National Thematic Consultant (Labour Market Integration and Social Security)

Job Description

Introduction

Established in 1951, IOM is a Related Organization of the United Nations, and as the leading UN agency in the field of migration, works closely with governmental, intergovernmental and non-governmental partners. IOM is dedicated to promoting humane and orderly migration for the benefit of all. It does so by providing services and advice to governments and migrants.

 

Project Context and Scope

The project “Promoting Sustainable and Socially Inclusive Labour Market Integration funded by the European Union and implemented by IOM Türkiye in cooperation with the Ministry of Labour and Social Security (MoLSS), Social Security Institution (SSI) and Presidency of Migration Management (PMM) of the Ministry of Interior (MoI) is supporting Türkiye’s efforts regarding economic and social integration of Syrians under temporary protection (SuTPs) and Persons under International Protection (PuIPs) in their host communities.

Commissioned by: Monitoring, Evaluation, Accountability, and Learning (MEAL) Unit, IOM Türkiye

Managed by: Senior National MEAL Officer   

Responsibilities

1. Evaluation Context

The International Organization for Migration (IOM), the United Nations (UN) Migration Agency, was established in 1951 and is the leading intergovernmental organization in the field of migration, working closely with governmental, intergovernmental, and non-governmental partners. With 175 member states, 8 states holding observer status, and offices in 172 countries, IOM is dedicated to promoting humane and orderly migration for the benefit of all. 

The IOM established its operations in Türkiye in 1991. IOM’s partnership with the Government of Türkiye (GoT) was formalized in November 2004, when Türkiye became an IOM Member State. IOM Türkiye works closely with the government of the Republic of Türkiye, regional authorities, the UN, donors, and civil society organizations to address migration challenges by implementing programmes through three pillars: Resilience, Mobility, and Governance. Across the country, IOM Türkiye provides a comprehensive response to the humanitarian needs of migrants, internally displaced persons, returnees, and host communities through direct humanitarian assistance, recreational activities, and various other efforts. Alongside IOM’s role in addressing the needs of migrants during crises, the mission works in close collaboration with the Government of Türkiye to address the longer-term impact of migration, including migrant assistance programmes, labour integration and migration management, immigration and border management, and research and data collection on migrant movement.

1. Evaluation Purpose, Objectives and Scope

This evaluation is being conducted in accordance with IOM’s Evaluation Policy and Guidelines which sets out a number of guiding principles and key norms for evaluation in the organization following the Norms and Standards of the United Nations Evaluation Group (UNEG). 

The mid-term evaluation aims to comprehensively assess progress achieved towards the expected results against those stated in the Project Documents and identify the lessons learned and recommendations relevant to the planning, preparation and implementation of remaining activities of the European Union-funded 48-month “Promoting Sustainable and Socially Inclusive Labour Market Integration” project.  The purpose of the external midterm evaluation is to assess all six core OECD-DAC criteria: relevance, coherence, effectiveness, efficiency, sustainability, and likely impact (including early signs of results, whether intended or unintended, positive or negative) as well as cross-cutting issues. 

Specific Objectives of the Mid-term Evaluation

The specific objectives of the evaluation are to:

• Assess the extent to which the project has achieved or is likely to achieve its stated objectives (outcome and impact levels) and outputs, while identifying both negative and positive factors that have facilitated or hampered progress in achieving the project outcomes, including external factors/environment, weakness in design, management, and resource allocation.

• Measure project’s degree of implementation, efficiency and quality delivered on intended and unintended results (outputs) up to midterm evaluation and specific objectives (outcomes), against what was originally planned. 
• To provide evaluative evidence on the contribution of the project towards formal employment of Syrians under Temporary Protection (SuTP), Persons under International Protection (PUIP) and host community members and the harmonization process in Türkiye.
• Measure the project contribution to the objectives set in the IOM Strategic Plan 2024-2028, IOM Türkiye Mission Strategy 2021-2025, United Nations Sustainable Development Cooperation Framework (UNSDCF) for 2021-2025, Türkiye’s EU accession priorities, national strategies and plans of Türkiye.

• Assess the effectiveness of the implementation strategy (i.e. implementation modalities, issues of coordination and partnership arrangements, and synergy among the LMI projects as well as with other initiatives/programmes of IOM Türkiye).

• Assess the management and financial efficiency of the project.

• Assess the extent to which the project's outcomes will be sustainable (without the need for external support) and contribute towards the objective of the project.

• Assess project’s contribution to gender equality and women’s empowerment and the broader “Leave No One Behind” agenda. 

• Generate substantive evidence-based knowledge by identifying best practices and lessons learned that could be useful for remaining project implementation, other development interventions at national (scale up) and international level (replicability).

• Provide a forward-looking perspective for IOM’s positioning in relation to labour market integration for the remaining project duration and potential subsequent phases.

• Provide formative recommendations toward project implementation and course-correction for the remaining project duration.

Cross-cutting issues of gender, non-discrimination and human rights, social dialogue, and international labour standards will be addressed throughout all the objectives as relevant. The evaluation will provide the project management, the donor (EUD), and key partners with an indication of project performance- how well the project is doing, the quality of project implementation, and any bottlenecks in implementation, in order to identify problems in a timely manner and in which areas corrective action may be required.  

Through a participatory approach, the evaluation team will actively engage relevant stakeholders, including IOM Türkiye staff, focal points of the national counterparts and beneficiaries from different activities. A tentative Expected Interview Schedule is provided in section 10 to indicate the level of effort and in-country travel required for data collection.

Recommendations, emerging from the evaluation, should be strongly linked to the findings of the evaluation and should provide clear guidance to IOM Türkiye and its stakeholders on how they can address them.

Furthermore, the evaluation will have a focus on what worked, what did not work, and why, based on feedback against evidence and provide actionable recommendations, highlight best practices, share lessons learned, and offer valuable insights, which will inform the remainder of the implementation of the project. An essential aspect of the evaluation involves analysing the integration of IOM cross-cutting themes, particularly gender considerations and a human rights approach, non-discrimination, social dialogue and international labour standards into project activities and implementation.  

The project implementation period is from 01.04.2024 to 31.03.2028. The mid-term evaluation will assess implementation from the project’s inception to its midpoint, covering the period from 01.04.2024 to May 2026.

1. Evaluation Criteria

The OECD-DAC evaluation criteria, relevance, coherence, effectiveness, efficiency, likely impact, and sustainability will guide the mid-term evaluation.  The main focus will be on the effectiveness, efficiency, and sustainability of the project activities to inform the assessment of progress to date, inform any needed adjustments, and ensure a transition/phase-out plan and exit strategy are developed. In addition, the evaluation will examine coherence, with particular attention to the project's complementarity and coordination with other relevant projects. All assessments will be conducted in accordance with the OECD-DAC definitions to ensure methodological rigour and consistency with international standards. 

• Relevance: The extent to which the intervention's objectives and design respond to the needs, policies, and priorities of beneficiaries at the global, national, and institutional levels, and continue to do so as circumstances evolve.

• Coherence: The extent to which the intervention is compatible with other interventions within the same country, sector, or institution.

• Effectiveness: The extent to which the intervention has achieved, or is expected to achieve, its stated objectives and results, including any differential results across groups.

• Efficiency: The extent to which the intervention delivers, or is likely to deliver, results in a cost-effective and timely manner.

• (Likely) Impact: The extent to which the intervention has produced or is expected to produce significant positive or negative, intended or unintended, higher-level effects.

• Sustainability: The extent to which the benefits of the intervention continue or are likely to continue.

1. Evaluation Questions

In the light of the evaluation parameters, the Evaluation Team is expected to analyze data and share their findings, conclusions and recommendations generated by this analysis. As a reference point for the evaluation, the Team is provided with indicative key and sub-evaluation questions below; which are expected to be amended, elaborated, aggregated, consolidated and submitted as part of the Inception Report and shall be included as an annex to the midterm report described below. In consultation with the Commissioning Unit, in the inception phase, the evaluation team will further develop and refine the evaluation questions to ensure detailed and specific information is gathered for each criterion. The evaluation matrix will be reviewed collaboratively with the Commissioning Unit. Any fundamental changes to the evaluation criteria and questions should be agreed upon between the evaluator(s) and the Commissioning Unit and reflected in the inception report.

The sub-questions included in the ToR are intentionally designed to guide prospective evaluation team by outlining the expected scope of the assessment, key thematic areas to be explored, and the breadth of analysis anticipated. They are meant to provide a comprehensive picture of what the evaluation should cover and to support evaluators in developing a robust evaluation matrix. Further refinement and consolidation of evaluation questions is an essential step during the inception phase. The evaluation evaluation team will be expected to prioritize, aggregate, and streamline these questions to ensure analytical depth, coherence, and a focused final report.

The following key questions will guide the evaluation process:

1. Evaluation Approach and Methodology

The evaluation should be transparent, inclusive, participatory and utilization-focused. The overall
methodology should be implemented following a theory of change approach, framed by the UN/OECD DAC^[3] evaluation criteria drawing upon mixed methods (quantitative and qualitative) data to capture direct project results as well as (likely) contributions.

In line with good practice in evaluating this type of complex system change-focused intervention, the overall methodology should be based on three concrete pillars:

1. the project’s theory of change;
2. an evaluation matrix grouping key evaluation questions and sub-questions by broad OECD/DAC criterion allowing analysis of programme results at different levels of its results chain
3. a data collection toolkit for the evaluation describing the quantitative and qualitative primary and secondary data collection tools that will be deployed to collect and analyse data to answer the evaluation questions.

