By continuing to browse this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Read our privacy policy

Türkiye Earthquake Response-Team member


  • Organization: IFRC - International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
  • Location: Ankara
  • Grade: Level not specified - Level not specified
  • Occupational Groups:
    • Disaster Management (Preparedness, Resilience, Response and Recovery)
    • Emergency Aid and Response
  • Closing Date: Closed

Organizational Context

Background of the Crisis

An earthquake with a magnitude of 7.7 occurred in Türkiye at 4:17 am on 6 February 2023, followed by eighty-three aftershocks at a maximum level of 6.7. An additional separate earthquake of 7.6 occurred at 1:24 pm the following day in the same region. Adiyaman, Hatay, Kahramanmaras, Gaziantep, and Malatya are reportedly the hardest hit. Almost two weeks after the initial earthquake, a separate earthquake with a magnitude of 6.4 hit Defne district, close to the Syrian border in Hatay province, on 20 February 2023. This was followed by an earthquake with a magnitude of 5.8 on the same evening in Samandag district, Hatay, causing further destruction to the already heavily damaged area.

Evaluation Purpose and Scope

The IFRC is conducting this OR because of its commitment to the people being assisted and in improving the relevancy, efficiency and effectiveness of the evolving response. The International Federation is committed to ensuring quality assurance, standards, and a strong culture of learning in its disaster response and, as such is committed to carrying out evaluations/reviews in the wake of all major disasters requiring an international response and as a mandatory exercise when the scale and scope of the operation meets certain triggers.

The focus of this evaluation is to assess the IFRC Network’s response in Turkiye with the following purposes:

  1. Evaluate the relevance, efficiency and effectiveness of the support provided by IFRC to the Turkish Red Crescent relief operation.
  2. Evaluate how the IFRC network performed against its Grand Bargain localization commitments.
  3. Explore challenges and opportunities related to the Turkish Red Crescent auxiliary role to draw lessons learned for future operations. 

Job Purpose

Evaluation Objectives and Key Questions

Considering the above purpose and scope, the OR will focus on answering the below objectives and questions:

a.    IFRC relevance, efficiency and effectiveness of the support provided by IFRC to the Turkish Red Crescent relief operation
i.    How well did the IFRC support align with the identified needs and priorities of the Turkish Red Crescent in the aftermath of the earthquake?
ii.    To what extent did the IFRC's assistance address the most critical and immediate challenges faced by the Turkish Red Crescent during the relief operation?
iii.    What measures were implemented by the IFRC to ensure the timely and cost-effective delivery of assistance to the Turkish Red Crescent?
iv.    How effectively were resources allocated and utilized by the IFRC in supporting the Turkish Red Crescent, and were there any notable areas of inefficiency that need improvement?
v.    What measures were implemented by the IFRC to ensure the timely and cost-effective delivery of assistance to the Turkish Red Crescent?
vi.    How effectively did IFRC ensure membership coordination as part of the response? What lessons can be learned for other emergencies of a similar nature? 

b.    Performance of the IFRC network against its Grand Bargain localization commitments
i.    How did TRC’s localized structure mobilize during the initial response? What challenges did the TRC face in doing so? How did TRC deliver on its specific responsibilities in the national disaster management plan? How did disaster law affect the response operation?
ii.    What circumstances are enabling for local action at scale, and what are detrimental? Are there any learnings from TRC’s preparedness and localized response that can be utilized in preparedness work globally? How did TRC utilize its branch and volunteer network? What existing preparedness tools and systems were in place and how did they work? 
iii.    How were the lessons learned from the previous responses to crisis utilized to ensure the challenges are addressed/resolved?
iv.    How were existing assets from ongoing large-scale programmes utilized in IFRC and TRC’ structures?
o    Integration and use of surge capacities into an existing strong IFRC structure
o    Empowered decision making across the structure
o    TRC`s large scale Cash and Voucher Assistance (CVA) programme, payment platform, CEA/hotline as well as PGI capacities
v.    What measurable outcomes can be attributed to the IFRC network's efforts in advancing localization in the earthquake response, and how did these outcomes align with the Grand Bargain commitments?
vi.    Were there any notable challenges or constraints faced by the IFRC in fulfilling its localization commitments, and what strategies could be employed to overcome these challenges in future humanitarian responses?

c.    Auxiliary Role 
i.    What were the pre-requisites that not only enabled, but empowered the NS to play their auxiliary role in the context of the earthquake response?
ii.    How well did existing laws and key agreements with the authorities facilitate effective and efficient response, nationally and locally?
iii.    What were the major challenges faced by the National Society in fulfilling this role during the 2023 Earthquake?
iv.    What were the lessons learned for future emergencies, not just for TRC in its auxiliary role, but also for other National Societies when building such a role into their preparedness efforts? 

