage of the project.

The project is implemented in the Eastern Region of Sierra Leone, which comprises three districts: Kenema, Kono and Kailahun. Specifically, six chiefdoms (two from every district) is targeted as follows; Kenema (Nongoa and Melegohun), Kono (Gorama Kono and Nimikoro) and Kailahun (Upper Bambara and Mandu). For the three districts, a total of 24 rural communities is selected (i.e. 8 per district). Selection of these communities is based on a set of criteria established from the outset, and include at least the following criteria; the engagement of women in decision-making processes within the power structure of the community; the prevalence of VAWG reported in the initial assessment, the accessibility of the community (roads); and services available for GBV survivors/women and girls

1.4  Total resources allocated for the intervention. Total fund allocated for the project disaggregated by source is as follows:

UN Trust Fund: US$ 497,582

MUWODA: US$ 00

1.5  Key partners involved in the project.

During the process of implementation MUWODA collaborated with the following key partners: MSWGCA that promote protection and empowerment of women and girls; district council in each of the three districts, the District level and chiefdom-level gender committees; Women, Men and Youth groups; Chiefs/traditional/religious leaders in each community; international and national NGOs and other service providers that are responding to GBV/VAWG and providing services to survivors of violence (health, legal protection/safety, psychosocial, livelihood, etc.)

2      Purpose of the Evaluation

2.1. Why the evaluation needs to be done?

Since its inception in 2017, the intervention has been challenging deeply held traditional beliefs and practices and power structures that support them; individual accountability around personal biases and beliefs, as well as relational accountability around social interactions and the dynamics of power and privileges.

The evaluation will play an important role in promoting accountability to gender equality, human rights and women’s empowerment by providing information on the way in which project affected women and men differently.

2.2. How the evaluation results will be used, by whom and when?

The evaluation should provide credible, useful evidence-based information that enable the timely incorporation of its findings, recommendations and lessons into the decision-making processes of Chiefdom Local /religious leaders, Local Councils, MSWGCA and GBV Service providers  It should inform MUWODA’s planning, programming budgeting,  implementation and reporting and should contribute to evidence-based policymaking, development effectiveness and organizational effectiveness. Lessons learned and opportunities can be replicated or used for wider adoption.

Policy makers, development partners, organizations (NGOs), government agencies and other stakeholders in the gender sub-sector are potential users of the evaluation results. Information contained will be used to inform planning, programming, budgeting and Implementation periods.

2.3. What decisions will be taken after the evaluation is completed.

      A key decision after the evaluation is completed is how organizations, decision-makers and stakeholders such as government line Ministries(MSWGCA) District Councils (DCs),Local and International NGOs (IRC, Save the Children, Defense for Children, Dignity Now,etc) and Multilateral  organizations such as UNDP, UNICEF, UNWomen etc., use the information to improve accountability decision-making and learning. The use and follow-up on key recommendations is critical and this can be facilitated through wide dissemination of the report, subsequent knowledge products, stakeholder presentations and action planning meetings. A management response to evaluation to facilitate the process of action planning will be developed. It will specify how organizations will follow up on evaluation, who is responsible and when the action will be implemented to improve overall performance and quality of ongoing and further programmes and strategies: MUWODA will permit UN Trust Fund to publish the report in their Evaluation library to disseminate and publicize the report for the benefit of MUWODA and UN Trust Fund and build the evidence base on EVAW/G

3. Evaluation Objectives and Scope

3.1Scope of Evaluation

The Evaluation will cover the entire project duration (March 2017 – March 2020). Geographical coverage extends to the targeted six chiefdoms of three districts of the Eastern Region of Sierra Leone namely, Kenema (Nongoa and Melegohun), Kono (Gorama Kono and Nimikoro) and Kailahun (Upper Bambara and Mandu). Communities included the 24 targeted communities and 8 controlled communities to compare results in communities targeted by the intervention and those not targeted by any intervention. The evaluation should cover the 600 target primary beneficiaries and 1008 target secondary beneficiaries as well as broader stakeholders in target and controlled communities.

3.2. Objectives of Evaluation

       The main objectives that this evaluation must achieve include;

To evaluate the entire project (3 years from start to end date), against the effectiveness, relevance, efficiency, sustainability and impact criteria, as well as the cross-cutting gender equality and human right criteria (defined below)

1.     To identify key lessons and promising or emerging good practices in the field of ending violence against women and girls, for learning purpose (this is defined under the knowledge generation criteria below)Evaluation Questions

Evaluation questions define the information that the evaluation needs to generate when answered, will give intended users of the evaluation the information they seek to make decisions, act or add to knowledge. It is expected of the evaluator to provide a response/answer to each of these questions in the final evaluation report.

Evaluation Criteria

Evaluation Questions

Effectiveness: A measure of the extent to which a project attains its objective/results (as set out in the project, document and results framework) in accordance with the theory of change

1.     To what extent were the intended project goal, outcomes and outputs (project results) achieved and how?

 

In addressing this question please assess the extent to which the project directly benefited the targeted beneficiaries. At project goal level this refers to primary beneficiaries (women and girls) and at outcome level, secondary beneficiaries (such as men and boys). Please include a table on the number of beneficiaries reached as an annex. In all cases please address whether the project achieved results in accordance with the expected theory of change or not.

Relevance: The extent to which the project is suited to the priorities and policies of the target group and the context

2.     To what extent do the achieved results (project goal, outcomes and outputs) continue to be relevant to the needs of women and girls?

In addressing this question please assess the extent to which the project strategies and activities were relevant and appropriate to the needs of women and girls and whether the project was able to adjust to any changes in the context and needs of the primary beneficiaries during the project.

Efficiency: Measures the outputs- qualitative and quantitative – in relation to the inputs. It is an economic term which refers to whether the project was delivered cost effectively.

3.     To what extent was the project efficiently and cost-effectively implemented?

In addressing this question, you may wish to consider whether the activities were delivered on time and to budget and whether activities were designed to make best use of resources (e.g. were cost comparisons made between different intervention/activity types before decisions taken?). Also consider whether the project has been managed well to make best use of human and financial resources.

Sustainability: Sustainability is concerned with measuring whether the benefits of a project are likely to continue after the project/funding ends

4.     To what extent will the achieved results especially any positive change in the lives of women and girls (project goal level), be sustained after this project ends?

In addressing this question, you may need to assess the likelihood for sustainability (given that the evaluation is conducted at the end of the project when longer-term sustainability cannot yet be assessed). For example, what steps have been taken to institutionalize the project, build capacity of stakeholders or secure benefits for rights holder through accountability and oversight system?

Impact: Assesses the changes that can be attributed to a particular project relating specifically to higher-level impact (both intended and unintended)

5.     To what extend has the project contributed to ending violence against women, gender equality and/or women empowerment (both intended and unintended)?

In addressing this question, you may have to repeat some evidence and analysis from question one on effectiveness, however this question should specifically identify any changes in the situation for women and girls in relation to IPV and other forms of violence and look at both intended and unintended change for both women and girls targeted by the project and those not (if feasible).

Knowledge Generation: Assesses whether there are any promising practices that can be shared with other practitioners

6.     To what extent has the project generated knowledge promising or emerging practices in the field of EVAW/G that should be documented and shared with other practitioners?

In addressing this question, it must be clear that the knowledge generated is new, innovative builds on evidence from other projects or has potential for replication or scale up in other projects or contexts. It should not include generic lessons or knowledge that has already been frequently documented in this context.

Gender Equality and Human Rights

Cross-cutting criteria: the evaluation should consider the extent to which human rights based and gender responsive approaches have been incorporated throughout the project and to what extent.

 

Practically this could mean, incorporating an assessment of human rights and gender responsiveness throughout the evaluation questions above – if not obvious, ensuring the evaluation approach and methods of data collection are gender responsive (e.g. women and girls must feel safe to share information); specify that the evaluation data must be disaggregated by sex and other social criteria of importance to the projects subject.

Others

These include other relevant questions needed by MUWODA and other stakeholders such as MSWGCA, DCs, GNOs etc

·      . To what extent did gender and power relations- including structural and other causes that give rise to violence, inequalities, unfair power relations and discrimination- changed as a result of the intervention? Why and to what extent intended and unintended results were achieved ?

Please analyze the implications of the result on the gender landscape in the region and give recommendations.

 

Evaluation Methodology

MUWODA expects that the external consultants applying for the roles must propose the evaluation design and methodology in their proposal/application. Data sources and information available to the successful evaluator will include: the project document; field implementation reports; baseline survey report; WHO/PATH “Researching violence against women: a practical guide for researchers and activists” (2005); UNICEFs “Child and Youth participation guide”; UNEG guidance document “Integrating human rights and gender equality in evaluations” (2011) chapter 3; etc.

Final decisions about the design and methods for the evaluation should be derived from consultations among the project staff, the evaluators and key stakeholders about what is appropriate and feasible to meet the evaluation purpose and objectives and answer the evaluation questions given limitations of budget, time and existing data. The evaluation design and methodology proposal must cover the following areas:

·      Proposed evaluation design

·      Data sources (primary and secondary)

·      Proposed data collection methods and analysis

·      Proposed sampling methods

·      Field visits

·      Level of stakeholder engagement

·      Timeline/workplan

·      Financial proposal

6. Evaluation Ethics

The evaluation must be conducted in accordance with the principles outlined in the UNEG “Ethical Guidelines for Evaluation” The evaluator must put in place specific safeguarding’s and protocols to protect the safety (both physical and psychological) of respondents and those collecting the data as well as to prevent harm. This must ensure the rights of the individual are protected and participation in the evaluation does not result in further violation of their rights. The evaluator must have a plan in place to:

·      Protect the rights of respondents, including privacy and confidentiality;

·      Elaborate on how informed consent will be obtained and to ensure that the names of individuals consulted during data collection will not be made public;

·      If the project involves children (under 18 years old) the evaluator must consider additional rights and need for parental consent;

·      The evaluator must be trained in collecting sensitive information and specifically data relating to violence against women and select any members of the evaluation team on these issues.

·      Data collection tools must be designed in a way that is culturally appropriate and does not create distress for respondence.

·      Data collection visits should be organized at the appropriate time and place to minimize risk to respondence;

·      The interviewer or data collector must be able to provide information on how individuals in situations of risk can seek support (referrals to organizations that can provide counseling support for example)

Resources

WHO, “Ethical and safety recommendations for intervention research on violence against women” (2016)

WHO, Ethical and safety recommendations for researching and monitoring sexual violence in emergencies” (2007)

WHO/PATH, “Researching violence against women: a practical guide for researchers and activists” (2005)

UNICEFs “Child and youth participation guide” (various resources)

UNEG guidance document, “Inter=grating human rights and gender equality in evaluations”, (2011) chapter 3.

7. Key deliverables of evaluator and timeframe

This section describes the key products the evaluation team will be accountable to producing and submitting to MUWODA.

No

Deliverable

Deadlines of submission to UN Trust Fund M&E Team

Deadline

1

Evaluation Inception Report

This report should be submitted by the evaluator within two to four weeks of starting the assessment. The report should meet the minimum requirements and structure specified in Annex C: “Inception Report Structure” of the UN Trust Fund Evaluation Guidelines, Annexes: Tools and Templates, for UN Trust Funds review and approval

By 1st January 2020

2

Draft Evaluation Report

This report should be submitted between month and two weeks before the final evaluation report is due. The Draft Report should meet the minimum requirements and structure specified in Annex E: “Evaluation Report structure” of the UN Trust Fund Evaluation Guideline Annexes Tools and Templates, for UN Trust Funds review and approval. The Evaluator may add additional sections to the evaluation report as deemed necessary.

 

By 15th, April 2020

3

Final Evaluation

No later than 2 months after the project end-date the Evaluator should submit the final Evaluation Report which must meet the minimum requirements and structure specified in Annex E of the UN Trust Funds Guideline for review and approval.

By 14th May,2020

 

8. Evaluation Team Composition and Requested competencies

8.1. Evaluation Team Composition and Risk and Responsibilities

The Evaluation Team will consist of the Evaluator and the Field Research Enumerators.

 Evaluator

The evaluator must have at least 5 years’ experience in conducting external evaluations, with mixed-methods evaluation skills and having flexibility in using non-traditional and innovative evaluation methods. The person must have expertise in gender and human rights based approaches to evaluation and issues of violence against women and girls. Must have experience in program design and theory of change; gender responsive evaluation; participatory approaches and stakeholders engagement; in-depth knowledge of gender equality and women empowerment; collecting and analyzing quantitative and qualitative data as well as data visualization and in-depth knowledge of the districts of the eastern region of Sierra Leone. The evaluator must have a strong commitment to deliver timely and high-quality results, i.e. credible evaluation and its report that can be used; a strong team leadership and management track record, as well as interpersonal and communication skills to help ensure that the evaluation is understood and used. The evaluator must have good communication skills and ability to communicate with various stakeholders and to express concisely and clearly ideas and concepts. Fluency in English is mandatory and good command of any of the local languages (Mende, Kissi, and Kono)

Field Research Evaluators (FREs)

FREs must have at least 2 years of field operations involving collection of data from communities. They must have a strong commitment to delivering high-quality and timely results; have strong interpersonal and communication skills and ability to communicate with the respondents and to express concisely and clearly the questions on the questionnaires. The FREs must have in-depth knowledge of the districts of the eastern region of Sierra Leone and must have a good command of the local languages of the region (Mende, Kono and Kissi)  

 8.2 Required Competencies

·      Evaluation experience at least 5 years in conducting external evaluations, with mixed-methods evaluation skills and having flexibility in using non-traditional and innovative evaluation methods

·      Expertise in gender and human-rights based approaches to evaluation and issues of violence against women and girls

·      Experience with program design and theory of change, gender-responsive evaluation, participatory approaches and stakeholder engagement

·      Specific evaluation experiences in the areas of ending violence against women and girls

·      Experience in collecting and analysing quantitative and qualitative data as well as data visualization

·      In-depth knowledge of gender equality and women’s empowerment

·      A strong commitment to delivering timely and high-quality results, i.e. credible evaluation and its report that can be used

·      A strong team leadership and management track record, as well as interpersonal and communication skills to help ensure that the evaluation is understood and used.

·      Good communication skills and ability to communicate with various stakeholders and to express concisely and clearly ideas and concepts

·      Regional/Country experience and knowledge: in-depth knowledge of Sierra Leone is required.

·      Language proficiency: fluency in English and Creole is mandatory; good command of local language in the eastern region is desirable. 

9. Management Arrangement of the evaluation

The management structure of the evaluation process shall consist of the following:

(i)             Evaluation Task Manger (ETM)

The ETM is a member of MUWODA (but ideally not the project Manager of the EMAP) who leads the overall management of the evaluation process and the work of the external evaluation to ensure it meets standards.

(ii)           The MUWODA Executive Director (MED)

The MED will take an active role and will provide oversight over the evaluation process to ensure it is owned by MUWODA, managed and used effectively.

(iii)          Internal Evaluation Management Group (IEMG)

The group will include EMAP project staff, M&E staff and senior managers of MUWODA. The IEMG will ensure oversight of the evaluation process, support the ETM with logistical, HR and procurement support, provide a sounding board to avoid any conflicts of interest or possible biases if people involved in the project also manage the evaluation and ensure the evaluation meets the needs of MUWODA.

(iv)          External Stakeholder Reference Group (ESRG)

A small group of active  stakeholders including partners and beneficiaries. The group is to advise on the TOR, design of the evaluation, provide contextual and technical expertise on EMAP, provide a sounding board for the ETM; scrutinizing and managing the evaluator/work and should be included in the data collection process e.g. likely to be interviewed by the evaluator.

(v)           The M&E Team of UN Trust Fund

The team will review the TOR, inception, draft and final reports to ensure and compliance with UN Trust Fund requirements and standards at all stages of the evaluation.

 

10. Timeline of the evaluation process

Stage of Evaluation

Key Task

Responsible

Number of Working days required

Timeframe

Inception stage

Briefings/orientation of evaluator

Evaluation Task Manager (ETM)

15 Working days

First week

Desk review of key documents

Evaluator

First Week

Finalizing the evaluation design and methods

Evaluator

Second Week

Submit draft inception report

Evaluator

  1st January 2020

Review Inception Report and Provide feedback

ETM, Stakeholder Group (SG) and UNTF

5 Working days

 10th January, 2020

Incorporating comments and revising the inception report

Evaluator

4 Working days

15th  January 2020

Submitting final version of inception report

Evaluator

Review final inception report and approve

ETM, SG and UNTF

5 Working days

By 1st  February 2020

Data collection and analysis stage

Desk research

Evaluator

10 Working days

By 3rd February 2020

Data collection (visit to the field, Interviews, questionnaires, etc.)

Evaluator

Over 6-8 weeks

By 30th March 2020

Synthesis and reporting stage

Analysis and interpretation of finding

Evaluator

4 Weeks

By 10th April 2020

Preparing a first draft report

Evaluator

Review of the draft report with key stakeholders for quality assurance

ETM, SG and UNTF

14 Working days

By 15th April 2020

Consolidate comments from all the groups and submit the consolidated comments to evaluation team

ETM

Incorporating comments and preparing second draft evaluation report.

Evaluation Team

2 Weeks

By 1st May 2020

Final review and approval of report

ETM, SG and UNTF

5 Working days

By 5th May 2020

Final edits and submission of the final report

Evaluator

8 working days

By 14th May 2020

 

Application Procedures:

Interested applicants for this position must submit the their application not later than 20th December,2019. To

•           The Executive Director. Muloma Women’s Development Association.

            MUWODA

            32        Swaray Street, Kenema. Sierra Leone

•           Or email to [email protected]

 Recruitment process

Screening

Applicants will undergo a screening process to determine whether they are suitable for the work they applied for. Education history, relevant work experience and qualifications will be considered to ensure to selection. Due consideration will be given to language needs, diversity and gender.

 Assessments and Competency Based Interviews

Candidates who pass the basic eligibility screening will be requested to complete various assessments (language and functional assessments, as appropriate) and finally, candidates are sent for grading. Candidates who pass these assessments will be contacted by a recruiter according to the needs of MUWODA to fill positions. MUWODA works with the best talent. To ensure we hire the right person for the right job, competency based interviews will be conducted. Such interviews are based on the concept that past behaviour and experience is the best indicator of future performance. In other words, your history tells a story about you: your talents, skills, abilities, knowledge and actual experience in handling a variety of situations.

 Appointment

Apart from ensuring previous education and work experiences have been verified, we also make sure the person/firm  we hire is a team-player and can fit into the organization’s culture, able to thrive and work in a multi-cultural organization with a passion to serve people of concern. Successful candidates will receive an official contract

Should government go ahead and repeal the criminal libel laws?"

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...