Job Description

Evaluation context

Over the past three decades, the International Organization for Migration (IOM) has expanded its engagement across diverse migration-related fields, addressing challenges through initiatives in humanitarian assistance, migration health, protection, and migration governance. Aligned with IOM’s commitment to humane and orderly migration, IOM Egypt works closely with the Government of Egypt and key stakeholders to support national responses to mixed migration flows and displacement crises, while strengthening migration governance and social cohesion.

The project “Protection and Resilience in Vulnerable Migrant Populations Affected by the Sudan Conflict” was designed as an emergency response to the large-scale displacement resulting from the conflict in Sudan, which erupted in April 2023.  As of December 2024, according to data reported by the Government of Egypt through the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MoFA), more than 1.2 million individuals fleeing Sudan have entered Egypt, including Sudanese nationals and third-country nationals (TCNs), many of whom arrived in highly vulnerable conditions. These populations face compounded risks related to protection, food insecurity, housing instability, limited access to health care, psychosocial distress, and exposure to gender-based violence (GBV), trafficking, and exploitation, against a backdrop of economic pressures and strained public services in Egypt. 

The project aims to reduce vulnerabilities and strengthen resilience among conflict-affected migrant populations through the provision of integrated protection and health assistance. Interventions include access to protection services, legal counselling, multi-purpose cash assistance, medical care, mental health and psychosocial support (MHPSS), and capacity building for national institutions, healthcare providers, and community actors. The project is implemented by IOM Egypt with the support of the Government of Japan, in close coordination with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MoFA), Ministry of Health and Population (MoHP), Egyptian Healthcare Authority (EHA) and other partners. Activities are primarily implemented in Cairo, Alexandria, Aswan, and other governorates hosting high numbers of Sudanese arrivals.

The intervention aligns with Egypt’s national priorities, IOM’s strategic objectives, and global frameworks including the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the Humanitarian–Development–Peace Nexus (HDPN).

Project Objective:

To contribute to enhanced self-reliance and reduced vulnerabilities in vulnerable migrant communities fleeing the conflict in Sudan. 

This objective is pursued through the following interdependent outcomes:

1. Outcome 1: Vulnerable Sudanese migrants fleeing the conflict in Sudan, including women and girls, experience reduced vulnerability and increased resilience through the provision of protection assistance including mental health and psychosocial support.

• Output 1.1: Increased and improved access to individual assistance and legal counselling services through streamlined needs assessment and registration processes.

• Output 1.2: Vulnerable migrants have increased access to tailored assistance through case-by-case needs assessments based on vulnerability criteria.

1. Outcome 2: Vulnerable migrants experience improved access to and utilization of medical services, including mental health and psychosocial support (MHPSS).

• Output 2.1: MoHP healthcare providers are equipped with the knowledge and skills to identify and address mental health and psychosocial concerns among migrants, with a focus on women and girls.

• Output 2.2: Vulnerable migrants, including women and girls, have improved access to specialized MHPSS services, direct medical assistance, and health care packages, resulting in increased awareness of mental health issues and strengthened peer support within their communities.

As of the mid-point of implementation, the project has provided comprehensive assistance to 10,626 individuals, progressing toward an overall target of 29,950 direct beneficiaries. Achievements to date include the establishment of accessible protection and intake mechanisms, with 5,213 hotline calls handled to facilitate registration, referrals, and follow-up support, and 3,780 individuals registered and screened for assistance across Cairo, Alexandria, and Aswan. Protection interventions have included multi-purpose cash assistance to 912 vulnerable migrants, prioritizing households facing acute risks such as eviction, chronic illness, disability, or high dependency ratios.

In the health and psychosocial sectors, 283 migrants accessed direct medical assistance covering consultations, diagnostics, specialist referrals, and treatment for acute, chronic, maternal, and disability-related conditions. Community-based mental health and psychosocial support (MHPSS) activities reached 201 participants, including women, children, and high-risk individuals, through awareness sessions, support groups, and family-focused activities. In parallel, 144 community leaders, volunteers, and frontline actors were trained to strengthen community-level psychosocial support, early identification of needs, and referral pathways. Collectively, these achievements reflect steady progress toward the project’s intended outcomes and provide a solid basis for assessing relevance, effectiveness, coordination, and implementation performance across sectors and geographic areas.

Evaluation purpose and objective

The final evaluation of the project “Protection and Resilience in Vulnerable Migrant Populations Affected by the Sudan Conflict” will assess the extent to which the project has achieved its stated objective and intended outcomes, with a focus on progress toward the results outlined in the project results framework. The evaluation will examine the relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, coherence, and sustainability of the intervention in responding to the protection and health needs of vulnerable migrants affected by the Sudan conflict in Egypt. It will analyze what worked well, what did not, under what conditions, and why, while identifying key enabling and constraining factors that influenced implementation. The evaluation will also document lessons learned, highlight good practices, and identify operational and contextual challenges to inform future programming.

The evaluation is conducted at this stage to capture evidence from the full implementation period, building on interim monitoring data and documented results, and to ensure that findings can be used to strengthen accountability, learning, and strategic decision-making at both country and regional levels.

The evaluation findings will inform the following audiences and uses:

• Project and Programme Management, to support evidence-based decision-making, assess implementation performance, and inform the design and delivery of future protection and migration health interventions;

• IOM Senior Management and the Regional Office, to assess alignment with institutional priorities, strategic approaches to crisis response, and organizational effectiveness in responding to large-scale displacement;

• Government counterparts and implementing partners (including MoFA and MoHP), to support reflection on partnership modalities, coordination mechanisms, and service delivery approaches;

• The donor, particularly the Government of Japan, to assess results, value for money, and the contribution of the project to addressing humanitarian needs arising from the Sudan crisis, and to inform decisions on future support;

• Humanitarian and coordination partners (UN agencies, NGOs, and CBOs), to share learning, promote complementarity, and enhance coordination in migration and displacement responses.

Ultimately, the evaluation will support IOM and its partners in demonstrating accountability, strengthening institutional learning, refining programmatic strategies, and informing future interventions aimed at reducing vulnerabilities and enhancing resilience among conflict-affected migrant populations in Egypt.

Evaluation scope

The evaluation will cover the full implementation period of the project “Protection and Resilience in Vulnerable Migrant Populations Affected by the Sudan Conflict”, from March 2025 to March 2026. It will assess the entire project cycle, including project design, planning, and implementation phases.

The evaluation will focus on activities implemented primarily across Cairo, Alexandria, and Aswan with the need to travel to these locations.

The evaluation will assess the following key project components:

• Protection Assistance and Direct Support:
  Including registration and intake mechanisms, legal information and counselling, multi-purpose cash assistance (MPCA), non-food items (NFIs), and protection-oriented case management delivered to vulnerable migrants.

• Health and Mental Health and Psychosocial Support (MHPSS):
  Assessing access to and utilization of direct medical assistance, community-based MHPSS services, awareness-raising activities, and referral pathways for specialized care.

• Capacity Building and Institutional Support:
  Reviewing support provided to national and community-level actors, including healthcare providers, community leaders, volunteers, and partner organizations, to strengthen protection and health responses.

Community-Based Engagement and Resilience:
Assessing activities aimed at strengthening community-level support systems, peer support mechanisms, and engagement of migrant communities in protection and MHPSS interventions.

Expected Outputs

The evaluation is expected to generate:

• Good practices and operational lessons learned;

• Practical and actionable recommendations for future programming;

• Identification of implementation challenges and bottlenecks;

• Analysis to inform the design of similar humanitarian and migration response interventions.

Cross-Cutting Themes

The evaluation will integrate analysis across IOM’s cross-cutting themes, including:

• Gender Equality, assessing the extent to which gender considerations, particularly the needs of women and girls, were mainstreamed across project components;

• Human Rights, examining the application of a rights-based approach in protection, health, and assistance delivery;

• Accountability to Affected Populations (AAP), reviewing beneficiary engagement, feedback mechanisms, and responsiveness to community needs;

• Disability Inclusion, assessing accessibility of services and consideration of specific needs of persons with disabilities;

• Prevention of Sexual Exploitation and Abuse (PSEA), reviewing risk mitigation measures, staff capacity, and beneficiary awareness.

Limitations

No project components or geographic areas are expected to be excluded from the evaluation. However, potential limitations may include restricted field access due to security, administrative, or logistical constraints in certain locations. In such cases, the evaluation may rely on alternative data collection methods, including remote interviews, secondary data review, and documentation provided by implementing partners. Any limitations, exclusions, or mitigation measures applied will be clearly documented in the final evaluation report.

Additional limitations may include delays in access to documentation, limited availability of key informants, or lower-than-expected response rates from beneficiaries, all of which will be transparently acknowledged.

Evaluation criteria 

 The evaluation will assess the performance of the project “Protection and Resilience in Vulnerable Migrant Populations Affected by the Sudan Conflict” against the OECD-DAC evaluation criteria. These include relevance, assessing the alignment of the project’s objectives and activities with the needs, priorities, and vulnerabilities of conflict-affected migrants in Egypt; effectiveness, measuring the extent to which the project’s intended objective and outcomes were achieved or are on track to be achieved; efficiency, examining how economically resources and inputs were converted into outputs and results; coherence, assessing the consistency of the intervention with IOM strategies, national priorities, and other humanitarian responses; coordination, examining the effectiveness of collaboration and complementarity with government counterparts, UN agencies, and implementing partners; impact, assessing the project’s contribution to observable changes in the wellbeing and resilience of targeted populations; and sustainability, appraising the likelihood that project benefits will continue beyond the project’s completion.

The evaluation will also assess the extent to which cross-cutting issues were integrated throughout the project, including gender equality, human rights, accountability to affected populations (AAP), disability inclusion, and prevention of sexual exploitation and abuse (PSEA

Evaluation questions

The following questions are indicative and will guide the evaluation under each criterion. The evaluator may further refine or adapt these questions in consultation with the Evaluation Manager during the inception phase.

Relevance

• To what extent were the project’s objectives and activities relevant to the humanitarian, protection, health, and psychosocial needs of vulnerable migrants affected by the Sudan conflict in Egypt?

• How well did the project design respond to the evolving context and emerging needs during implementation?

• To what extent were the project’s objectives and activities aligned with Egypt’s national priorities and IOM’s strategic frameworks?

• To what extent were beneficiaries and key stakeholders involved in needs identification, design, implementation, and feedback mechanisms?

Effectiveness

• To what extent were the project’s intended objective, outcomes, and outputs achieved or likely to be achieved by the end of the project?

• What key factors facilitated or constrained the achievement of results across protection, health, and MHPSS components?

• To what extent did the project improve access to protection services, medical assistance, and mental health and psychosocial support for vulnerable migrants?

• How effective were the capacity-building activities in strengthening the ability of healthcare providers, community leaders, and partners to respond to migrant needs?

• How effective was the project’s monitoring system in tracking progress and informing adaptive management and decision-making?

Efficiency

• To what extent was the relationship between inputs (financial, human, and material resources) and results achieved appropriate and justifiable?

• Were resources used efficiently to deliver planned activities and achieve intended outcomes within the project timeframe?

• Were there any avoidable delays, bottlenecks, or implementation challenges, and what were their underlying causes?

Coherence (including Coordination)

• To what extent was the project coherent with other IOM interventions and humanitarian responses addressing the Sudan crisis in Egypt?

• How effective was coordination with government counterparts, UN agencies, NGOs, and community-based organizations in planning and implementation?

• To what extent did the project complement, rather than duplicate, existing services and interventions?

• How well were referral pathways and coordination mechanisms functioning across protection, health, and MHPSS services?

Impact

• To what extent has the project contributed to observable changes in protection, resilience, health outcomes, or psychosocial well-being of targeted migrants and host communities?

• Were there differential effects or benefits for specific groups, including women, children, and persons with disabilities?

• What positive and negative effects, both intended and unintended, has the project generated for migrants, host communities, and relevant institutions?

• To what extent can observed changes be reasonably linked to the project’s interventions, as opposed to external contextual factors?

• How has the project contributed to broader systems-level changes, such as strengthened healthcare provider capacities, improved referral pathways, or enhanced national or community-level protection mechanisms?

Sustainability

• To what extent are the project’s benefits, approaches, or models likely to continue or be replicated after project completion?

• To what extent were local capacities strengthened to support the sustainability of protection, health, and MHPSS services?

• What partnerships, systems, or mechanisms were established to support continuity, and what risks may affect the sustainability of outcomes?

Cross-Cutting Themes 

• Gender Equality:
  To what extent did the project integrate gender considerations in the design and delivery of services, particularly for women and girls, and were additional efforts required to ensure gender-responsive implementation?

• Disability Inclusion:
   To what extent were persons with disabilities able to access project services, including medical, psychosocial, and cash-based assistance?

• Human Rights:
  To what extent did the project apply a rights-based approach in delivering protection assistance, legal counselling, and health services?

• Accountability to Affected Populations (AAP):
  To what extent were beneficiaries informed, consulted, and able to provide feedback on project services, and how was this feedback used?

• Prevention of Sexual Exploitation and Abuse (PSEA):
  To what extent were PSEA principles integrated into project implementation, staff capacity-building, and beneficiary awareness activities?

Evaluation methodology

The evaluator will be responsible for designing and implementing an appropriate evaluation methodology aligned with the evaluation purpose, scope, and evaluation questions. A mixed-methods approach, combining qualitative and quantitative methods, is expected to enable triangulation of findings and support a robust assessment of the project’s performance against the evaluation criteria.

The detailed methodology will be proposed by the evaluator and refined during the inception phase, in consultation with IOM, and documented in the inception report and evaluation matrix. The evaluator is expected to justify the selected methods and demonstrate how they are suitable for the project context, scope, and data availability.

Data collection is expected to draw on a combination of methods, which may include:

• Review of relevant project documentation and monitoring data;

• Interviews with key stakeholders, including IOM staff, government counterparts, and implementing partners;

• Consultations with beneficiaries and community actors, such as focus group discussions or other participatory methods;

• Quantitative data collection tools, such as surveys, where appropriate.

The evaluator will propose a sampling strategy that reflects the project’s geographic scope and target populations, ensures appropriate representation of women, men, and vulnerable groups, and justifies sample sizes and selection criteria. All proposed tools and sampling approaches will be subject to IOM review and approval prior to data collection.

Data analysis methods will be defined by the evaluator and should allow for systematic qualitative analysis and appropriate quantitative analysis, as relevant, with clear explanation of how findings from different data sources will be triangulated to support credible conclusions and recommendations.

The evaluation methodology is expected to integrate IOM cross-cutting themes, including gender equality, human rights, accountability to affected populations (AAP), disability inclusion, and prevention of sexual exploitation and abuse (PSEA), and to adhere to ethical standards, confidentiality requirements, and the principle of “do no harm,” particularly when engaging with vulnerable populations.

Ethics, norms and standards for evaluation 

This evaluation must adhere to the IOM Data Protection Principles, the United Nations Evaluation Group (UNEG) Norms and Standards for Evaluation, and all relevant ethical guidelines.

IOM expects all evaluation stakeholders, including internal staff, partners, and the external evaluator(s), to uphold the highest ethical standards throughout the evaluation process. This includes ensuring informed consent, confidentiality, voluntary participation, data security, and do-no-harm principles, particularly when engaging with vulnerable groups such as migrants, women, children, and persons with disabilities.

The evaluator(s) will be required to review and comply with:

• The UNEG Ethical Guidelines for Evaluation

  • The UNEG Code of Conduct for Evaluators

  • IOM’s Data Protection Manual and any applicable guidance on working with human subjects

All data collection activities must ensure the dignity, safety, and rights of participants are fully respected.

Evaluation deliverables 

The following deliverables are expected from the Evaluator. All deliverables will be prepared in close coordination with IOM and submitted according to agreed timelines.

Reporting Standards and Format

• All deliverables will be submitted in English and adhere to professional writing standards.
• The final evaluation report must meet the quality requirements outlined in the UNEG Quality Checklist for Evaluation Reports.
• All documents will be submitted electronically in editable MS Word format.
• Any presentations or briefing materials will be shared with IOM in editable digital format.
• Upon commencement of the assignment, IOM will provide the Evaluator with all relevant templates and guidance.

Specifications of roles 

Evaluation Consultant / Evaluation Team

The Evaluation Consultant or Evaluation Team will be responsible for the independent design and implementation of the evaluation in accordance with the approved Terms of Reference. Key responsibilities include:

• Developing and submitting the inception report, including the refined methodology, evaluation matrix, data collection tools, and sampling approach;
• Conducting data collection, including desk review, key informant interviews, focus group discussions, and surveys as applicable;
• Analyzing qualitative and quantitative data and ensuring triangulation of findings;
• Preparing and submitting all evaluation deliverables, including the draft and final evaluation reports, presentations, and evaluation brief;
• Ensuring compliance with IOM Data Protection Principles, UNEG Norms and Standards for Evaluation, and ethical requirements throughout the evaluation process.

IOM Evaluation / Project Manager

The IOM Evaluation or Project Manager will be responsible for overall coordination and management of the evaluation process. This includes:

• Serving as the primary focal point for the evaluation consultant;
• Facilitating access to project documentation, data, and relevant stakeholders;
• Coordinating internal and external stakeholders’ inputs to the evaluation process;
• Reviewing evaluation deliverables in a timely manner and consolidating feedback;
• Leading the completion and follow-up of the Management Response Matrix and supporting the implementation of accepted recommendations.

IOM Egypt Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Focal Point

The IOM Egypt M&E Focal Point will provide technical oversight and quality assurance throughout the evaluation process. Responsibilities include:

• Providing technical guidance on evaluation design, methodology, and tools;
• Reviewing and providing feedback on the inception report, data collection instruments, and evaluation reports;
• Ensuring alignment of the evaluation with IOM evaluation standards and quality requirements.

Stakeholders and Partners

Relevant stakeholders, including government counterparts, implementing partners, community-based organizations, and beneficiaries, will contribute to the evaluation by:

• Participating in interviews, focus group discussions, surveys, and validation sessions, as appropriate;
• Providing contextual insights and feedback on project implementation and results;
• Supporting access to relevant information and facilitating engagement with beneficiary groups, where applicable.

Quality Assurance and Review Process

Quality assurance will be integrated throughout the evaluation process and will include, at a minimum:

• Formal agreement on the final Terms of Reference between IOM and the Evaluation Consultant prior to commencement of the assignment;
• Review, revision, and approval of the inception report and data collection tools by the Project Manager and M&E Focal Point;
• Review and consolidation of comments on the draft evaluation report by IOM Egypt;
• Final review and approval of the evaluation report by IOM Egypt, in coordination with the Regional Office (RO Cairo), as applicable.

Time schedule

Evaluation Requirements 

Quality and Performance Expectations

The selected evaluator(s) will be expected to demonstrate high professional standards throughout the assignment. Performance will be assessed based on, but not limited to:

• Timely submission of agreed deliverables in line with the approved workplan;

• Application of an evaluation methodology aligned with OECD-DAC criteria and UNEG Norms and Standards;

• Quality, clarity, and analytical depth of findings, conclusions, and recommendations;

• Coherence between evaluation findings, evaluation questions, and the project results framework;

• Effective engagement with stakeholders and adherence to ethical standards and “do no harm” principles.

Evaluation budget

The total budget allocated for the external evaluation should be inclusive of:

•               Evaluator fees
•               Local travel and accommodation
•               Data collection costs (enumerators, transcription, etc.)
•               Translation and interpretation (if needed)
•               Report production
•               Any required taxes or overheads

The consultant must submit a detailed financial proposal as part of their application. The budget should clearly outline all anticipated costs, including those related to data collection, logistics, translation services, and any other expenses necessary for completing the evaluation.

While IOM Egypt may provide logistical and coordination support (e.g., arranging meetings or site access), the evaluator remains responsible for managing all activities within the budget ceiling.

Responsibilities

Category B Consultants: Tangible and measurable outputs of the work assignment 

Deliverables:

• Inception Report – Due within 10 days of contract signing

• Validation Session – After data collection and before report drafting

• Draft Evaluation Report – Late April 2026

• Final Evaluation Report & Evaluation Brief – Late May 2026

• Management Response Matrix (MRM) – Final stage

Performance indicators for the evaluation of results

• Timely submission of deliverables

• Evaluation methodology aligns with OECD-DAC and UNEG standards

• Quality and clarity of analysis and recommendations

• Alignment of findings with evaluation questions and project results framework

• Effective engagement with stakeholders and adherence to ethical standards

Qualifications

Education, Experience and/or skills required

• An advanced university degree in evaluation, social sciences, public health, international development, or a related field;

• At least five (5) years of relevant evaluation experience, preferably in migration, humanitarian response, protection, or health programming;

• Demonstrated knowledge of OECD-DAC evaluation criteria and experience applying mixed-methods approaches;

• Proven experience conducting evaluations for UN agencies, international organizations, or donor-funded programmes;

• Strong analytical, writing, and reporting skills in English; knowledge of Arabic is an asset;

• Familiarity with the Egyptian and/or MENA context is desirable;

• Demonstrated experience conducting participatory, gender-responsive, and ethically sound evaluations, including engagement with vulnerable populations.

1. Travel required

   Yes – to field sites in Cairo, Alexandria, and Aswan (if feasible; subject to security and logistics) 

2. Competencies 

   Values

   • Inclusion and respect for diversity: respects and promotes individual and cultural differences; encourages diversity and inclusion wherever possible.

     • Integrity and transparency: maintains high ethical standards and acts in a manner consistent with organizational principles/rules and standards of conduct.

     • Professionalism: demonstrates ability to work in a composed, competent and committed manner and exercises careful judgment in meeting day-to-day challenges.

Core Competencies – behavioural indicators

• Teamwork: develops and promotes effective collaboration within and across units to achieve shared goals and optimize results.

  • Delivering results: produces and delivers quality results in a service-oriented and timely manner; is action-oriented and committed to achieving agreed outcomes.

    • Managing and sharing knowledge: continuously seeks to learn, share knowledge and innovate.

    • Accountability: takes ownership for achieving the Organization’s priorities and assumes responsibility for own action and delegated work.

    • Communication: encourages and contributes to clear and open communication; explains complex matters in an informative, inspiring and motivational way.

      Submission Procedures

    • Interested candidates (individual consultant only) are invited to submit a complete application package in accordance with the instructions outlined in this Terms of Reference.

      The application package should include:

    • A technical proposal outlining the evaluator’s understanding of the assignment, proposed methodology, and workplan;

    • A financial proposal, including a detailed budget breakdown in line with the proposed methodology;

    • A curriculum vitae (CV) of the evaluator highlighting relevant evaluation experience;

    • At least two samples of previous evaluation reports or similar analytical work;

    • Applications should be submitted electronically through the IOM online recruitment platform, by the deadline indicated in the solicitation notice. Only applications submitted via the official IOM website in accordance with the instructions provided will be considered.

Required Skills

Job info