Job Duties and Responsibilities

The team will carry out the OR through a series of approaches, including: 
•    Secondary data analysis (Emergency Appeal, Operation Updates, in-country documents, mission reports, debriefs, assessments). No primary data collection from assisted people is planned for this OR, this evaluation should utilize results of existing primary data sets collected by TRC or jointly by TRC and IFRC (existing datasets and surveys, studies and analysis completed by TRC and/or IFRC, also including existing reviews and evaluations completed by Kizilay Academy). 
•    Key Informant Interviews (KII) with key Red Cross Red Crescent (RCRC) and external stakeholders (i.e. UN Agencies and international organizations) in country and for those who have recently left the operation; and at the Regional and Geneva levels, including interviews with key delegates involved in the earlier stages of the response. 
•    Meetings and focus group discussions with RCRC and external actors, including TRC, PNS in-country, etc. 
•    The list of external actors and stakeholders from which the OR will have interviewees will be agreed upon by the IFRC and TRC beforehand. 

The Review/Evaluation team will present its preliminary findings to the Turkish Red Crescent, the IFRC in-country team in Türkiye, the ROE and Geneva Headquarters before departure, through a participatory meeting and/or virtual workshop. 

An EMT will also be set up to manage and support the OR. The Evaluation Management Team (EMT) will oversee and support the implementation of the OR process, including the finalization and approval of the ToR, quality assurance and approval of deliverables by the commissioners and recruitment of the evaluator(s). 

Evaluation deliverables and Timeframe

The OR team will deliver the following:

Inception Report: The inception report will iterate the parameters and the workplan to operationalize and direct each aspect of the evaluation and data collection plan, including the tools and methods to be employed. The Inception Report will elaborate on these terms of reference by:

  • agreeing on specific evaluation questions
  • describing how the evaluation and data collection will be carried out
  • refining and specifying the expectations
  • detailing the methodology
  • drafting data collection tools (interview guides, guidance for the FGDs, etc.)
  • clarifying roles and responsibilities of the team
  • outlining the timeframe and activities for the evaluation
  • describing the planned structure of the evaluation final report.


Job Duties and Responsibilities (continued)

Debriefings / feedback to management at all levels: The team will present its preliminary findings to the Turkish Red Crescent, relevant stakeholders, the ROE and Geneva Headquarters in a participatory meeting or virtual workshop, before the evaluation process comes to a close. This will allow all three levels to take on board any pertinent comments and/or to make any corrections or additions to the findings, as required before the finalization of the report.

Draft Report: A draft report, identifying key findings, lessons learned and recommendations for the current and future operation, will be submitted within one week of the team’s return from the field. Turkish Red Crescent and IFRC (at country, regional and HQ levels) will be given the opportunity to provide comments and require corrections or additions to the Draft Report. 

Final Report: The final report will contain a short executive summary (no more than 1,000 words) and a main body of the report (expected to be no more than 10,000 words) covering the background of the intervention evaluated, a description of the evaluation methods and limitations, findings, conclusions, lessons learned, and recommendations. Recommendations should be specific, feasible and evidence based. It will contain appropriate appendices, including a copy of the ToR, cited resources or bibliography, a list of those interviewed, and any other relevant materials. The report will also be made available to RC/RC stakeholders and external partners involved in the response via the IFRC Evaluation Databank, in a format agreed by all stakeholders involved.
The final report will be submitted one week after the receipt of comments on the draft report and will have to be validated by the Commissioners (IFRC Regional Director of Europe and USG NSDOC, Turkish Red Crescent Society Director General for International Affairs & Migration Services). Once validated, the final report and the Management Response will be shared with Turkish Red Crescent senior management, IFRC senior management, wider IFRC and Movement stakeholders and following approvals, the report be posted on the IFRC Evaluation Databank.


Below is the timeline of the activities and deliverables. The consultative process is expected to take place from August to November 2023:  

Activities / deliverables

Time Schedule

Consultant Working days

-          Nomination of EMT

-          Nomination of Commissioners

June-July 2023


-          Development and Approval of ToR

January 2024


-          Selection of Evaluation Teams

February - March 2024


-          Desk Review

-          Debriefings from key stakeholders

-          Inception Report

February - March 2024

10 days

-          Data Collection

-          Presentation of Findings

March - April 2024

13 days

-          Draft report and draft executive summary

-          Final report

April 2024

10 days

-          Presentations (validation session and dissemination session)

April 2024  

2 days


Evaluation Management Team (EMT)
The EMT will manage and oversee the evaluation process at the technical level and will consists of:
•    1 x FP from IFRC Geneva HQ 
•    2 x FP from IFRC Regional Office for Europe (ROE): Operations and PMER
•    1 x FP from TRC  

Ethical Standards
The evaluators should take all reasonable steps to ensure that the OR is designed and conducted to respect and protect the rights and welfare of the people and communities involved. The review should be technically accurate and reliable, conducted in a transparent and impartial manner, and contribute to organizational learning and accountability. Therefore, the evaluation team should adhere to the evaluation standards and applicable practices outlined in the IFRC Evaluation Policy.

The IFRC Evaluation Standards are:
1.    Utility: Evaluations must be useful and used.
2.    Feasibility: Evaluations must be realistic, diplomatic, and managed in a sensible, cost-effective manner.
3.    Ethics & Legality: Evaluations must be conducted in an ethical and legal manner, with particular regard for the welfare of those involved in and affected by the evaluation.
4.    Impartiality & Independence: Evaluations should be impartial, providing a comprehensive and unbiased assessment that takes into account the views of all stakeholders.
5.    Transparency: Evaluation activities should reflect an attitude of openness and transparency.
6.    Accuracy: Evaluations should be technically accurate, providing sufficient information about the data collection, analysis, and interpretation methods so that its worth or merit can be determined.
7.    Participation: Stakeholders should be consulted and meaningfully involved in the evaluation process when feasible and appropriate.
8.    Collaboration: Collaboration between key operating partners in the evaluation process improves the legitimacy and utility of the evaluation.
It is also expected that the review will respect the seven Fundamental Principles of the Red Cross and Red Crescent: 1) humanity, 2) impartiality, 3) neutrality, 4) independence, 5) voluntary service, 6) unity, and 7) universality. Further information can be obtained about these Principles at:

Knowledge, Skills and Languages

Evaluation Team Competencies and Qualifications

The RMT will select the members of the evaluation team, which will comprise of 3-4 persons, including a team leader. Efforts will be made to ensure gender diversity amongst the team, as well as to respect other diversity/skills criteria.

The team members will have the following skills and experience: 

  • Five years of experience or more working in international relief operations and/or monitoring and evaluation.
  • Master’s degree in international relations, social sciences, humanitarian assistance and/or related fields or equivalent experience is preferred.
  • Familiarity with the Red Cross Red Crescent Movement and its disaster management system.
  • Experience in carrying out interviews and facilitating focus group discussions.
  • Sound experience in data consolidation, analysis and presentation. Ability to clearly synthesize and present findings.
  • Fluent in English.
  • At least one of the team members should be fluent in Turkish.
  • Should not have a vested interest in the IFRC operation being reviewed.

As it is an ongoing operation, it is important that the team abides by all necessary security rules and that they are sensitive to the significant workload of the various teams and ensure that demands are kept to a minimum. Efforts will be made to appoint logistical focal points at the various levels to assist with the evaluation, along with interpreters at the country level to assist with data collection and analysis.

Competencies, Values and Comments

Application Procedures for Team Member

Interested candidates should submit their application material by 29 February 2024,23:59 CEST to with Team Member for the ORTurkiye EQ’ written in the Subject Line. 

Applicants from National Societies are requested as seconded staff for the Operational Review.

Application materials should include:

  • Curriculum Vitae (CV)
  • Cover letter clearly summarizing experience as it pertains to this assignment
  • Applicants are required to provide 1 example of a previous evaluation report they have authored.

Application materials are non-returnable, and we thank you in advance for understanding that only short-listed candidates will be contacted.


This vacancy is now closed.
However, we have found similar vacancies for you: