`

DAI-EDACE

Baseline TORs, Phase-II

  1. Background Information

In the late 2013, Foreign Commonwealth Office (FCO) contracted DAI/Europe to implement the project Enhanced Democratic Accountability and Civic Engagement (EDACE) to improve access to justice for the poor, disempowered and marginalized segments in Pakistan.

During the phase-1, 11 grants were dispersed to different civil society organizations. The project completed its first year of implementation and now has been extended further for a period of 1 year till March 2016. In the first phase the project focused on following areas:

  • Legal Aid services.
  • Community mobilization and awareness on human rights including minority rights.
  • Enhancing citizen’s access to police and legal awareness through helplines.
  • Working on women protection services.

The target beneficiary groups for the project are; a) women b) youth c) marginalized communities including minorities. Phase-I also trained police and judiciary on human rights themes which was appreciated by all concerned.

Phase-II of EDACE: Phase II will built on its strengths of Phase-I and deepen its impact as well as adopt a more focused programming approach. Based on the refined program understanding and lessons learnt, Phase II will have following streams of interventions:

a)Advocacy at Provincial and Federal Level on the issue of constitutional ‘Right to Information’ (RTI) and capacity building of relevant officers at district level on RTI

b)Advocacy for Legal reforms with Law and Justice Commission, Pakistan Bar Council and National Police Bureau in coordination with relevant stakeholders.

c)Provision of legal aid and legal awareness through two different models (help line and Bar association based legal awareness and legal aid)

d)Community groups formed doing awareness through a customized tool of action months(a uniform content of awareness across all project districts, would be developed on EDACE’s focus areas of women rights, legal rights, right to information, access to services/redressal, minority rights etc.)

e)Community youth groups trained and acting as paralegals for communities

f)Community groups acting as catalysts for interfaith harmony

g)Community groups acting as channels and facilitators to access services (like helplines, redress mechanisms like ombudsmen etc.)

  1. Objectives of the Baseline:

Primary Objective;collect Data according to EDACE Logframe[1]: It is expected that the study will review EDACE Phase-I Baseline for identifying gaps and conducting a gaps analysis. This should be the point of departure. This gap analysis will factor in design of the methodology and tools for the baseline[2] and it is expected that the methodology will address the gaps of PHASE-I Baseline.

Following table presents the impact and outcome indicators and data typology that needs to be ascertained/collected and analyzed for monitoring and tracking the progress against specific objectives of the program:

Key results / Indicators / Proposed Tools / Target Group
Impact:
Society state relations strengthened in Pakistan. / a. Increase in rights-based laws and policies amended/enacted/ approved for the protection of civic rights / Legislative Watch Reports
National and Provincial Assemblies Reports
b. International ranking of Pakistan in Rule of Law[3] Index / World Justice Project Report / World Justice Project
c. Percentage of citizens with improved sense of security and safety in project districts[4] / Questionnaire and Focus Group Discussion (FGD) / General public
Outcome 1:
Citizens are better aware of their rights, voice their grievances and utilize redressal options.
Under this outcome, awareness raising on demanding RoL, access to complaint redressal mechanisms and citizens engagement to respond to communal disputes to be tracked and analysed. / Outcome Indicator 1.a:
Percentage increase in citizens (disaggregated by gender and age) demonstrating increased awareness about their rights and formal mechanisms for access to justice in programme districts / Questionnaire and Focus Group Discussion (FGD) / General public
Outcome Indicator 1.b:
Percentage increase in citizens lodging legal cases with appropriate authorities through mechanisms established by EDACE partners / Questionnaire and Focus Group Discussion (FGD) / General public
Outcome 2:
Selected state institutions at sub-national level better respond to citizens’ demands for protection.
Under this outcome, government policies related to RoL as well as efficiency and effectiveness of selected state institutions to be assessed with appropriate recommendations to set the realistic milestones to be achieved during the span of the project. / Outcome Indicator 2.a:
Number of legislative/policy changes/reviews successfully advocated with government (national and subnational level) / Copies of bills and policy papers / Research and Advocacy Organizations
Outcome Indicator 2.b:
Percentage increase in cases/complaints referred or recommended by EDACE mechanisms that are redressed by selected state institutions / End-line study, Case Studies, KIIs, Beneficiary Feed back / General public
Outcome Indicator 2.c:
Percentage increase in service-users , disaggregated by sex and age, satisfied with selected state institutions regarding complaint redressal and access to information / Questionnaire and Focus Group Discussion (FGD) / General public
Outcome 3:
Outcomes 1 (citizen use of non-violent dispute and grievance redressal mechanisms) and 2 (better state protection of citizens) faster or more effectively achieved as a result of EDACE partner collaboration.
Under this outcome, status and scope of collaboration within EDACE partners and other similar programmes and projects to be assessed and possible areas of collaborations to be highlighted. / Outcome Indicator 3.a:
Number of formal partnerships matured between EDACE grantees and between EDACE grantees and other programmes/ projects / Key Informant Interviews
Secondary data / Similar organizations/ projects

Note: Log frame information provided will need to be updated once 2015-16 grants are finalized before initiating baseline study.

Secondary Objective;the ‘Bigger Picture’ for Impact Assessment: This Objective of the baseline is to gather qualitative and quantitative data in the target districts on the broad areas of EDACE’s interventions. The data typology that also needs to be captured is as follows:

  1. Primary/secondary research on identifying the policy and legislative gaps on the advocacy themes identified in EDACE Phase-II approach. This could be qualitative comparative analysis at national and provincial levels.
  2. Primary/secondary data and analysis on issues of Rule of Law and democratic accountability institutions in the target districts.
  3. Primary data preferably a KAP/Perception survey and analysis of the issues relating to the broad framework of EDACE interventions (as outlined above e.g. RTI, Legal Rights- (right to bail, right to fair trial and due process, legal aid etc.), on district representative sample.
  4. Primaryqualitative research of duty bearers/supply side stakeholders for assessing and bench marking their knowledge and perception of different citizen’s rights as discussed in point number 3.

Integrative Methodology and Tools: It is necessary that the firm uses district representative sample size with more than 95% Confidence level and less than 5 % Margin of error. It is expected that tools will include a section on respondent profiling vis-à-vis; gender, age, income level, ethnic tribal origin etc[5]. It is desirable that the data collection methodology and tools should be integrated for achieving the twin objectives of the baseline.It is also expected that proposed methodology will include frequencies and timelines of data collection, cleansing and analysis. Methodology and tools will be finalized after EDACE team approval. The proposed tools are:

a)Secondary Research ( to be shared with EDACE team in the inception report)

b)Questionnaires

c)Focus Group Discussion (FGDs)

d)Key Informant Interviews (KIIs)

It is also expected that technical proposal will include clear methodological safeguards for “data validation”. Data Validation Methodology will be reviewed at two levels:

a)Inbuilt methodological safeguards need to be embedded within data collection tools

b)Spot validations will be conducted by EDACE team through random sampling

  1. Geographic Scope:

The study will be conducted in the provinces of Punjab and Sindh covering the following districts:

Target Districts / Punjab (3) / Multan, Muzaffargarhand Rajanpur
Sindh (10) / Karachi, Hyderabad, Larkana, Sukkur, Ghotki, Jacobabad, Kashmore, Mirpur Khas, Umerkot, Tharparker
  1. Methodological Scope of the Baseline

Using a combination of quantitative and qualitative research techniques including analysis of secondary information/reports, household and stakeholder surveys (Community, district and provincial departments and officials etc) and stakeholder analysis (in-depth interviews and focus group discussions), the consultant firm will:

  1. Provide an analysis of the previous phase baseline to identify and address gaps. This will help EDACE in establishing/revisiting the baseline since the inception of the programme.
  2. Provide analysis of the existing role and capacity of key supply side institutions that are responsible for decision making and implementation of rule of law and human & constitutional rights in the selected districts.
  3. Analyze existing and potential opportunities for strengthening legal assistance and delivery mechanism in the selected districts.
  4. Map out the work done in the selected districts to improve citizen demand and access to rule of law and good governance.
  5. Give an assessment on the level of awareness and understanding of the target groups regarding their rights and availability to rule of law institutions delivery systems.
  1. Baseline Deliverables
  1. Baseline methodology and proposed sampling strategy by using two approaches as following:
  • Before and after project activities: By comparing the situation before and after the implementation of project activities.
  • With and without project activities: By comparing the target beneficiaries to non-targeted beneficiaries (Control Treatment method). The second approach will help in measuring the true impact of EDACE programme in targeted districts.
  1. Analytical framework
  2. Work plan detailing all data collection activities
  3. A proposed baseline report outline
  4. Documented interviews and focus group discussions with stakeholders to understand current situation in selected districts on rule of law, civic life and role of state institutions
  5. Baseline report that critically analyzes the situation in the selected districts and provides quantifiable data against key program indicators
  1. Selection process and criteria:

The potential firm will submit a detailed technical and financial proposal. The proposal will devise technical strategy and all costs. The proposal should include:

  • Cover letter addressing the requirements stated
  • Detailed CVs of experts
  • Description of methodology to clearly address the criteria and content of the Terms of Reference and may detail what additional improvements / best practices the firms can introduce while collecting and computing baseline values
  • Samples of previous work including tools used and reports produced
  • Three references (names, email and phone contacts) from previous clients where similar work has been conducted

The proposals will be evaluated on technical and financial basis. The technical score will be awarded upon maximum of 80% score, whereas, the financial will be awarded maximum of 20% score. The client will award the contract to the firm with highest accumulative score in technical, financial and the presentation of the competition process. The review team will review proposals based on the following general criteria:

  1. Methodology30 Marks
  2. Length of relevant experience10
  3. Key personnel and enumeration staff25
  4. References15
  5. Cost20

Total:100

All documents related to this tender shall be in English and all costs shall be expressed in Ruppees. Proposals may be submitted electronically or by hard copy. If proposals are submitted electronically, all pieces to the proposal must be labeled clearly. Acceptable formats include Microsoft Word, Microsoft Excel, and PDF.

  1. Time Frame:

Time for completing the assignment and provision of final report is within 6 weeks of signing of the contract agreement. The firms will provide a work plan detailing all activities from initiation to the submission of final deliverables.

  1. Validity of proposal:

Proposals will be valid for 30 days. EDACE reserves the right to reject any or all proposals received in response to this RFP, and is in no way bound to accept any proposal. The client additionally reserves the right to negotiate the substance of the finalists’ proposals, as well as the option of accepting partial components of a proposal if appropriate.

  1. Intellectual Property Rights:

All outputs under the assignment shall be the sole property of EDACE. The Consulting Firm shall not exercise any rights on all the outputs and cannot share the same with any outsiders without the prior consent of EDACE.

1

`

Annex-A: EDACE Logical Framework Analysis (Phase-II)

PROJECT NAME / ENHANCED DEMOCRATIC ACCOUNTABILITY AND CIVIC ENGAGEMENT (EDACE)
IMPACT[6] / Impact Indicator 1 / Data disaggregation / Baseline / Target / Achieved / Assumption
Society state relations strengthened in Pakistan. / Increase in rights-based laws and policies[7] amended/enacted/ approved for the protection of civic rights / a. Laws amended/enacted / -- / 1
b. Policies amended/approved / -- / 1
Source
• Notification of Bills and Policies
• National and Provincial Assemblies Report
Impact Indicator 2 / Data disaggregation / Baseline / Target / Achieved
International ranking of Pakistan in Rule of Law[8] Index / Overall rank / 98/102 / 96/102
Source
World Justice Report: Rule of Law Index 2015 Report
Impact Indicator 3 / Data disaggregation / Baseline / Target / Achieved
Percentage of citizens with improved sense of security and safety in project districts[9] / Male
Female
Source
• End-line study / Beneficiary feedback
OUTCOME 1 / Outcome Indicator 1.a / Data disaggregation / Baseline / Target / Achieved / Assumption
Citizens are better aware of their rights, voice their grievances and utilize redressal options / 1.a Percentage increase in citizens (disaggregated by gender and age) demonstrating increased awareness about their rights and formal mechanisms for access to justice in programme districts / Male / • Cultural constraints do not deteriorate to the extent where women and other excluded groups are prohibited from participating in programme activities.
Security does not deteriorate to the extent where it prohibits programme activities.
Restrictions on civil society do not prevent grantees from operating in programme districts.
Female
Source
• End-line study / Beneficiary feedback
Outcome Indicator 1.b / Data disaggregation / Baseline / Target / Achieved
Percentage increase in citizens lodging legal cases with appropriate authorities through mechanisms established by EDACE partners / Accessed Police / m/f / m/f
Accessed Courts / m/f / m/f
Accessed Ombudsperson / m/f / m/f
Accessed RTI Commission / m/f / m/f
Accessed ADR / m/f / m/f
Source
• MIS Forms, End-line study / Beneficiary feedback
OUTPUT 1.1 / Output Indicator 1.1.1 / Data disaggregation / Baseline / Target / Achieved / Assumption
11Enhanced capacity of selected CBOs/CSOs and groups to promote and protect civic rights of vulnerable groups specifically women, youth and minorities. / Cumulative number of CBOs /CSOand community groups[10] with ability to develop plans/projects aiming to promote and protect civic rights of local communities / CBOs trained[11] / 89 / As above.
Groups trained / 1245 / 205
Individuals trained / 29,419,
m. 13,826,
f. 15,593 / 3350
Source
MIS Forms, Training Reports, Focus Group Discussion
Output Indicator 1.1.2 / Data disaggregation / Baseline / Target / Achieved
Number and types of quality knowledge-based products (e.g. manuals, toolkits and IEC material) developed and institutionalized in selected CBOs/CSOs / Training Manuals / 9
Video material / 9
Audio Material / 2400
Posters / Pamphlets
Source
Copy of draft and approved manuals and materials
OUTPUT 1.2 / Output Indicator 1.2.1 / Data disaggregation / Baseline / Target[12] / Achieved / Assumption
12. Increased awareness of and access to selected state institutions supplying Rule of Law in targeted areas / Number of persons aware of how to access state RoL institutions / Thru mass media / 1,227,568
(m. 1,113,502,
f. 114,066) / 256,000 / m/f / As above.
Thru paralegals/clinics / m/f
Thru call centers / m/f
Thru Community interventions / 182,500 / m/f
Total / 438,500
Source
MIS Forms, Campaigns reports, Beneficiary feed back
Output Indicator 1.2.2 / Data disaggregation / Baseline / Target[13] / Achieved
Number of persons (disaggregated by sex and age) who seek legal-aid and advice from grantees. / Legal advice (thru helplines/clinics) / 14,177
(m. 9,028,
f. 5,149) / 15600
Legal Aid (thru paralegals) / 490
Legal Aid (thru clinics/centers) / 500
Source
MIS Forms, Case studies, Beneficiary feedback
Output Indicator 1.2.3 / Data disaggregation / Baseline / Target[14] / Achieved
Number of individuals facilitated to demand state Rule of Law services through EDACE supported mechanisms[15] / Police / 114,728 (m.99,136, f. 15,652) / 5 /district / m/f
Ombudsman / 50 /district / m/f
Service delivery departments at local level / 50 /district / m/f
Source
MIS Forms, Case Studies, KIIs, Beneficiary Feedback
OUTCOME 2 / Outcome Indicator 2.a / Data disaggregation / Baseline / Target / Achieved / Assumption
2. Selected state institutions at sub-national level better respond to citizens’ demands for protection. / Number of legislative/policy changes/reviews[16] successfully advocated with government (national and subnational level) / Laws advocated / 5 / Security does not deteriorate to the extent where it prohibits programme activities.
• State institutions demonstrate willingness to work with EDACE grantees to a minimum extent.
• Cultural constraints do not deteriorate to the extent where women and other excluded groups are prohibited from participating in programme activities.
No major events take place that distract state institutions from performing their RoL functions.
Policies advocated / 4
Source
Copy of bills and proposed policies, News Clippings, Key Informant Interviews
Outcome Indicator 2.b / Data disaggregation / Baseline / Target / Achieved
Percentage increase in cases/complaints referred or recommended by EDACE mechanisms that are redressed by selected state institutions / Police / m/f / m/f
Courts / m/f / m/f
DLECs / m/f / m/f
Ombudsman / m/f / m/f
RTI Commission / m/f / m/f
Source
End-line study, Case Studies, KIIs, Beneficiary Feed back
Outcome Indicator 2.c / Data disaggregation / Baseline / Target / Achieved
Percentage increase in service-users , disaggregated by sex and age, satisfied with selected state institutions regarding complaint redressal and access to information / Police / m/f / m/f
Courts / m/f / m/f
DLEC / m/f / m/f
Ombudsman / m/f / m/f
RTI Commission / m/f / m/f
Dar up Amanas / m/f / m/f
Source
End-line study, Case Studies, KIIs, Beneficiary Feedback
OUTPUT 2.1 / Output Indicator 2.1.1 / Data disaggregation / Baseline / Target / Achieved / Assumption
21. Enhanced knowledge and recognition of opinion and decision makers (at national and subnational level) on selected thematic issues / Number of research studies[17] and other documents addressing RoL issues produced and disseminated. / Researches / Papers shared / 5 / 9 / • Provincial governments provide appropriate assurances to allow grantees’ activities in both provinces.
No major events preoccupy legislators or policy-makers
Research-based video Documentaries shared / 4 / 1
Source
Copy of knowledge products, Dissemination record, MIS Forms
Output Indicator 2.1.2 / Data disaggregation / Baseline / Target / Achieved
Number of legislative and policy reforms[18] drafted and shared with key stakeholders / Number of bills proposed / 5
Number of policies proposed / 4
Source
Copy of bills and proposed policies, News clippings, Key Informant Interviews
OUTPUT 2.2 / Output Indicator 2.2.1 / Data disaggregation / Baseline / Target / Achieved / Assumption
22. Improved capacities of selected state institutions at subnational level for supply of Rule of Law and protection / Number of government officials and professionals in selected state institutions with improved knowledge about providing appropriate legal assistance and referral. / Police Officers / 28,609 (m.14,131,
f. 14,478) / 245 / m/f / As above.
Judges / 150 / m/f
Lawyers / 190 / m/f
Dual, SWD Staff and others / 65 / m/f
Researchers for GMIS / 20 / m/f
Project Staff / 30 / m/f
Total / 700 / m/f
Source
End-line study, Case Studies, KIIs, Beneficiary Feed back
Output Indicator 2.2.2 / Data disaggregation / Baseline / Target / Achieved
Selected state institutions with improved RoL and protection services benefitting target groups (DuA residents, women seeking legal support etc.) / Dar ul Amans / 3
Women friendly courts / 11
Source
Compliance record, Monitoring Visits, Progress Reports
Output Indicator 2.2.3 / Data disaggregation / Baseline / Target / Achieved
Number of databases/systems[19] established/improved and made operational to facilitate state institutions for improved responsiveness to citizens’ complaints/queries / Database/systems established / 7 / 2
Database/systems improved / 1 / 2
Source
Software coding, Project documentation, Periodic Reports, Plan of action, meeting minutes
Compliance record, Monitoring Visits, Progress Reports
Outcome 3 / Outcome Indicator 3.a / Data disaggregation / Baseline / Target / Achieved / Assumption
Outcomes 1 and 2 more effectively achieved as a result of EDACE partners' integrated and collaborative programming. / Number and types of formal partnerships matured between EDACE grantees and other programmers/projects / Moues signed between EDACE partners / 3 / To be planned / No major events occur which distract EDACE partners or other programme partners from relevant work.
Restrictions on civil society do not prevent grantees’ ability to conduct activities safely.
MoUs signed with other programmers/ projects / To be planned
Source
Meetings Minutes, Related correspondence, Copies of signed MoUs
OUTPUT 3.1 / Output Indicator 3.1.1 / Data disaggregation / Baseline / Target / Achieved / Assumption
31. Collaboration mechanisms formed between EDACE partners and similar programmes/ projects to maximise the benefits to citizens in target sub-national project areas. / 3.1.1 Number of meetings and workshops held to identify and develop opportunities for collaboration amongst EDACE partners by EDACE / Integration Workshop Report / 5 / 8 / As above
Joint Initiatives[20] taken / 228 / 200
Source
Meetings Minutes, Related correspondence, Copies of signed Moues
OUTPUT 3.2 / Output Indicator 3.2.1 / Data disaggregation / Baseline / Target / Achieved / Assumption
32. Collaborative Donor Coordination Forum established. / Selected funding agencies signed MoU to form Donor Coordination Forum / Forum / 1 / As above
Source
Copy of MoU and minutes of meetings
Output Indicator 3.2.2 / Data disaggregation / Baseline / Target / Achieved
3.2.1 Uniform paralegals module developed and in place / Uniform paralegal module / 1
Source
Copy of Module
Output Indicator 3.2.2 / Data disaggregation / Baseline / Target / Achieved
3.2.2 Directory for referral services and legal aid centers compiled and disseminated. / Copy of directory for referral services / 1
Source
Copy of directory
1

[1] See Annexure-A: EDACE Results and Indicators (Phase-II)