Terms of Reference
Final evaluation of the Oak Foundation-funded Projects entitled:
Establishing child protection systems at local level to ensure the protection of children from abuse, neglect and exploitation in the Republic of Moldova
And
Safe, strong and free – a better system to protect children in Moldova

Job title : Evaluator for Final Evaluation

Period : November- December 2013

Reporting to : Steering Committee (consisting of one representative per
organisation)

Task Group (consisting of 2 Evaluation Assistants – one per project)

Oak Foundation

Start Date : November 1, 2013

1. Project Aims and Objectives

Tdh/P4EC project

Goal

By December 2013, 2000 vulnerable children and their families in Falesti and Ungheni regions have improved access to family support and child protection services, including systems to prevent and protect them from family separation, violence, abuse, and neglect.

Objectives:

1.  By December 2013, models of child protection mechanisms have been designed and tested and capacities built to integrate these models into the child protection system in Ungheni and Falesti regions.

2.  By December 2013, professional and public attitudes are shifted towards supporting vulnerable families and children to prevent child neglect, abuse and exploitation.

Intended outcomes:

1.  By the end of the project, specialists working in social assistance, education, health and other child-related sectors in Falesti and Ungheni are able to prevent, identify and protect children-victims of neglect, abuse, exploitation.

2.  By the end of the project, public attitude shifted towards condemning and reporting abuse.

NCCAP/CRIC Project

Goal:

Victims or potential victims of abuse, neglect and exploitation are protected through the efficient system of monitoring, prevention and combating child abuse, established at the regional and national level.

Objectives:

1.  Children members of the school councils and professionals working with children from two districts of the country have increased capacities to monitor and report the realization of the children’s right to be protected from abuse, neglect and exploitation.

2.  Professionals working with children from two districts have capacities to implement common strategies for child abuse prevention and multidisciplinary response, based on the results of child rights monitoring

Intended outcomes:

1.  Increasing the level of information and strengthening monitoring capacities of compliance with the child’s right by children members of the school councils, parents and professionals from two districts of the country that are working with children.

2.  Strengthening the child protection system in Leova and Orhei in order to identify and refer vulnerable children for assistance, based on strong mechanism to monitor, prevent and ensure adequate response to children who are victims or potential victims of abuse, neglect and exploitation.

2. The Scope of the Final Evaluation of the Project

The purpose of the final project evaluation is to assess the achievements of the project against its stated outcomes, and to assess its overall impact, effectiveness, relevance, efficiency and sustainability. The final evaluation will also identify/document lessons learned and make recommendations to inform future projects of Oak Foundation in Moldova.

3. Purpose of the Final Evaluation:

To explore the following key areas:

Relevance

·  To what extent are the objectives of the project still relevant?

·  Is the project consistent with the specific development challenges in the country? How does it align with national strategies and priorities?

·  Do stakeholders care about the project and believe that it makes sense?

Efficiency of implementation

·  Has the project been implemented within deadline and cost estimated?

·  What mechanisms are in place to monitor the implementation?

·  Are resources concentrated on the most important initiatives? Any identified synergies between project initiatives that contributed to reducing the costs while supporting results?

Effectiveness

·  How did the project implementation contribute towards the stated outcomes? What is the level of change (intended and unintended)? How broad are the outcomes?

·  To what extend the project beneficiaries benefited from the project?

·  What is the attribution part of the project?

Impact

·  To what extent is the project contributing to a long-term positive effect on vulnerable children and communities?

·  What (if any) unintended impacts have there been? Were they positive or negative?

·  From national perspective, what difference has the project made concerning systems for the care for children in Moldova?

Sustainability

·  How sustainable are the outcomes achieved?

·  What are the potential threats to sustainability?

Lessons-learned and recommendations

·  What new learning as a result of this project has been identified, and what are the recommendations for any potential continuation of project activities?

·  How could this work be expanded or replicated in other areas of the country?

3.  Methodology:

The evaluation should be participatory and seek to engage all main stakeholders in the process. Documentation produced during the implementation, including progress and expenditure reports, mid-term evaluation reports and other relevant documents should be utilised. Key activities include:

·  Desk research & documentation review

·  Key informant interviews with main stakeholders, including from the 4 main implementation NGOs, the Government, teachers, social workers, communities and local authorities.

·  Focus group discussions with beneficiaries (including children)

·  Surveys

Use should be made of the Logical framework and Monitoring Plan of each project that is based on the logic model that sets out indicators, data sources, data methods and data analysis requirements. This Plan covers:

a.  Indicators such as quantitative measures of numbers of children reintegrated/placed in alternative care, number of assisted children victims of child abuse, neglect and exploitation, or numbers of policy-makers, decision makers and professionals trained.

b.  Data sources, which have been clearly defined for all of the areas to be monitored.

5. Duties and Responsibilities

The consultant will have the following duties and responsibilities:

·  Lead and manage the evaluation process and maintain collaboration with the task group of organisations

·  Design the detailed evaluation methodology (including the methods for data collection and analysis) ensuring that stakeholders are meaningfully involved in both the research and the analysis

·  Conduct an assessment of the projects (as per the scope of the evaluation described above)

·  Draft the evaluation report and submit to Task Group

·  Finalize the evaluation report taking into account comments and feedback from stakeholders, projects staff, the project implementing agency/partners and Oak Foundation.

·  Comply with the requirements of the technical assignment stated in these Terms of Reference on time and to a high standard

6. Timeframe and payment

The evaluation will involve a one and a half month work in November-December 2013, and the final report should be submitted no later than December 20, 2013.

Time frame (indicative) / Key Activity / Output
1st and 2nd week / §  Desk research, Document review
§  Discussion with project representatives from the 4 organisations
§  Revision of ToR with emphasis on method and approach. Preparation and approval of work plan
§  Design of evaluation tools / Work plan and evaluation process developed
3rd and 4th week / §  Data collection through interviewing, focus group discussions etc. / Transcripts from interviews, focus groups, etc.
5th week / §  Data analysis
§  Report writing / First draft of evaluation report
6th week / §  Circulation of draft evaluation report to Oak Foundation and steering group and incorporate feedback / Second draft of evaluation report
7th week / §  Finalise evaluation report / Input from stakeholders
Final draft of evaluation report

All reasonable expenses will be covered as long as they are accompanied by receipts. Payment will be made in 2 stages: 20% on submission of the agreed work plan for the evaluation and 80% on approval of the final report.

7. Lines of reporting

The consultant will be managed by the task group. The evaluation process, work plan and final report will be agreed through a consultative process with the task group, the steering committee and Oak Foundation.

8. Outputs

3 key outputs are expected: A work plan, a draft report and a final report.

The evaluation report should be clear and simply written and free of jargon. The main body of the report should not exceed 30 pages plus annexes, and should include the following sections:

a)  Basic information page (1 x A4 page maximum including Project title, agencies’ names, Name of person who developed the report, including summary of role/contribution of others in the team, period during which the evaluation was undertaken)

b)  Contents page

c)  Abbreviations and acronyms page

d)  Executive summary (1 page max.)

e)  A short introduction to the project and context

f)  Evaluation Methodology

g)  Findings & Analysis (the exact headings for this part are likely to include the key areas mentioned in the purpose of the evaluation, p.3 of the ToR)

h)  Summary of Recommendations (including details as to how they might be implemented)

i)  One page summary of lessons indicating with who and how lessons should be shared including those who are benefiting from the project, and how any resulting changes in the report will be included

j)  Annexes (including ToR for the final evaluation, names and contact details of the evaluators along with a signed declaration of their independence from the project team, evaluation schedule, people met, documents consulted, end of project surveys etc.)

The report should support the analysis of the projects’ achievements with relevant data and state how this has been sourced.

9. Competencies

Essential

The selected external consultant(s) must:

i.  Have demonstrable experience with result-based management evaluation methodologies

ii. Have strong analytical skills

iii.  Have demonstrated expertise in qualitative evaluation methodologies, and participatory research techniques, including interviewing and involving vulnerable children in research;

iv.  Have demonstrable experience of preparing quality final evaluation reports in English

v. A background in social science or related subject

Desirable

i.  Previous experience of evaluating and assessing the impact of projects working with children victims and potential victims of child abuse and neglect, children without and at risk of losing parental care; and the principles of children’s rights and child protection;

ii. Experience in conducting joint, multi-projects evaluations.

iii.  Knowledge of Romanian language is an advantage.

10. How to apply

Applications should include the following:

v  Covering letter

v  CV

v  Technical proposal

v  Financial offer

MTR/ Research Activity / Objectives / Participants / Resources required / Time required
Short description of the evaluation/ research activity / tool. / Which project Objective does this relate to? How? / Who will you use this tool with? How will children’s meaningful participation be encouraged? / What materials etc. are required to conduct this evaluation/ research activity? / How much time do you need to conduct this activity with all the participants?

Please send your application to the following e-mail address , by October 25, 2013.