Somalia: End of project evaluation: PPA Gender & Child Protection

Evaluation Terms of Reference

PPA 2Gender & Child Project
PBAS Number
197765

World Vision Somalia

Published November, 2008 © World Vision International

NOTE: LEAP alignment requires that this template be used in conjunction with the evaluation TOR guidelines, which can be found on the TD website. It is recommended that the template be filled out using these guidelines.

i. Table of Contents
a) Acknowledgement……………………………………………..2
b) Affirmation………………………………………………………2
c) Glossary…………………………………………………………..2
d) Introduction………………………….…………………………..2
e) Evaluation Summary……………………………………………2
f) Description of Project to be evaluated………………………3
g) Who evaluation is intended for……………………………….3
h) Evaluation type. Purpose and objectives…………………….5
i) Evaluation Methodology………………………………… ……8
j) Evaluation time frame…………………………………….…..14
k) Budget………………………………………………………..…..14
l) Logistics…………………………………………………….….…15
m) Documents required……………………………………..…….15
n) Authority & Responsibility……………………………..….…..15
o) Evaluation products…………………………………….………16
p) Documents to be submitted…………………………….…….14
q) Qualification of Consultant………………………….…………17
r) Child Protection & Confidentiality……………………………17

ii. Acknowledgements
The following people and groups of people need to be recognised in the implementation of the PPA2 project in Somaliland.
a) The community of Toghdheer region
b) The teachers of the Toghdeer region
c) The Mayor of Toghdheer region
d) The Imams and their appointed representatives
e) Local NGOs operating in Toghdheer
f) World vision field based staff and support staff based in Nairobi
iii. Affirmation
The work contained there-in is WV Somaliland work due acknowledgement is made to other sources consulted in coming up with this document. The work remains property of WVS and any distribution or copy should be done with consent from WVS.

iv. Glossary
CBO Community Based Organisation
FGD Focus group discussion
FGM Female genital Mutilation
HH Household
INGO International Non-Government Organisation
MTE Mid-term Evaluation
NGO Non-Government Organisation

v. Introduction
PPA2 project is a gender & child well-being project funded by DFID through WVUK. The project is implemented in 10 villages of Lughaya in Somaliland. The project has been in implementation since 2013 and end in March 2016. The project directly targets 800 children (400 girls and 400 boys, 4% of children with disabilities until March 2015 and 5% 5% children with disabilities April 2015 to March 2016 ) in 10 villages, and 50 teachers in 10 primary schools, 20 FGM practitioners / traditional birth attendants, 50 religious leaders /imams / elders, government line Ministries, CBOs/NGOs (SAYS, other Child Protection stakeholders in Awdal child protection network plus Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs) as direct beneficiaries. Indirectly, this project will target the population of 10 villages in Lughaya District. Work closely with Community based structures, CBOs, NGOs and INGOs.
The main objective of the end of project evaluation is to assess the relevance, effectiveness and outcomes, sustainability, successes and challenges/constraints of the PPA 2 project in Somaliland

1. EVALUATION SUMMARY

Project (s) PPA Gender & Child Protection
Project PBAS Number(s)
Evaluation Type End of Project evaluation
Evaluation Purpose Primary objectives: to determine the effectiveness, efficiency, relevance, equity and value for money of the project, in order to identify key lessons for organisation learning and action.
Secondary objectives: to determine the sustainability of the project and, where appropriate, its adaptability when faced with a change of context.
Primary Methodologies Quantitative and Qualitative methodologies (details below)
Evaluation Scope Lughaye District, Awdal Region in Somaliland
Evaluation Start and End Dates Start between 1 – 15th February (as soon in February as possible)
Maximum time required:
• 1 week to agree & finalise tools.
• 1 week to train enumerators.
• 1-2 weeks for data collection.
• 1-2 weeks for data aggregation and analysis.
• 1 week to draft report and send to NO and WVUK.
• 1 week to finalise final draft of the report.
Anticipated Evaluation Report Release Date • Draft Evaluation Report due to NO and World Vision UK by Friday 23rd March 2016 (to allow the field team time to review the report before the end of the project on 30th March)
• Final agreed version of Evaluation Report due to NO and World Vision UK by 15th April 2016

1. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT BEING EVALUATED

PPA-funded Child Protection Project
The project described below has been managed by World Vision UK as part of a grant it has received by DFID (the Department for International Developed of the UK Government). The project commenced in April 2011. In April 2014, the grant was extended for a further two years to March 2016.

The grant has allowed WVUK to fund projects in various countries, all of which have focussed on child protection. Projects have focussed on strengthening systems for child protection and enhancing strategies for fighting harmful traditional practices at the local level. They have also sought to increase the resilience of children to abuse, exploitation, violence and neglect through training children in child rights and life skills. Projects have had an element of local advocacy to them. Some projects have also had an element of national advocacy to them.

The overall grant was informed by a WVUK log-frame (See indicators in section 4, under effectiveness). These indicators are the ones informing this evaluation. Each project has also however had its individual log-frame and design. These allowed for the specificities of each implementing context, while aligning with the overall log-frame.

Project name: Somaliland PPA2 Gender & Child Protection
Start date: April 2014
End date: March 2016

Geographic areas of implementation:

Village Name Number of Households Population
Sheed-Dheer 110 660
Garbo-dadar 700 4200
Tourka 100 600
Gargaara 460 2760
Lughaya 800 4800
Idho-cadays 110 660
Garaaca 98 588
Karure 160 960
Geerisa 600 3180
Fardaha 450 2800
Total 3,588 21,208

Key beneficiaries and stakeholder groups:
Key Stakeholders include:
Children
School Teachers
Religious leaders and teachers
School and child rights committees

Programmatic approaches/models utilised in the project:

• Community education
• Child rights campaigns. These are campaigns held on key dates within the calendar so at to reach a wider audience. They involve dramas speeches and banners
• Youth education through sport (YES). This is an awareness creation exercise which combines rights and knowledge development and on the presentation of trophies children speak on their rights
• Children training on rights and right awareness
• Media dialogues on topical issues related to child rights

1. WHO THE EVALUATION IS INTENDED FOR
   The evaluation findings and recommendations are intended to:
   • Provide information to enhance the impact of future World Vision programmes.
   • Provide key information on the results and key learning of the project, to be shared with implementing partners and stakeholders.
   • To provide key information on outcome and output progress and key learning, to be reported back to the donor, DFID.

2. EVALUATION TYPE, PURPOSE & OBJECTIVES

This is an End of Project evaluation.

Core (primary) objectives
The core objectives of the evaluation, which will be reported back on to DfID, are to measure the effectiveness, efficiency, relevance, equity and value for money. They also very importantly include detailing the learning acquired from the project. All of these are detailed below.

A. Effectiveness
To assess the achievement of the project in relation to indicators as detailed in WVUK’s log-frame at the level of outcomes 2 and 2A, as well as at the level of outputs 2.2, 2.3, 3.1 and 3.2. This should include assessing how the theory of change and specific programmatic approaches used have contributed to these achievements.

For the purpose of this evaluation, community should be defined in the same way that the project has done so from 2011 to 2014.