The evaluation process should be participatory, engaging government officials, implementing and development partners, project staff, key stakeholders and a wide cross-section of staff and beneficiaries while ensuring inclusion of elements of gender equality.

The main analytical framework for the evaluation is provided by the Project’s theory of change, which should be used to organize the evaluation questions according to the Project’s expected results at each level of its results chain. In doing so, the evaluation should use a broad Contribution Analysis (CA) approach to causal inference with a view to understanding the influence of relevant contextual factors, and alternative and additional drivers or obstacles to change at the regional and national levels that may have influenced the Project’s direct and indirect, intended and unintended results.

The evaluation should also seek to apply additional evaluation techniques that can further strengthen the plausibility of links between the results of the different strands of work on various intended Project outcomes at the policy, community and individual beneficiary levels as well as telling the story of how and why both intended and unintended change has or has not happened as a result of the intervention. The methodological prism may involve contribution analysis (effectiveness), process tracing (case studies), outcome harvesting/most significant change (unplanned/emerging results), landscape analysis (relevance and coherence), quantitative analysis (indicator achievement and funding analysis), document review (relevance and efficiency), light foresight (forward-looking aspects) and techniques linked to participatory evaluation^[4].

In line with UN evaluation practice, the scope of the evaluation should cover six core UN/OECD DAC evaluation criteria: relevance, coherence, effectiveness, efficiency, likely impact, sustainability, and crosscutting issues. In proposing how to conduct the evaluation, the evaluation team should use an evaluation matrix to operationalize the theory of change and its agreed framework of direct and indirect results into a set of measurable categories of evaluative analysis following the results chain of the intervention. The evaluation matrix should properly address gender equality (GE) and human rights (HR) dimensions, including age, disability and vulnerability.

The evaluation questions above present a set of preliminary questions that the evaluation team should address in their proposed approach, following the revised UN/OECD DAC criteria. A final, more detailed evaluation matrix will be developed during the inception phase on the basis of document review and initial consultation with key Project stakeholders.

On the basis of the questions included above and the information present elsewhere in this Terms of Reference, the evaluation team should deploy a set of data collection methods and tools (that includes gender disaggregation) and allow for rigorous triangulation. These methods and tools will allow leveraging existing secondary data as well as collecting new primary data to be gathered during the field visit, which together will be able to answer the initial questions listed above. 

The combination of primary and secondary tools or the number of separate ‘lines of evidence’ should be at least five and be designed – as with the rest of the evaluation - with triangulation and complementary assessment of the sub-questions in the matrix in mind.

The evaluation team is requested to propose a set of mixed methods data collection/analysis methodologies and techniques to answer the evaluation questions.^[5] This will be refined in the inception phase. The following lines of evidence should be considered: 

• Document, literature and monitoring systems review: Commissioning Unit will provide access to all relevant documentation, data collected, and analysis. Further documents may be requested by the evaluation team. The Project team will share information and provide guided walk-throughs of the Project and project management methods, platforms and tools. This should include a review of;
• Project document and description of the action
• Result Framework/MEAL Framework and Plan 
• Work Plan
• Donor/Progress Reports 
• Monitoring Reports
• Project Steering Committee meeting minutes
• Studies relating to the country context and situation 
• Financial documentation and reports.
• Background documents and other documentation.
• Analysis of deliverables and financial reports: Comprehensive access to deliverables, financial reports, and reporting dashboards will be provided alongside documentation.
• Structured, semi-structured and/or in-depth interviews or Key Informant interviews (KIIs): The team will provide a stakeholder list, including a wide range of stakeholders from the donor, national government and local administrations, as well as project partners, including the Delegation of the European Union to Türkiye, MoLSS (DGFREU and DGILF), ISKUR, SSI, PMM, IOM representatives and the project team, and selected provincial stakeholders from Ankara, Gaziantep, Istanbul and Kahramanmaraş. All interviews should be undertaken with full confidentiality and anonymity. (The Midterm evaluation report should not assign specific comments of individuals)
• Focus groups discussions with private sector employers and final beneficiaries.
• Secondary data analysis.
• Direct observations.
• Case studies.

The Evaluation Team will ensure triangulation of the various data source. Data and evidence will be triangulated with multiple sources to address evaluation questions. The final methodological approach including interview schedule and data to be used in the evaluation should be clearly outlined in the inception report and fully discussed and agreed between IOM, stakeholders and the Evaluation Team. 

Data collection tools should be gender sensitive, ensure that the data collection is disaggregated by sex and take into account the broader cross-cutting issues as presented below and elsewhere in the ToR.

Cross-cutting

As noted above, the promotion and protection of Human Rights (HR) & Gender Equality (GE) and Disability Issues (DI) and LNOB are central principles to the mandate of the UN, and all UN agencies must work to fundamentally enhance and contribute to their realization by addressing underlying causes of human rights violations, including discrimination against women and girls, and utilizing processes that are in line with and support these principles. Those UN interventions that do not consider these principles risk reinforcing patterns of discrimination and exclusion or leaving them unchanged. It is therefore important that evaluations commissioned by IOM take these aspects into account.

The methodology and techniques to be used in the evaluation should be described in detail in the Inception Report and the Midterm Evaluation Report, and should contain, at minimum, information on the instruments used for data collection and analysis, whether these be documents, interviews, questionnaires or participatory techniques following high level of research ethics and impartiality. 

Final decisions about the specific design and methods for the evaluation will be made through consultation among IOM, the Evaluation Team and key stakeholders about what is appropriate and feasible to meet the evaluation purpose and objectives as well as answering the evaluation questions, given limitations of budget, time and data.

1. Ethics, Norms, and Standards for Evaluation 

The evaluation team must follow the IOM Data Protection Principles, UN Evaluation Group (UNEG) norms and standards, and relevant UNEG ethical conduct guidelines while carrying out the mid-term evaluation. The evaluation of the project is to be carried out according to ethical principles and standards established by the UNEG. 

• Anonymity and confidentiality. The evaluation must respect the rights of individuals who provide information, ensuring their anonymity and confidentiality. 
• Responsibility. The report must mention any dispute or difference of opinion that may have arisen between the Evaluation Team and Project Team in connection with the findings and/or recommendations. The Evaluation Team must corroborate all assertions and disagreements. 
• Integrity. The Evaluation Team will be responsible for highlighting issues not specifically mentioned in the ToR if this is needed to obtain a more complete analysis of the intervention. 
• Independence. The Evaluation Team should ensure its independence from the intervention under review and must not be associated with its management or any element thereof. 
• Incidents. If problems arise during the interviews, or at any other stage of the evaluation, they must be reported immediately to IOM. If this is not done, the existence of such problems may in no case be used to justify the failure to obtain the results stipulated by IOM in this Terms of Reference. 
• Validation of information. The Evaluation Team will be responsible for ensuring the accuracy of the information collected while preparing the reports and will be ultimately responsible for the information presented in the evaluation report. 
• Intellectual property. In handling information sources, the Evaluation Team shall respect the intellectual property rights of the institutions and communities that are under review.
• Delivery of reports/deliverables. If delivery of the reports/deliverables is delayed, or in the event that the quality of the reports delivered is lower than of the quality desired by IOM, the Evaluation Team will not be entitled for any payment regarding that specific report/deliverable, even person/days for submission of the report/deliverable has been invested.

1. Human Rights, Gender Equality, Vulnerable Groups and Disability Issues

The methodology used in the midterm evaluation, including data collection and analysis methods should be human rights and gender-sensitive to the greatest extent possible, with evaluation data and findings disaggregated by sex, ethnicity, age, etc. Detailed analysis on disaggregated data will be undertaken as part of the midterm evaluation from which findings are consolidated to make recommendations and identify lessons learned for enhanced gender responsive and rights-based approach of the project. These evaluation approach and methodology should consider different types of groups in the project intervention – women, youth, minorities, and vulnerable groups.

The promotion and protection of Human Rights (HR) and Gender Equality (GE) vulnerable groups and Persons with Disabilities are central principles to the mandate of the UN, and all UN agencies must work to fundamentally enhance and contribute to their realization by addressing underlying causes of human rights violations, including discrimination against women and girls, and utilizing processes that are in line with and support of these principles. Those UN interventions that do not consider these principles risk reinforcing patterns of discrimination and exclusion or leaving them unchanged. It is, therefore, important and required that evaluations commissioned by UNDP take these aspects into account.

• Guidance on Integrating Disability Inclusion (DI) in Evaluations^[6]
• Integrating Human Rights and Gender Equality in Evaluations^[7]

Concretely, evaluation team members are requested to incorporate the following key principles from the UNEG guidance for integrating human rights, gender equality, and disability inclusion into their work:

1. Inclusion. Evaluating HR, GE, and DI requires paying attention to which groups benefit and which groups contribute to the intervention under review. Groups need to be disaggregated by relevant criteria: disadvantaged and advantaged groups depending on their gender or status (women/men, age, location, etc.), duty-bearers of various types, and rights-holders of various types, in order to assess whether benefits and contributions were fairly distributed by the intervention being evaluated. In terms of HR & GE, it is important to note that women and men, boys and girls who belong to advantaged groups are not exempt from being denied their human rights or equal rights. The same applies to persons with disabilities. Therefore, the concept of inclusion must assess criteria beyond advantage. Likewise, it is not unusual that some groups may be negatively affected by an intervention. An evaluation must acknowledge who these stakeholders are and how they are affected, and shed light on how to minimize the negative effects.
2. Participation. Evaluating HR, GE and DI must be participatory. Stakeholders of the intervention have a right to be consulted and participate in decisions about what will be evaluated and how the evaluation will be done. In addition, the evaluation will assess whether the stakeholders have been able to participate in the design, implementation and monitoring of the intervention. It is important to measure stakeholder group participation in the process as well as how they benefit from results.
3. Fair Power Relations. Approaches to human rights, gender equality and disability inclusion issues seek, inter alia, to balance power relations between or within advantaged and disadvantaged groups. The nature of the relationship between implementers and stakeholders in an intervention can support or undermine this change. When evaluators assess the degree to which power relations changed as a result of an intervention, they must have a full understanding of the context, and conduct the evaluation in a way that supports the empowerment of disadvantaged groups. In addition, evaluators should be aware of their own position of power, which can influence the responses to queries through their interactions with stakeholders. There is a need to be sensitive to these dynamics.

1. Evaluation Deliverables and Schedule

Midterm Evaluation is expected to be conducted between 4 May 2026 – 31 October 2026. The Evaluation Team is expected to submit the following deliverables to the satisfaction of IOM:

* The number of person/days are solely provided to give the Evaluation Consultant an idea on the work to be undertaken. The payments shall be realized in accordance with Evaluation Budget and Terms of Payment section, irrespective of the number of person/days to be invested for the completion of each respective deliverable. The person/days indicated shall include all related costs for field mission and data collection including travel, accommodation, local transportation, and translation/interpretation.

** Dates may be changed according to the actual contract start date.

The final report of the mid-term evaluation will be shared with the IOM and key stakeholders. It will be attached as an Annex to the progress report for donor submission. The results of the evaluation report will be presented and discussed with IOM Türkiye, stakeholders, and the donor.

The external evaluation team is expected to deliver the following: 

• Inception report + Data collection toolkit

This report will be 30 pages maximum in length and will propose the methods, sources and procedures to be used for carrying out the independent evaluation. The report should justify why the said methods are the most appropriate, given the set of evaluation questions identified in the ToR. It will also include a mission programme which indicates proposed timeline of activities and submission of deliverables as well as an Evaluation Matrix. The Evaluation Matrix will demonstrate the evaluation team`s understanding of the ToR and outline data collection and analysis plans, to be completed and reviewed with the IOM Türkiye prior to the field visit. The report should be submitted to IOM Türkiye after the document review phase for feedback and discussion, prior to the interview phase. The Inception Report should include in Annex a Data Collection Toolkit that includes a set of data collection instruments for both qualitative and quantitative data collection tools to be used in the course of the evaluation (i.e. for qualitative data: interview guides, focus group discussion guide, direct observation forms, questionnaires for consultations with stakeholders, etc; for quantitative data, surveys, relevant templates to assess change in basic financial and operational performance of the partners over the period supported by IOM). The toolkit should also include a proposal around how the different data sources will be organized and synthesized. The data collection toolkit should be able to be tailored to both English and local language data collection needs. The Evaluation Team will maintain an audit trail of the comments received and provide a response on how the comments were address in the revised drafts. This document will be used as an initial point of agreement and understanding between the Evaluation Consultant and IOM. In principle, the report is expected to contain the outline provided in the footnote link.[8]

• Presentation of the initial findings

Following the field visits phase, the evaluator should prepare a presentation of the preliminary evaluation findings, tentative conclusions, and recommendations. This will be used to debrief the IOM team and address any misinterpretations or gaps. 

• A draft evaluation report

Based on the debrief and initial feedback, the evaluation team should prepare a draft evaluation report[9]  incorporating lessons learned and recommendations, and share with the IOM Türkiye Team. It will also contain an executive summary of no more than 5 pages that includes a brief description of the project, its context and current situation, the purpose of the evaluation, its methodology and its main findings, conclusions and recommendations. The findings section must be organized by evaluation criteria and refined sub-questions agreed at the inception stage, presenting evaluation findings and recommendations for the Project, aggregated and synthesized on the basis of the results of the different data collection and analysis tools (35-45 pages). Annexes must be presented with a summary of findings from each of the ‘lines of evidence’ used to support the evaluation findings. All completed tools and datasets making up the different lines of evidence should be made available to IOM. IOM will disseminate the draft evaluation report to the evaluation reference group in order to seek their comments and suggestions. Comments and suggestions of IOM and Evaluation Reference Group will be collected in an audit trail and will be shared with the Evaluation Team for final revisions. There could be up to three rounds of review, typically first by IOM for quality assurance, then by evaluation reference group, and finally by senior management.

• Mid-term evaluation final report + Audit Trail

Once finalized, the evaluation team will submit the mid-term evaluation report in the IOM-provided template. The report should include an executive summary, a list of acronyms, an introduction, an evaluation context and purpose, an evaluation framework and methodology, findings, conclusions, and recommendations. Annexes should include the TOR, the inception report, the list of documents reviewed, the persons interviewed or consulted, and the data collection instruments. In addition, the Midterm Evaluation Report should contain clear recommendations that are concise, feasible, actionable and clearly linked to conclusions and findings. The Midterm Evaluation Report will be shared with IOM to be disseminated to the key stakeholders. The Evaluation Team will also submit its responses to the Audit Trail to show the actions taken/not taken and revisions made/not made in line with suggestions and recommendations of IOM and Evaluation Reference Group providing detailed justifications in each case. 

• Evaluation brief (two-page summary according to the IOM template) and infographics

The evaluation team will prepare a concise two-page evaluation brief[10]  in English, summarising key findings, lessons learned, and recommendations. IOM will provide a template that may be adapted but it should not exceed 2 pages. Page one should include identification of audience; project information (project title, countries covered, project type and code, project duration, project period, donor(s), and budget); evaluation background (purpose, team, timeframe, type of evaluation, and methodology); and a brief description of the project. Page two should summarise the most important evaluation results: key findings and/or conclusions, best practices and lessons learned (optional), and key recommendations. The evaluation team will also prepare infographics summarizing key findings, good practices, lessons learned, conclusions, and recommendations. The purpose of these infographics is to enhance accessibility of results for diverse audiences and support effective dissemination. 

•  Management response matrix (IOM will provide the template)

After IOM Türkiye approves the evaluation report and brief, the evaluation team should draft a Management Response Matrix[11] using the IOM template, listing recommendations and indicative timelines for implementation. The IOM team will finalize the matrix in coordination with project stakeholders.

• The final presentation of the evaluation report (online briefing with a slide deck for IOM staff, the donor, and key stakeholders to be identified and agreed upon)

A meeting will be organized with key stakeholders including IOM and Evaluation Reference Group members to present findings, conclusions, and recommendations. The meeting will be held online. The presentation will be on main findings and lessons learned but will also be forward looking in proposing recommendations that are actionable by IOM and stakeholders. A draft slide deck should be shared with the IOM project and MEAL teams in advance, and feedback should be reflected in the final version.

All deliverables are to be written in English and meet good language standards. The final report should meet the standards laid out in the UNEG Quality Checklist for Evaluation Reports. IOM Türkiye will not cover any cost related to translation/interpretation during data collection and reporting; all related expenses shall be included in the evaluation team’s payments.

1. Institutional Arrangements/Reporting Lines 

IOM has full ownership of this assignment and of its final products. Thus, any public mention (including through social media) about the activity should state clearly that ownership. In addition, any public appearance or related published work related to the activity should be coordinated and approved by IOM in advance. Likewise, any visibility material or product produced for this assignment must be in the name of IOM and shall not be used without prior approval from IOM.

The Evaluation Team shall be responsible to the Evaluation Manager (in this case IOM’s Senior National MEAL Officer) for the completion of the tasks and duties assigned throughout this Terms of Reference. All the reports are subject to written approval from the Evaluation Manager, for the payments to be affected to Service Provider/Individual Consultant.

The following are the key actors involved in the implementation of this Midterm Evaluation:

1. Evaluation Manager

This role will be conducted by the Senior National MEAL Officer of IOM who will have the following functions: 

• Supervise the evaluation process throughout the main phases of the evaluation (preparation of the ToR, implementation and management and use of the evaluation)
• Participate in the selection and recruitment of the Evaluation Team
• Provide the Evaluation Team with administrative support and required data and documentation
• Ensure the evaluation deliverables meet the required quality 
• Safeguard the independence of the exercise, including the selection of the Evaluation Team 
• Review the Inception Report, Draft Evaluation and Final Evaluation Reports and provide necessary approvals on behalf of IOM Commissioning Unit
• Collect and consolidate comments on draft evaluation reports and share with the evaluation team for finalization of the evaluation report
• Contribute to the development of management responses and key actions to all recommendations addressed to IOM
• Facilitate, monitor and report on implementation of management responses on a periodic basis

2. Senior Programme Coordinator will have the following functions: 

• Establish the Evaluation Reference Group with key project partners when needed
• Ensure and safeguard the independence of the evaluation
• Provide comments and clarifications on the Terms of Reference, Draft Inception Report and Draft Evaluation Reports
• Ensure the Evaluation Team’s access to all information, data and documentation relevant to the intervention, as well as to key actors and informants who are expected to participate in interviews, focus groups or other information-gathering methods 
• Respond to evaluation recommendations by providing management responses and key actions
• Ensure dissemination of the evaluation report to key stakeholders
• Be responsible for implementation of key actions of the management response

3. Evaluation Team (who will be recruited under this Terms of Reference) will be responsible for the overall coordination and quality of the midterm evaluation report to be produced. It is the Evaluation Team who will be held accountable to IOM in the quality of the final product. The evaluation team will conduct the evaluation study by fulfilling their contractual duties and responsibilities in line with this ToR, United Nations Evaluation Group (UNEG) norms and standards and ethical guidelines and in full compliance with IOM’s Evaluation Policy and Guidelines. This includes submission of all deliverables stipulated under this ToR document, to the satisfaction of IOM. Evaluation Team’s functions do not include any managerial, supervisory and/or representative functions in IOM, partners and beneficiaries. All documents and data provided to the Evaluation Team are confidential and cannot be used for any other purpose or shared with a third party without any written approval from IOM. 

There will be two team members conducting the Midterm Evaluation. Both consultants shall not have participated in the programme/project preparation, formulation, and/or implementation (including the writing of the Project Document) and should not have a conflict of interest with programme’s/projects’ related activities.  The scope of work for the Evaluation Team of this evaluation will include but not be limited to: 

• To develop and finalize the inception report that will include elaboration of how each evaluation question will be answered along with proposed methods, proposed sources of data, and data collection and analysis procedures; 
• To design the tools and data collection; 
• To reconstruct the Theory of Change if required;
• To conduct data collection, analysis and interpretation; 
• To develop the draft evaluation report; 
• To finalize the evaluation report; 
• To present of findings and de-brief;
• To plan, execute and report, kick-off and feedback meetings and debriefings; 
• To ensure compliance with the TOR; and 
• To utilize best practice evaluation methodologies.

4. Evaluation Reference Group: This group is composed of the representatives of the major stakeholders in the project and will review and provide advice on the quality of the evaluation process, as well as on the evaluation products (more specifically comments and suggestions on the draft report and final report) and options for improvement.

Reporting Line

The Evaluation Team will be responsible to the Evaluation Manager (in this case Senior National MEAL Officer of IOM) for the completion of the tasks and duties assigned throughout this Terms of Reference document. All the reports are subject to written approval from the Evaluation Manager following consultation with the Senior Programme Coordinator, for the payments to be affected to the Evaluation Team consultant(s). 

Reporting Language and Conditions

The reporting language will be English. All information should be provided in an electronic version in Word document format. The Evaluation Team shall be solely liable for the accuracy and reliability of the data provided, along with links to sources of information used.

Title Rights

The title rights, copyrights and all other rights whatsoever nature in any material produced under the provisions of this ToR will be vested exclusively in IOM.

1.  Duty Station, Travel and Facilities to be Provided

Duty Station for the Assignment is home-based with specific in-country travel requirements. The Evaluation Team (Team Leader and Thematic Expert) will be requested to travel totally for at least 14 days (excluding travel days and weekends) to provinces in Türkiye where the Project has been implemented as indicated in the expected interview schedule table below. All the costs associated with travel, accommodation and any other living costs shall be borne by the Evaluation Team.

The locations of partners and stakeholders do not rule out the probability of a remote monitoring mission if approved by the Commissioning Unit under exceptional circumstances. The names of cities are there to indicate a potential sample which must be agreed between the Evaluation Team and the Commissioning Unit.

1. Evaluation Costs and Terms of Payment

The evaluation consultant's fee will be all-inclusive, covering all individual costs related to international/domestic flights, local transportation, hotel accommodation, meals, field trips to respective implementation sites, translation/interpretation, printing, communication, and any other expenses required to complete the evaluation. Payment of consultancy fees will be processed upon IOM’s approval of the following deliverables: 

Payment Schedule:

Duration of the Contract 

Midterm Evaluation is expected to be conducted tentatively between 4May 2026 – 31 October 2026. This period covers all evaluation tasks, including preparation, data collection, analysis, and reporting. The evaluation team is expected to manage and complete these tasks efficiently within the agreed timeframe, ensuring high quality of deliverables. The specific dates will be identified at contracting stage.

1. Team Composition and Specific Duties of Team Members

IOM will engage two national consultants: 1) Evaluation Specialist (Team Leader), 2) Thematic Expert (Labour Market Integration and Social Security). Within the scope of the assignment, overall duties and responsibilities of the Evaluation Team are described under Section 9. This job requisition aims to recruit the National Thematic Consultant (Labour Market Integration and Social Security).

Thematic Expert (Labour Market Integration and Social Security)

The Thematic Expert will provide specialized expertise related to labour market integration, labour standards, employability, and social protection aspects of the project. The Thematic Expert will work under the coordination and guidance of the Team Leader.

The duties and responsibilities of the Thematic Expert include:

• Contribute to the development of the evaluation methodology, particularly with respect to labour market integration, employability, labour standards, and social protection components.

• Support the preparation of the inception report, including inputs to the evaluation matrix, data collection tools, and analytical framework.

• Contribute to the reconstruction or refinement of the Theory of Change, where necessary.

• Conduct document review and contribute to the identification of key evaluation questions related to labour market integration, employment support mechanisms, and decent work.

• Support the design and implementation of data collection tools relevant to the thematic areas.

• Conduct thematic data collection activities, including stakeholder interviews, focus group discussions, and consultations with relevant institutions and partners.

• Analyze qualitative and quantitative data related to labour market integration, employment services, labour standards, and social protection.

• Provide technical inputs and analytical contributions to the evaluation findings, conclusions, and recommendations.

• Contribute to the drafting of relevant sections of the evaluation report.

• Support the Team Leader in preparing presentations, validation meetings, and debriefings with stakeholders.

• Ensure timely submission of analytical inputs and deliverables to the Team Leader.

Qualifications

Thematic Expert (Labour Market Integration and Social Security)

I. Academic Qualifications:

Required:

• Bachelor’s degree in a relevant field such as Economics, Public Administration, Law, Development Studies, Social Sciences or related disciplines. (5 points)

Asset:

• Master’s degree (or higher) in a relevant field such as Economics, Public Administration, Law, Development Studies, Social Sciences or related disciplines. (5 points)

II. Years of experience:

Required:

• Minimum 10 years of progressive professional experience in the fields of labour market governance, employability policies, social protection systems, and labour rights. (10 points) 

III. Competencies:

Required:

• Minimum 5 years of experience in design and implementation of gender-responsive decent work, social protection, formalization and employability interventions targeting refugees/migrants, host communities, and disadvantaged groups. (20 points)
• Experience in integration of one or more of the cross-cutting themes of gender equality, human rights, non-discrimination, social dialogue and international labour standards into the design and implementation of minimum of 3 development interventions. (15 points)

Asset:

• Demonstrated experience in multi-stakeholder coordination and policy dialogue with national labour market governance and social protection actors in Türkiye including the Ministry of Labour and Social Security, Turkish Employment Agency (ISKUR), Social Security Institution (SGK), trade unions, employer associations, local administrations etc. (15 points)
• Experience in implementing EU-funded or UN-implemented projects/programmes in Türkiye or comparable contexts. (10 points)

IV.  Language:

Required:

• Good command of spoken and written English and Turkish. (10 points)

Notes:

• Internships (paid/unpaid) are not considered professional experience. 
• Obligatory military service is not considered professional experience.
• Professional experience gained in an international setting is considered international experience.
• Experience gained prior to completion of undergraduate studies is not considered professional experience.

Required Competencies

IOM’s competency framework can be found at this link. Competencies will be assessed during the selection process.

Values - all IOM staff members must abide by and demonstrate these five values:

• Inclusion and respect for diversity: Respects and promotes individual and cultural differences. Encourages diversity and inclusion.
• 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.
• Courage: Demonstrates willingness to take a stand on issues of importance.
• Empathy: Shows compassion for others, makes people feel safe, respected and fairly treated.

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 actions and delegated work.
• Communication: Encourages and contributes to clear and open communication. Explains complex matters in an informative, inspiring and motivational way.

Notes

IOM covers Consultants against occupational accidents and illnesses under the Compensation Plan (CP), free of charge, for the duration of the consultancy. IOM does not provide evacuation or medical insurance for reasons related to non-occupational accidents and illnesses. Consultants are responsible for their own medical insurance for non-occupational accident or illness and will be required to provide written proof of such coverage before commencing work. 

Any offer made to the candidate in relation to this vacancy notice is subject to funding confirmation.

Appointment will be subject to certification that the candidate is medically fit for appointment, accreditation, any residency or visa requirements, security clearances.

IOM has a zero-tolerance policy on conduct that is incompatible with the aims and objectives of the United Nations and IOM, including sexual exploitation and abuse, sexual harassment, abuse of authority and discrimination based on gender, nationality, age, race, sexual orientation, religious or ethnic background or disabilities.

IOM does not charge a fee at any stage of its recruitment process (application, interview, processing, training or other fee). IOM does not request any information related to bank accounts.

IOM only accepts duly completed applications submitted through the IOM e-Recruitment system (for internal candidates link here). The online tool also allows candidates to track the status of their application.

No late applications will be accepted. Only shortlisted candidates will be contacted.

For further information and other job postings, you are welcome to visit our website: IOM Careers and Job Vacancies

Required Skills

Job info