Evaluation Terms of Reference

Project Title:Communities Working for the Advancement of disaster resilience to Combat Human Trafficking (Danajon Communities WATCH), Cebu

Project numberP130002

Project Period: October 2013 – September 2016

Field of activity: Disaster Risk Reduction and Human Rights (Prevention of Human

Trafficking)

Country:Philippines

Type of Evaluation: End Evaluation

List of Contents

1Purpose of the Evaluation

2Description of the Intervention

3Scope and Focus of the Evaluation / Evaluative Questions

4Evaluation Methods and Process

5Deliverables

6Schedule

7Evaluation Team / Qualifications

8Budget

9Mandator

10 How to apply

Annexes:

-List of Project Documents

-Standard Report Structure

Up-dated by: Geri Meili, March 14, 2016

1Description of the Intervention

See attached project documents.

2Purpose of the Evaluation

This final evaluation of the ‘Danajon Communities WATCH / DCW project is initiated by the Caritas Switzerland and will be carried out by an external consultant (team) by April2016. The results of the evaluation will be used for accountability and learning purposes by the main stakeholders: Caritas Switzerland, The JTI Foundation, the local project partners PhilDHRRA, A2D, Lihok foundation and the local authorities of Central and Eastern Visayas on provincial, municipality and barangaj level. The results will also be used to determine if an extension phase should be considered for potential financing.

The main purposes of the evaluation are:

1.Assess the relevance, effectiveness, impact and sustainability, the perspectives of extension and replication,as well as the mainstreaming of cross-cutting issues in comparison to project design and Caritas Country Strategy 2012-2016.

2.Identify lessons learned and provide recommendations for similar interventions in future.

3Scope of work

The evaluation will cover the entire project period until April 2016. The evaluation will have a particular focus on assessing impact, sustainability and opportunities for replication, but will address equally other standard evaluation fields, as the relevance, the effectiveness, and the mainstreaming of cross cutting issues i.e. gender, do-no-harm and capacity development of local partners, especially civil society organizations. The scope and key evaluation questions are presented in Table 1:

Table 1: Evaluation scope and key questions

Evaluation dimentions / Scope / Key evaluationquestions
Relevance / To assess the project relevance to the needs of beneficiaries; caritas strategy; local and government needs, priorities and strategies /
  • Is the project design relevant to needs and priorities of beneficiaries, local and government authorities, development context, as well as contribute to Caritas’s Country Programme?
  • How has theproject implementation addressed the needs and priorities mentioned?
  • How has the project reacted to possibly changed surroundings and needs after Hayan?

Effectiveness / To assess project achievements against objectives / target outcomes, as identified during design and modified during implementation /
  • What have been the main project achievements at outcome and output level, in both fields of local DRR-management and prevention of human trafficking?Are achievements according to plan? Why different?
  • Were unintended results achieved, positive or negative ones? Why, what is the impact of it?
  • What is the level of participation of target communities, local NGO and public partners in project planning, implementation and monitoring?
  • What is the quality and efficiency of established local stakeholder coordination and networks? And with international actors?
  • How efficiently has the knowledge gained from the baseline been included into the running project?
  • How well did the program approach work in the sense of how well did this project link with the other two projects in the field of trafficking?
  • What can be assessed regarding the supposed links between natural disasters and risk for Human Trafficking, see also Caritas knowledge project?
  • Was this link followed up efficiently?

Cross-cuttingissuemainstreaming / To assess how cross cutting issues have been mainstreamed in project implementation and management and with what effects /
  • How cross-cutting issues, in particular for gender and capacity building / advocacy work,do no harm have been mainstreamed in project implementation and management?
  • What are the results of cross-cutting issue mainstreaming?

Impact / To assess and analyze how the project has contributed to changes (mitigation, resilience, adaptation) at different levels of beneficiaries and other stakeholders /
  • What are changes occurred to beneficiaries,local NGO partners and local public partners regarding
  • awareness, and behaviors of beneficiaries,
  • structures and capacities /tools on barangaj, municipality and provincial level,
  • management of both strategic fields of DRR management and Human Trafficking prevention, by local project civil and public partners (NGOs and local authorities)
  • improved stakeholder coordination?
  • What are positive or negative changes expected, or unexpected?

Sustainability / To assess the likelihoods for continuation and replication of project interventions by project stakeholders /
  • How project practices/ impacts will last in the future? What has been or will be (likely) replicated?
  • What is the ownership of beneficiaries/duty holders and duty bearers to project interventions? What is the willingness, aspiration and capacity of project stakeholders to continue and replicate project interventions?
  • What are driving and hindering factors to replicate and continue project interventions?

Efficiency / To assess the project management system and utilization of project resources /
  • Are human and financial resources efficiently used to achieve project outcomes?
  • What is the quality and efficiency of project management and coordination structure?How useful and appropriate was the consortium structure?
  • How has project planning, coordination, monitoring, reporting and decision making as well as financial controlling functioned? Is this done efficiently and effectively?

Lessonsandrecommendations / Toanalyselessonsandproviderecommendationsforfutureinterventions /
  • What are best practices that can be replicated? What should have been done differently at different stage of project cycle (i.e. planning, implementation, monitoring and management) to better ensure project success?
  • What are recommendations towards local stakeholders, Caritas and donors to ensure that best practices and lessons from the project will be replicated and that the project effects will be sustainable?

4Evaluation Methods and Process

An external evaluation is required in order to present independent analysis for accountability and learning purposes. Participatory methodology is suggested to stimulate interaction between evaluators and project stakeholders. Suggested methods include desk study, focus groups discussions, face-to-face in-depth interviews (based on interview guideline/questionnaire), etc. Consultants are requested to propose methodologies, techniques and tools for approval by Caritas.

The consultants will have a briefing meeting with Caritas to clarify the proposed evaluation TOR. Caritas and its partners will assist in organizing the field visits. Caritas will provide the necessary documents as basis for the evaluation to the consultant. Caritas must be informed in advance about any upcoming difficulties and also approve any proposed adaptation of the evaluation plan.

5Deliverables

Expected Outputs:

  1. Detailed evaluation concept and agenda including methodology, tools and processes,to bereviewed and approved by Caritas before the start of the mission.
  2. Briefing with Caritas and local organizations.
  3. A presentation of first findings and recommendations at the end of the mission in the field, to Caritas and local project partners.
  4. A preliminaryreport in English toCaritas on the results and findings.
  5. A completed draft report for review and comments by the JTI Foundation and Caritas.
  6. Final report in English for Caritas review and approval.
  7. Presentation of final evaluation results to Caritas,the JTI Foundation and partners, in the field and in Switzerland, if requested.

6Schedule

The contract period will be from March 25 till May 15, 2016. The draft report is expected to be submitted by April 30, the final report is expected to be submitted by May 10, 2016. The table below shows the main activities, deliverables and allocated maximum number of days.

S/N / ActivitiesandDeliverables / # of Days
1 / Desk study project documents, reports and related materials. Prepare detailed field work plan and develop the evaluation tools for Caritas review, feedback and approval. Finalize the evaluation tools. / 3days
2 / Field visits , detailed assessments
Analyze the data and the findings, debrief Caritas, partners and other relevant stakeholders on the results and findings in Cebu. Develop the draft report for the JTI Foundation and Caritas review, feedback and approval / 10 days
4 / Finalreport submitted for Caritas review and approval. Presentation of results, if requested. / 2 – 3 days
Total maximum number of days / 16days

7Qualifications

It is proposed a national consultant team covering entire mandate, or a team with an international consultant with focus on best practice, impact and strategic learning, and a national consultant with focus on achievements, local participation and effects on local institutions.

The consultants must meet the following requirements:

  • Proven technical knowledge and expertise in Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) and Community Based Disaster Risk Management (CBDRM), and of prevention of trafficking, child protection and Gender Based Violence (GBV);
  • Regional and country relevant knowledge an asset;
  • Research and evaluation experience and skills;
  • Proven reporting skills in English;
  • Good experience and skills in facilitating meetings, discussion, interviews.

8Budget

The consultants will submita financialproposal (budget)as explained in section 10.

Consultancy fees will be based on contracted working days andcontracted unit daily salaries as well as travelling and administrative costs, conforming Caritas regulations.

Reimbursable expenseswill bebased on Caritas cost norms and accepted invoices.

9Mandator

The evaluation is to be carried out under the mandate ofMr. Gerhard Meili, Senior Program Manager Philippines. In the Philippines, during the field mission, Mr Raymond Salas, national Development Program Coordinator, (DPC) of Caritas Switzerland is mandated to supervise and support the evaluation team and to ensure the necessary participation of local project partners.Mr. Raymond Salas and Mr. Gerhard Meili must be informed in advance about any upcoming difficulties and also approve any proposed adaptation of the evaluation plan.

  1. Howtoapply?

Interested consultants are invited to send theirtechnical and financial proposal (budget) and CV, addressing their understanding of the assignment, an evaluation plan including methodology, tools and process (workplan including dates) as well asreference details by

March 24, 2016 to:Mr Gerhard Meili, Senior Program Manager Philippines, Phone +4141 419 24 44, Email: . Mr Meili may be contacted also for further information.

Consultants in the Philippines may also contact Mr. Raymond Salas, Development Program Coordinator of Caritas Switzerland in the Philippines,

Phone: +63 919 207 64 58, Email: .

Annexes

Annex 1: List of project documents.

Provided as a separate file.

Annex 2: Standard Format for Evaluation Reports

The format for the presentation of the evaluation given here is to be considered as minimum standard. Where indicated it can be extended with additional chapters and sub - chapters. The report should be no longer than X pages in total, excluding annexes.

  • Table of Contents
  • Acronyms and abbreviations
  • Acknowledgements
  • Executive summary
  • Introduction

Purpose and objectives of the evaluation

Scope of the evaluation, short statement on the evaluation methods used

  • Description of the development intervention

Context of the intervention, including policy and institutional context Description of the intervention and the intervention logic and the implementation arrangements

  • Findings

Presentation and interpretation of the factual evidence in relation to the evaluative questions.

  • Conclusions

Assessment by the evaluators of the intervention results against the expected results (as identified at the planning stage or as reconstructed by the evaluators).

  • Recommendations and Lessons learned

Proposals for improvements for the client and users of the evaluation.Lessons that may have implication for the future of the development intervention or may be relevant for wider application.

  • Annexes:
  • TORs
  • List of stakeholders consulted
  • Detailed description of the evaluation process and methodology: description of the evaluation process, the methodology used (including any limitations of this method), information sources (including any data issues), stakeholder’s participation and consultation.