Outcomes Indicator Unit of Measure Methodology set out in WVUK Log-frame
Children and communities, especially the most vulnerable and those in the poorest and/or most fragile contexts, are accessing quality services, are cared for and protected and enjoy good health 2 Increase in the number of girls & boys, especially the MV, reporting living free from violence, abuse & exploitation (including number and proportion of girls and boys with disabilities) Children (including 5% of children with disabilities) HH surveys, annual reports
2A Number & description of communities where girls & boys, especially the MV, report living in a more protective and caring environment. Communities CP HH surveys + additional questions, FGD (river of life/MSC), annual reports
Outputs Indicator Unit of Measure Methodology set out in WVUK Log-frame
Strategies for strengthening formal and/or informal systems for child protection implemented 2.2 Number & description of communities supported to implement sustainable strategies to strengthen child protection systems, in coordination with local duty bearers. Communities WV monitoring reports, records of the number of communities where 1 or more CBOs have a) received capacity building inputs, b) understand the formal child protection systems and c) have developed a sustainable Child Protection Strategy/Action Plan. Reports to be validated by capacity building /training records, focus groups discussion questions on formal systems, copies of CBO plans, etc...
Outputs (continued) Indicator Unit of Measure Methodology set out in WVUK Log-frame
Strategies for strengthening formal and/or informal systems for child protection implemented 2.3 Number & description of communities implementing enhanced strategies to address Harmful Traditional Practices and associated norms that harm girls/boys Communities WV monitoring reports, records of the number of communities where 1 or more CBOs have identified a specific, locally prevalent, harmful traditional practice/social norm and, following review of strategies and options, have adopted or formulated a new or enhanced strategy to reduce prevalence rates in their community (including models or approaches introduced by WV). WV monitoring reports to include brief narrative descriptions of the strategies and how they are being implemented.
Resilience of children most vulnerable to abuse, exploitation, violence and neglect strengthened 3.1 Number of girls & boys trained in life skills and child rights (including number and proportion of girls and boys with disabilities) Children (including children with disabilities) Annual reports & training records
3.2 Number, proportion & description of girls and boys who are equipped to protect themselves (including number and proportion of girls and boys with disabilities)

N.B. This indicator is to be measured in relation to indicator 3.1 Children (including children with disabilities) HH surveys, FGD, annual reports, records of the % of children trained who score an improvement in survey section on ‘identity and social skills’ and know where to go for help in case of abuse. WV reports including brief narrative descriptions of the ways in which children perceive they are better equipped.

A table of indicator results against WVUK’s log-frame outcome indicators 2 and 2A, and output indicators 2.2, 2.3, 3.1 and 3.2 showing the data at baseline, MTE and end of project evaluation should be presented in the evaluation report, to allow us aggregation of results across projects in various countries.

B. Efficiency
To determine how well have the inputs to the project been converted to outputs.
• Number of communities that have abolished FGM
• Number of children that have knowledge of their rights
• Strategies put in place to strengthen Formal/informal Child protection systems
• Extent of capacity strengthening done with the government to implement child protection strengthening

C. Relevance
To measure how relevant the project was for the communities in the area of implementation. This can be done through assessing how appropriate the project’s design and implementation were to community needs, local government policies/orientation and WV’s country strategies.

D. Equity
To measure to what extent the intervention and outcome achievements reached and impacted the most vulnerable children. This should also include assessing which most vulnerable groups were reached by the project.

World Vision seeks to work with the Most Vulnerable children, whose quality of life and ability to fulfil their potential is most affected by extreme deprivation and violations of their rights. These children often live in catastrophic situations and relationships characterised by violence, abuse, neglect, exploitation, exclusion and discrimination. World Vision’s definition includes four vulnerability factors which can assist in understanding who the most vulnerable children are:

1. Abusive or exploitative relationships: relationships which are characterised by violence or use of a child to benefit others sexually or commercially, or which consistently harm the child through intentional acts or negligence.
2. Extreme deprivation: extreme material poverty or deprivation of caregivers.
3. Serious discrimination: severe social stigma, which prevents children from accessing services or opportunities essential to their protection or development.
4. Vulnerability to negative impact from a catastrophe or disaster: natural or manmade events which seriously threaten the survival or development of a child, with certain children being more likely to be affected negatively and less likely to be able to recover.
   In this project, the most vulnerable children we have targeted include:
   • Children with disability especially children with down syndrome
   • Girls in and out of school

E. Value for Money:
To understand the cost drivers of the project and assess to what level the project has demonstrated maximum effectiveness, efficiency and economy.

Please see the attached document for more information on our position on value for money

F. Learning
To evaluate, analyse and detail what has been learnt throughout the project and how has this learning been shared. This should also include any learning arising from the evaluation itself.

From the learning, the evaluation should also seek to detail recommendations for improving programming going forward. This may include recommendations on bettering programme/project design and indicators, or on on enhancing programmatic achievements, relevance, equity/targeting, value for money, sustainability and/or adaptability.

Secondary objectives
G. Sustainability
To assess the overall structure, management and implementation of the project, focusing on its success in terms of starting/applying practices that have the potential to be owned and continued by the local community. The question to be posed for this is: what will happen to all the project’s work after it has closed and the community owns it?

Where social accountability of beneficiary feedback mechanisms have been implemented alongside CP work, it may be helpful to look at how programming or the nature of the project’s community engagement has adapted in light of beneficiary feedback.

1. EVALUATION METHODOLOGY

Outcome Indicator 2 Increase in the number of girls & boys, especially the MV, reporting living free from violence, abuse & exploitation (including number and proportion of girls and boys with disabilities)
What it measures The prevalence of violence, exploitation and abuse (physical, economic, emotional and in certain cases, sexual) experienced by children in the target area. The survey measures the percentage of children aged 8 - 17 who achieve a positive score on the ‘WVUK PPA Child Protection Outcome Survey’ Sections 1 – 3 on ‘You & Your Life/school/work, violence, and sexual abuse’.
How to measure it

Based on the WV ‘Guide to using Youth Healthy Behaviours survey Facilitation Notes’, if literacy levels are low, and particularly for the younger age groups, it is recommended that a direct administration or ‘guided facilitation’ approach is used. In which case, the children selected for each cluster sample will need to gather with the facilitator/enumerator in a suitable location. Where literacy levels are high the survey may be self administered.

For children aged 8 - 11 years, facilitators should use the ‘Junior version’ WVUK PPA Child Protection Outcome Survey which is shortened, simplified and has no section on sexual abuse.
How to calculate it # of children who achieve a positive score
Total # of children surveyed

Please provide the figures for each part of this equation in the evaluation report
Contextualise It is essential to translate the forms into the most commonly used local language(s) and translate back into English to ensure the sense and meaning of the questions remains. The question and response option numbers must remain identical on the Survey forms and collation spreadsheet. In addition, check the terminology and translate into locally child friendly and recognised terms where appropriate (particularly on sexual matters).

Particular questions to contextualise are noted on the questionnaires in red. For child labour, revise chores if not relevant to context (e.g. fetch firewood). In some religious, cultural or ethnic contexts, it may be necessary to omit the Section 4 questions on Sexual abuse but only with the prior agreement of WVUK.

It is important to test the survey on a small sample before use and revise where necessary.
Tools It is important to use BOTH the ‘Full’ and ‘Junior’ versions of the WVUK PPA Child Protection Baseline & Evaluation Survey’ questionnaire for appropriate ages.

Survey data must be entered into the Excel data collection spreadsheet provided by WVUK, carefully following the instruction sheet on page 1.
Disaggregate By gender, age and disability
Reference population The minimum sample size is 225 children aged 8 – 17, selected randomly from the project area. The sample must be divided equally across three age groups (75 junior children aged 8 – 11, 75 adolescents aged12-14 and 75 youths aged 15-17 years).

Note: The baseline included a ‘booster sample’, identified as ‘Most Vulnerable Children’ (MVCs), but this is NOT required for the evaluation survey.
The sample of 225 is to be obtained by random selection of 15 clusters in the project area and then random selection of 15 households per cluster.

However, if the target area is spread over several ADPs it may be necessary to increase the number of clusters and reduce the number of children per cluster accordingly. If possible use the same new cluster selection for the evaluation as used for the baseline (if done correctly), but note that the evaluation requires 1 additional cluster.

To achieve an equal age range balance for each cluster (5 children from each age bracket), it is recommended that enumerators select a child from each age group in turn. Please refer to the table below to calculate the cluster and sample sizes.

If the programme area includes very different social, economic or cultural contexts (e.g. both urban and rural or ethnically diverse areas), then cluster selection will need to reflect the population proportions of the different areas.

Age group # per cluster # of clusters Total # of children sampled
Ages 8 - 11 5 15 75
Ages 12 - 14 5 15 75
Ages 15 - 17 5 15 75
Total all ages 15 15 225

Please Contact WVUK if advice is needed on random sample selection.

Outcome Indicator 2.A Number & description of communities where girls & boys, especially the MV, report living in a more protective and caring environment.
What it measures The number of positive changes in community child protection and caring mechanisms reported by children.

Qualitative tools and descriptions provide qualitative information to back up and help interpret the quantitative data.
How to measure it
Quantitative and qualitative data: selected questions from WV child protection household survey reports, with additional questions on perceptions of the strength, effectiveness and reliability of CP systems.

Qualitative tools used in Focus Groups (River of Life and Most Significant Change tools), narratives from the project’s annual reports.
How to calculate it = Sum and % of children who give positive responses to over half of the 7 relevant baseline survey questions and 3 new questions.
Contextualise The new survey questions are not included in the survey for ages 7 – 11s
Tool Evaluation Survey
River of Life and Most Significant Change tools (see separate sheet below)
Narrative reports
Disaggregate By gender, age and disability
Reference population For the survey questions, the minimum sample size is 225 children in the project area aged 8 – 17, selected randomly from the project area. Detailed criteria are as the same as Outcome Indicator 2 detailed above.

For the Focus Groups, this depends on the nature of the project area population, as FGDs need to provide a representative sample. If the population is generally uniform across all areas then a minimum of 4 children’s groups will be sufficient comprising 1 boys and 1 girls group for children aged 12 – 14 and 2 more FGDs for youth aged 15-17 years. If the population is divided into diverse socio-economic or cultural / ethnic groups then a separate set of 4 FGDs will be required for each group (up to a maximum of 4 sets).

Output Indicator 2.2 Number & description of communities supported to implement sustainable strategies to strengthen child protection systems, in coordination with local duty bearers.
What it measures Demonstrable improvement in particular elements of policy, structure or implementation of child protection systems or mechanisms at national or community level compared to the Baseline or Mid Term Evaluation.
How to measure it

At Baseline stage, the project team carried out an Assessment Mapping exercise to assess the state of child protection systems or mechanisms at national and local level.

To determine the number of communities supported to implement sustainable strategies it should be identified how many communities (which may be stakeholder groups within different communities)
a. Have received capacity building inputs (reviewing training reports as well as collecting FDG data).
b. Understand the formal child protection system and informal child protection system (as appropriate for the context).
c. Have developed a Child Protection strategy/Action Plan.

This should be triangulated with WV Annual Reports, which include a description of where improvements have taken place (or are in progress), or make reference to the national and local Child Protection mapping report. Government, partner records/publications or KIIs (similar to Goal Indicator 2), may also be used for cross validation.
How to calculate it = Cumulative sum of communities that
a. Have received capacity building inputs
b. Understand CP systems
c. Have come up with CP strategies or action plans
Contextualise According to national and local policy and practice environment
Tool WV and stakeholder narrative reports, FGD
Disaggregate By number of communities

Output Indicator 2.3 Number & description of communities implementing enhanced strategies to address Harmful Traditional Practices and associated norms that harm girls/boys

For the purposes of this PPA project, harmful traditional or cultural practices are defined as rituals, traditions or other socially accepted practices that violate the protection rights of girls and/or boys and have a negative effect on their health, or physical, mental or psychological integrity.
How to measure it

At Baseline stage, FGDs should have identified 2 – 4 common harmful traditional or customary practices that violate the rights of children in the target communities (such as early or forced marriage, female genital mutilation, sexual exploitation rituals, excessive physical discipline etc).

Then Focus Group Discussion participants (adults and children) should have been asked to discuss each of the 2 - 4 practices in turn and rank which is most common.

To determine the number of communities implementing enhanced strategies, evidence should be sought from the various communities & stakeholder groups in relation to action plans/strategies and to progress in implementing these. WV monitoring reports may include brief narrative descriptions of the strategies and how they are being implemented.

Additionally it may be helpful to look at which communities are reporting a noticeable reduction in a particular harmful traditional or customary practice that violates the protection rights of children. This may be done through Focus Group Discussions participants (adults and children) are asked to discuss “How common is the same identified harmful traditional practice in your community?” After discussion, participants are required to vote using the 5 point ‘Likert scale’. Voting should be by secret ballot. Finally, as a check, participants are asked to discuss, then agree on the following statement: “Is the identified harmful traditional practice more or less common than it was a year ago, and to what extent?”. This should be scored to assess the current situation, as related to what is previously was.

If a focal harmful practice was NOT identified at Baseline stage, the Evaluation must identify and assess the practice(s) that the project has focused on.

Service provider and partner records and KIIS could be used for cross validation. FGDs should be led by a skilled facilitator, supported by 1 or preferably 2 note takers who record all discussions by the community to record their insights and perceptions on the issue under discussion and contribute to the qualitative data.
How to calculate it = Cumulative sum of communities

AND

# of participants voting for a lower prevalence rate than in the baseline
Total # of participants

Please provide the figures for each part of this equation in the evaluation report.
Tool Focus Group Discussions & Questions. Likert 5 point scale for voting.
Disaggregate By communities + gender, adults, children and vulnerable groups
Reference population This depends on the nature of the project area population as Focus Groups need to provide a representative sample. If the population is generally uniform across all areas then a minimum of 3 adult and 2 children’s groups will be sufficient.

If the population is divided into diverse socio-economic or cultural / ethnic groups then a separate set of FGDs will be required for each group up to a maximum of 4 sets.

The minimum provision is as follows which should be repeated for each location:
2 adult groups, (1 male, 1 female), using random cluster sampling to select adults from the same community and 2 children’s groups aged 12-18 years (split ages if necessary). In addition, include 1 mixed gender FGD comprised of community representatives active in child protection/rights promotion. It is recommended that the children’s FGDs for this output are part of WV’s Children Clubs.

Output Indicator 3.1 Number of girls & boys trained in life skills and child rights (including number and proportion of girls and boys with disabilities)
What it measures Measure of actual number of children who have received life-skills training
How to measure it Record the cumulative total numbers of children who received training, disaggregated as indicated. Training records to be kept to verify data.
How to calculate it = cumulative sum of children trained
Contextualise N/A
Tool N/A
Disaggregate By gender and disability
Reference population All children in programme area participating in WV facilitated life skills training, including any children trained by peer educators

Output Indicator 3.2 Number, proportion & description of girls and boys who are equipped to protect themselves (including number and proportion of girls and boys with disabilities)
N.B. This indicator is to be measured in relation to indicator 3.1
What it measures Quantitative data: Percentage of children trained in life skills (disaggregated) who obtain a high score on life-skills questions in the WVUK PPA2 CP survey and can name 2 or more local protection mechanisms.
Qualitative data: Descriptions of ways in which children feel they are better equipped to protect themselves.
How to measure it Use the WVUK CHILDREN’S CLUB survey to record resilience / asset levels (as set out on separate survey sheets).

In addition, carry out FGDs in the Children’s Groups to record brief descriptions of ways in which children feel they are better equipped to protect themselves.
How to calculate it Number of children trained who answer question L05 correctly & give ‘Always’ or ‘Often’ responses to at least 3 of the 5 questions Y06, 07, 09, 10 & P12.
Total number of surveyed children who were trained

Please provide the figures for each part of this equation in the evaluation report.
Contextualise If required, change name of ‘Child Rights Club’ to the local equivalent e.g. ‘Forum’ or ‘Parliament’.
Tool Use WVUK PPA2 Child Protection CHILDREN’S CLUB Evaluation survey questions.
Disaggregate By gender and disability
Reference population The overall group for this consists of all children in the project area who participated in WV facilitated life skills training, including any children trained by peer educators.

A ‘purposive sample’ is required from this group, the sample size depends on the total number of children trained in life skills, but must be representative of all children trained e.g. across different contexts and geographical areas. Where appropriate, the sample should be split equally across the following age groups: 8 – 11, 12-14 and 15-17 years. To achieve a maximum 5% margin of error, the following sample sizes are required:

# of children trained Sample size (from trained children)
50 50
100 80
200 135
500 or above 220

The full PPA Outcome survey includes questions on life skills to provide a randomly selected ‘Control group’ of children to compare against those that have participated in life skills training. To avoid ‘double counting’, facilitators must first identify and exclude any child who has already contributed to the full survey for the same evaluation. However, if the full survey identified a large number of trained children, this sub-set can contribute to the sample size for this indicator.

1. EVALUATION TIMEFRAME
   In responding to this TOR, the consultant should share a detailed data collection schedule.
   The consultant must be able to deliver a quality WV-approved final evaluation report that fulfils the requirements of this ToR.

The evaluation should start as early as possible in February 2016, with the maximum time anticipated being as follows:
• 1 week to agree & finalise the tools
• 1 week to train enumerators
• 1 -2 weeks for data collection
• 1-2 weeks for data aggregation & analysis
• 1 week to prepare the draft report and send to WV National Office and WVUK
• 1 week to finalise the report following WV National Office and WVUK feedback.

Please note a draft report is due to National Office and WVUK by Friday 23rd March2016, to allow the field team time to review the report before the end of the project on 30th March.

1. BUDGET
   WV to pay directly
   Outside the evaluator contract Cost to be included in the evaluator’s contract
   Flights WVS
   Enumerators WVS
   Hotel/accommodation WVS
   Food per diem WVS
   Vehicle hire WVS
   SPU WVS
   Stationery & Printing WVS
   Consultancy Fees Consultant
   Total

2. LOGISTICS
   Visas to Somaliland will be obtained at port of entry. WVS staff in Somaliland will communicate with the immigration department prior to any visitors arrival to facilitate processing of the visa upon arrival. Visa forms will be sent that will be presented together with passport and 2 passport size photos.
   Travelling in-country will be coordinated by World Vision based on an agreed travel schedule. World Vision will organize the required SPU to facilate field travel for non-Somalis

3. DOCUMENTS
   The consultant will be furnished with relevant documentation to support the desk review of secondary information. This will include the baseline assessment of the project, specific project level design documents and log-frames, mid-term evaluation (if conducted), reports submitted to WVUK and contextual data. These documents will be sent out to the evaluator by the 20th of February 2016.

The consultant is encouraged to identify any other sources of appropriate additional information that may be required to supplement what is provided by the project.

1. AUTHORITY & RESPONSIBILITY
   This Evaluation will be led by an external consultant. Technical support will be provided by WV Somalia National Office Quality Assurance team. Where clarifications are needed, these will be supplied by WVUK.

TEAM MEMBERS ROLES/RESPONSIBILITY
External Consultant
• Establish working contacts with all the relevant stakeholders.
• Prepare and submit to World Vision the evaluation proposal including methodology to be used, work plans and schedules for both quantitative and qualitative aspect of the assignment, for review and feedback.
• Design data collection tools.
• Conduct an in-depth desk top review of the relevant secondary data.
• Interview selected respondents during the evaluation.
• Train enumerators.
• Visit selected project sites.
• Collect data where appropriate.
• Conducting entry and exit conferences (de briefing) with WV staff.
• Prepare and submit draft evaluation report to World Vision for review and feedback.
• Submit final evaluation report both in soft and hard copies
Enumerators • Responsibly and professionally complete relevant data collection tools following guidelines and information to be provided during training.
Project team • Ensure all logistics for study are in place.
• Ensure any visa requirements are processed in good time.
• Ensure community mobilisation is done by the project staff.
• Participate in data collection as appropriate.
• Ensure key stakeholders are well informed about the proceedings.
• Act as the overall link between the project, partners and evaluator.
• Advertise and recruit data collectors in collaboration with quality assurance team.
• Supervises the implementation of the study.
• Provide necessary project-related information during planning and implementation of the evaluation, in a timely manner.
• Provide feedback on the draft evaluation report.
Administration Officer • Provide logistics & administrative support as and when required.
Quality Assurance • Review and approve the study tools and methodology, with guidance from WVUK as appropriate.
• Brief stakeholders about the purpose of the evaluation, working with the project manager.
• Provide all the necessary support to the consultant to ensure timely completion and compliance with international survey standards.
• Lead the recruitment of enumerators.
• Participate in the training of enumerators (as appropriate).
• Coordinate with Supply Chain to ensure processing of payment for the consultant/survey team leader upon completion of the assignment.
P&C • Facilitate recruitment of enumerators, draft contract, and ensure that the enumerators sign WVP Child Protection Policy
World Vision UK (remotely) • Provide technical support as required, including input into tools used, to ensure consistency with baseline and mid-term evaluation methodologies.

1. EVALUATION PRODUCTS
   The evaluation should result in, but not be limited to, the following products:
2. Entry Meeting: Consultant will meet WV staff and present their work-plan for discussion and be briefed on logistics and any other technical related issues.
3. Training of the enumerators.
4. De-brief presentation.

5. A draft & final evaluation report. The consultant will produce a draft report to be submitted to the WV Somalia office on an agreed date for review. A final report (MS Word, Excel files, PDF) will then be submitted. The report should have the following structure:
   a. Cover page (1 page)
   b. Table of Contents (1 page)
   c. Acknowledgements (1 page)
   d. Glossary/Acronym list (1 page)
   e. Introduction (1 page)
   f. Description of Project being evaluated(1 - 2pages)
   g. Executive summary (2 Pages)
   h. Summary table of indicator evaluation results (including baseline and MTR as appropriate)
   i. Evaluation/Background (max 2 pages)
   j. Methodology (max 1 pages)
   k. Findings (max 10 pages)
   l. Conclusion and recommendations (max 3 pages)
   m. Lessons learnt from the evaluation process (max 1 pages)
   n. Appendices (to include copies of all tools, list of enumerators, survey timeline including all KII and FGD participants and discussion transcripts (as many pages as necessary - please reference the annexes in the report, but include them in a zip file as separate documents

6. DOCUMENTS TO BE SUBMITTED BY THE CONSULTANT
   The consultant should submit a proposal comprising of the following;

7. A technical proposal, which indicates how the consultant is going to undertake the activities highlighted in the TOR, with initial indication of the enumerators needed and the timeframe.

8. A two-page CV with up to key personnel for the consultancy.

9. Copies of the proposed data collection tools, where these are not provided by World Vision (WV may provide these for parts of the evaluation to ensure consistency with the baseline and the Mid Term Evaluation).

10. A two-page capability statement detailing the consultant’s ability to deliver a quality evaluation report within the given timeframe.

11. A financial budget with explanation about the line items.

12. A brief outline of at least 3 previous engagements of a similar nature showing how the assignments were similar to this one and what the outcomes were. Include one reference for each assignment and a sample of previous evaluation reports undertaken by the consultant.

13. Any appendices the consultant sees as relevant to his/her proposal.

14. CONSULTANTS’ QUALIFICATIONS
    The consultant must have undertaken similar works, ideally in the country the project has been implemented in, in the last four years. They should:
    • Have excellent team leading skills, with the ability to work with a varied team.
    • Be a well grounded social scientist, with excellent skills in research, monitoring and evaluation of Child Protection projects, and specific knowledge of standards and legal requirements.
    • Have skills/experience in measuring Child Protection indicators, including perceptions/attitudes.
    • Have a good understanding of the country, its context and the impact this may have on the working environment.
    • Hold a minimum educational qualification equivalent to a Master Degree, in a relevant qualification and good numerical/statistical knowledge.
    • Demonstrate proven experience in conducting participatory qualitative and quantitative evaluation studies with superior analytical skills.
    • Have excellent written and spoken English.
    • Have excellent report writing skills.
    • Have a good knowledge of windows environment and statistical packages.

15. CHILD PROTECTION & CONFIDENTALITY
    The external evaluator, along with all enumerators will be required to sign and follow WV Somalia Child Protection protocols. All data is to remain confidential and is not to be shared with third parties.

Applications from qualified firms/individuals should be submitted by 12th February 2016 to somo_supplychain@wvi.org. If you don’t hear back from us by 1st March 2016, kindly be informed that your bid was not successful.

Applications from qualified firms/individuals should be submitted by 12th February 2016 to somo_supplychain@wvi.org. If you don’t hear back from us by 1st March 2016, kindly be informed that your bid was not successful.