Consulatancy to Conduct End of Project Evaluation of Food Security Through Agribusiness in South Sudan
- Organization: Cordaid - Catholic Organisation for Relief and Development Aid
- Location: Juba
- Grade: Level not specified - Level not specified
- Agriculture and Forestry
- Security and Safety
- Monitoring and Evaluation
- Project and Programme Management
- Food Security, Livestock and Livelihoods
- Closing Date: Closed
1.2 PROJECT BACKGROUND:
This ToR is for the End of Project Evaluation of the “The Food Security Through Agribusiness in South Sudan Project-SSADPII (Project Number: 4000001744)”. This was a five-year project that ran from August 2018 to July 2023 funded by the Embassy of the Kingdom of the Netherlands (EKN) in South Sudan. The overall goal of the project was to improve food security, income, and employment of 10,000 farmer households in selected 3 counties Bor, Torit and Yambio of Jonglei, Eastern Equatoria and Western Equatoria states respectively (see attached logical framework). These actions were based on the Making Markets Working for the Poor (M4P) approach. It supported the strengthening of market functions and market players to make the local markets more inclusive and more enabling for agribusiness to thrive. Moreover, the project strived to increase farmers' and agribusiness' (MSMEs, Cooperatives, VSLAs) access to organization, technology, markets, and finance.
This project was implemented by a consortium of Cordaid, Agriterra, and SPARK organizations, with Cordaid as the lead consortium agency. The 3 agencies worked in close collaboration with the relevant line ministries of the Government of South Sudan, and key stakeholders, include local and international NGOs, UN agencies, and the private sector. According to the project, 10,000 farming families would benefit from increased production and productivity. 1000 youths & women and 750 existing MSMEs would benefit from Business Development Services. 230 Farmers Cooperatives would be established or strengthened, and 120 Village Economy, Market and Social Association (VEMSA) would directly benefit from Cooperative Development and VEMSA Development Support. Also, the project would create access to finance in partnership with Rural Finance Initiative (RUFI). The project used a Revolving Loan Fund (RLF) scheme to provide access to finance to the target communities. More on the project can be found on https://d-portal.org/ctrack.html?country_code=SS§or_group=311&reporting_ref=NL-KVK-41160054&year_min=2018&year_max=2021#view=act&aid=NL-KVK-41160054-200254
2. PURPOSE OF THE EVALUATION
The purpose of the end of project evaluation is to determine the extent to which the project has achieved its objectives; assess whether the project represents good value for money, highlight the key lessons learnt, document challenges and provide recommendations to support future programming in a similar context.
2.1. KEY OUTCOME OF THE END OF PROJECT EVALUATION:
- Measure the overall achievements of the project based on relevant indicators defined in the Log frame, with results stipulated in the full indicator table (see attached logical framework)).
- Based on the indicators captured, analyze the key success and constraint factors (both internal and external) for each outcome.
- Analyze the project based on the evaluation criteria stated in next section.
- Recommend on strategies and approaches for learning.
3. EVALUATION CRITERIA
The consultant will use the OECD DAC evaluation criteria of relevance, coherence, effectiveness, efficiency, impact, and sustainability to review the project.
- i. Relevance: This is the extent to which the intervention objectives and design responds to target beneficiaries needs and South Sudan development policies, and priorities
- Coherence: were the project actions implemented logically and clearly according to the designed strategies? If there was any change in strategy, was it executed according to the adjustments, leading to the anticipated output and outcomes?
- iii. Effectiveness: The extent to which the intervention achieved, or is expected to achieve, its objectives and its results, including any differential results across groups. This refers to the aggregate measure of the extent to which the expected outputs and outcomes have been achieved so far or are expected to be achieved by the end of the project.
- Efficiency: This is the extent to which the interventions have been delivered or likely to be delivered in an economical and timely manner. This refers to the “Economic” conversion of inputs (funds, expertise, natural resources, time, etc.) into outputs, outcomes, and impacts, in the most cost-effective way possible, as compared to feasible alternatives in the context.
- Impact: This the extent to which the interventions have generated or are expected to generate significantly positive or negative, intended, or unintended, higher-level effects (see log frame). This seeks to identify the social, environmental, and economic effects of the intervention that are longer term or broader in scope than those already captured under the effectiveness criterion.
- vi. Sustainability: Will the benefits last? This examines the extent to which the net benefits of the intervention will continue or are likely to continue for a long period of time after the intervention, in terms of the financial, economic, social, environmental, and institutional capacities of the established systems needed to sustain net benefits over time. This analyzes the resilience, risks, and potential tradeoffs.
The evaluation criteria are translated into the following specific evaluation questions. These questions will be discussed with the experts during the Inception Phase. However, once agreed upon, the evaluation questions are contractually binding. The evaluation will provide answers to the below questions.
- To what extent are the objectives of the Programme valid to the needs of the beneficiaries?
- To what extent are the activities and outputs of the Programme consistent with the overall goal and the attainment of its objectives?
- To what extent are the activities and outputs of the Programme consistent with the intended impacts?
- To what extent were the project goal and objectives achieved?
- What were the major factors influencing the achievement or non-achievement of the objectives?
- Were activities delivered on budget?
- Were objectives achieved on time?
- Was the project implemented within the defined scope?
- Was the project implemented according to the defined strategy?
- What has changed because of the project?
- What range of outcomes (intended and unintended) has the project contributed to – taking account of each of social, economic, environmental, and cultural considerations
- How did the action of the project meet the needs of the target beneficiaries particularly gender, youths, and women, IDPs, Returnees and People with disability
- What was the added value of this project to the lives of the target communities, both regarding its design and implementation?
- Is there evidence that the initiative is likely to grow – scaling up and out – beyond the project life?
- To what extent will the benefits of the project continue after donor funding ceased?
- What were the major factors which influenced the achievement or non-achievement of sustainability of the project?
- What was the relationship between this project and other Dutch/non-Dutch funded projects in the same areas?
- How could this relationship be utilized for strengthening sustainability?
4. THE EVALUATION METHODOLOGY
The evaluation will incorporate the principles and standards of the OECD/DAC for a participatory, credible, and gender sensitivity. Therefore, both quantitative and qualitative methods of data collection can be considered. The chosen methods should be inclusive and respect the social and cultural context of the target beneficiaries. The evaluator should consider acceptable research ethics to be applied during the data collection process. In general terms the evaluation should be guided by the “do-no-harm” principle. The sampling methodology and size should be representative by considering the spread of the beneficiaries and relevant stakeholders.
5. SCOPE OF THE END OF PROJECT EVALUATION
The evaluator is expected to undertake the following tasks:
- Develop Inception report and presenting it for review and approval.
- Based on project Log frame, develop detailed methodology of the evaluation, data collection tools, sampling, and data analysis instruments for all relevant indicators, and present for review and approval. Research methods include a beneficiary Survey in a similar manner as the baseline and mid-line that were conducted, Focus Group Discussions, Key Informant Interviews, and relevant desk research.
- Facilitate an expert/stakeholder review of the tools and methodology proposed for the survey, FGD and KIIs in the project locations.
- Revise the tools and methodology proposed based on feedback from the expert/stakeholder review.
- Train data collectors (Enumerators)/supervisors on use of data collection tools.
- Data collection should happen in all the three (3) counties of Bor, Torit and Yambio simultaneously. Therefore, either the consultant or their designated supervisors will supervise the data collection.
- The overall sample frame will be made up of at least 10,000 beneficiaries reached under the project. Therefore, the sample size will be at least 370 respondents.
- Lead the data collection exercise with participation of CORDAID staff and relevant consortium members’ staff.
- Perform data collation, cleaning, analysis, and report writing.
- Present the preliminary findings to the project management team.
- Generate and present a draft evaluation report for review by the SSADPII Consortium partners and EKN.
- Facilitate local stakeholder’s review of the draft report and inputs from the project location.
- To check the factual basis of the evaluation, and to discuss the draft findings, conclusions, and recommendations.
- Incorporate stakeholder/expert comments and submit final report.
- Present the final evaluation report to CORDAID/consortia members and EKN. The final report should be submitted to CORDAID South Sudan and EKN in both hard and soft copies.
6. TIME FRAME
The length of the assignment will be between 50-80 days. The consultant/team are expected to visit all the project sites within this time frame. However, the assignment is planned to commence as from June 6th, 2023. The final report submission date will be discussed during signing of contract.
The table below on activities schedule will be completed by the consultant.
NUMBER OF DAYS ALLOCATED
Desk review of data/design of methodology/tools development.
Virtual training of enumerators/supervisors,
Remotely Support the data collection
Data analysis and sense-making
Debriefing/conduct validation workshop
Final revision and submission
7. SUPPORT EXPECTED FROM CORDAID SOUTH SUDAN TO THE EVALUATION TEAM.
Cordaid South Sudan will provide the following, to enable successful completion of the assignment.
- Flight fare (round trip) into and out of the country as well as within the country during conduct of the assignment.
- Accommodation and upkeep for the consultant at the organization’s rate
- Enumerators’ fees and training materials
- Logistical support for the data collection process
- Coordination with local authorities by facilitating clearance for the consultant’s work.
8. KEY DELIVERABLES
Based on this TOR the consultant shall deliver the following:
- The consultant will submit an inception report 1 week after signing of the contract.
- A draft (soft copy) end of project evaluation report for review report, two weeks after data collection.
- Organize a validation workshop
- Submit to CORDAID South Sudan the final report for the evaluation, one (1) week after receiving the feedback from Cordaid and consortium members.
- All data sets used for analysis as well as any other form of transcripts used, are Cordaid South Sudan property, hence shall all be submitted with the final report.
- The final report should include at least the following components.
- Should have a maximum of 30 pages, excluding annexes. - Executive summary. - Background; Brief project description and context - Evaluation purpose. - Study methodology including sampling procedure and size. - Key findings per results areas of the project - Strategies used to achieve the results. - Unintended results - Lessons learnt per project outcome results. - Recommendations per project outcomes - Conclusion. - Appendices
9. EVALUATOR’S PROFILE AND REQUIREMENTS
- The Lead Consultant should hold at least master’s degree related to the assignment.
- At least Five (5) years’ experience evaluating resilience programs related to Agriculture, Food security, Disaster Risk Reduction, livelihood projects and strong project sector engagement.
- Demonstration of relevant skills in leading evaluations in South Sudan contexts
- The consulting team should include specialist in the following fields, gender, food security and climate resilience.
- Excellent analytical and report writing skills.
10. APPLICATION GUIDELINE
Potential candidates are advised follow the below guidelines.
- A detailed technical proposal document including evaluation criteria, methodology, evaluation question, Sampling and Data management processes, clearly articulated.
- Detailed Financial proposal with detailed budget clearly broken down per clear headings.
- Sampled experiences of previous works, similar this assignment.
- Curriculum Vitae of the head consultant(s), and 3 references/referees preferably previous organizations for whom the consultant worked.
- Profile of the consultancy firm- with proof of compliance to South Sudan legal operation of companies such as registration and NRA e-tax identification certificate
11. EVALUATION AND AWARD OF THE EVALUATION CONSULTANCY SHALL BE BASED ON THE FOLLOWING CRITERION
All applications shall be evaluated against the below set of indicators.
Demonstration of clear understanding of the assignment
Comprehensive outline of how to carry the assignment
Experience and expertise in similar assignments
Clear technical proposal
Applications should be submitted to email@example.com on or before 2nd June, 2023 5:00PM (Central African Time), with the subject title of “SSADP II END OF PROJECT EVALUATION”, in a zipped folder.
However, we have found similar vacancies for you: