End-Term Evaluation: Community Flood Resilience Project, Kakuma at Danish Refugee Council

PURPOSE 

The primary objective of the evaluation is to provide quantitative assessment of achievement of the key programme indicators. Additionally, the evaluation is expected to: assess the relevance, efficiency, effectiveness, equity, impact and sustainability of the project, and generate lessons that will inform potential scaleup as well as use of promising resilience approaches and techniques in the wider context of Turkana County, other parts of Kenya and the region.

It is expected that the evaluation will respond to the following key questions:

Relevance: 

• Were the interventions chosen in line with local priorities and were they the most appropriate and relevant for building resilience, taking into account the operational environment and the overall context? 

Impact: 

• What were the intended and unintended, positive and negative, intermediate and long-term outcomes of the interventions?  
• How many people are more resilient as a result of the project? 
• What is the net dollar benefit per person reached by the project? (Cost benefit analysis)

Sustainability: 

• Which aspects/components of the interventions implemented have potential for long-term impact and sustainability beyond the project period? 
• Are skills gained/inputs provided likely to continue being used after the project closure? 

Effectiveness: 

• Did the project accomplish what it set out to achieve (output/outcome indicator targets set in results framework)? 
• What are key contributing factors affecting the achievement or non-achievement of the intended outcomes? 
• To what extent did the response contribute to reduction of future vulnerabilities to flood risks?

Efficiency:  

• Was the response timely, appropriate and cost effective?

Equity: 

• To what extent did the project benefit all individuals and groups fairly, particularly the most vulnerable and harder to reach as well as those with special needs?

KEY RESPONSIBILITIES 

Scope of consultancy 

The Consultant / Consultancy firm will undertake the evaluation in Kakuma Ward and surrounding areas where the Community Flood Resilience Project activities have been implemented. The evaluation will primarily target direct beneficiaries of the project but will include sampling of the indirect beneficiaries to provide indication of the extended coverage of the impact of the project. The assignment is expected to take 15 days starting from 27th June 2018.

The scope of work for this evaluation includes the following: 

• Review of secondary information (relevant existing reports/studies and previous flood resilience assessments etc.) and COFREP documents;  
• Develop an inception report detailing the process and methodologies to be employed to achieve the objective of this consultancy as stated above. It should include a detailed work plan for the assignment, and present the same to DRC for review, inputs and approval; 
• Design data collection methodology and tools guided by international evaluation standards, the project’s result framework and theory of change; 
• Pre-test and refine data collection tools in consultation with the COFREP Consortium Partners; 
• Carry out data collection, entry and analysis using the Cost Benefit Analysis (CBA) approach to calculate net dollar benefit per person and other relevant qualitative and quantitative measurements as per the project’s results framework and mandatory learning questions. 
• Prepare and present a draft evaluation report and lessons to DRC and the consortium members for review, comments and discussions.  
• Prepare the final evaluation report. The format of the report shall include the following: Executive Summary, Background Information: Brief on the project and context; Evaluation purpose and objectives; Methodology - Design, Sampling technique and Sample size; Findings: Analysis based on objectives and interpretation. Where possible include photos that support findings; Key accomplishments and summary of project assessment; Lessons learnt, good/promising practices and opportunities for improvement; Recommendations and Appendices; 
• Develop a learning brief based on a template to be provided by DRC; 
• Conduct a debrief meeting to reflect on findings, lessons and recommendations with key COFREP stakeholders; 
• Submit the final evaluation report to DRC on 2 CDs (soft copy of final report, raw and processed data files and reference documents).

Methodology 

The consultant is expected to use a hybrid evaluation approach / model for measuring community resilience combining both quantitative and qualitative methodologies with the Sustainable Livelihoods Approach (SLA) being primary.

The consultant is required to use the participatory approaches during primary data collection and to plan the work in a manner that will ensure sufficient time is spent in the field collecting data. The consultant and his/her auxiliary staff must take all reasonable steps to ensure that the evaluation is designed and conducted to respect and protect the rights and welfare of the people and communities involved and to ensure that the evaluation is technically accurate and reliable, is conducted in a transparent and impartial manner, and contributes to organizational learning and accountability.

Specifically, the Consultant will be expected to: 

a.) Provide an overview of the shocks and stresses experienced over the programme period and its impact on the interventions. Analyze contextual factors that contributed to vulnerabilities and coping capacities of host community and refugee households in the programme location.

b.) Assess the contribution of the programme, if any, to:  

• Enhanced resilience abilities, capitals or capacities of targeted communities in Kakuma to effects of recurrent floods and other key hazards. 
• Increased/unlocked livelihoods opportunities for flood-affected communities through large scale and micro-catchment infrastructure to harness and utilize flood water/ runoff for food production.  
• Enhanced flood risk mitigation through flood control infrastructure and environmental rehabilitation and protection.  
• Increased effectiveness of community-based disaster risk management structures in disseminating and promoting use of early warning information and implementation of community disaster risk reduction action plans. 

c.) Provide gender-disaggregated end line statistics for key programme indicators.

d.) Undertake robust cost benefit analysis for the resilience returns of the programme.

e.)Facilitate evidence-based documentation of lessons based on three broad Areas of Transformation and corresponding learning questions outlined below: 

Learning Questions by Area of Transformation 

AoT 1: Inclusive Decision-Making  

AoT 1.1 What did inclusive decision-making mean / look like in the programme’s context?

AoT 1.2 How did the project work with and benefit the most vulnerable? Did the project target or benefit women, children, people living with disabilities and other vulnerable groups? Were there differences in how the groups mentioned benefited? Why? What ways would the project have more specifically included or benefited marginalised groups?

AoT 1.5 Were there any gender constraints for inclusive decision-making? What actions were taken to address these and how successful were they?  

AoT 2: Partnerships

AoT 2.1 What did partnership (internal / external) mean to the programme?

AoT 2.4 What partnership opportunities have been explored by the programme? Were there any successful partnerships / how were they built? What worked and what did not work, especially in relation to incentives and barriers for different types of actors (private sector, local actors, academics, authorities, etc.)?

How were trade-offs between different priorities of different partners managed and what was learnt from this? What could be done differently next time? 

AoT 3: Resilience thinking

AoT 3.1 How did the project increase resilience? In what way is the project different from a ‘business as usual’ development initiative? What did the project enable participants to do differently? What evidence is there of whether it was beneficial, and over what timescale?

AoT 3.4 What shocks or stresses did the project face during implementation? What were the implications of these (on the project implementation and on the project goal)? With hindsight, to what extent could these have been predicted and planned for? What could be done differently next time?  

Facilitate a reflection session with key COFREP stakeholders to review and validate key findings and lessons from the evaluation.

KEY DELIVERABLES/OUTPUTS 

• Inception report 
• Soft copy of the final version of the Project End-Term Evaluation Report in two (2) CDs; 
• Study materials including soft copies of all tools and datasets both quantitative and qualitative (electronic and hard copies, as applicable) 
• List of respondents to be annexed to the report 
• 1 learning brief in the template provided by DRC (electronic)

REPORTING ARRANGEMENTS 

The DRC Head of Program is the overall in-charge of the consultancy. In Kakuma, the consultant will report to the Area Manager and work closely with the COFREP Coordinator. The review of all reports generated will be supervised and coordinated by the Monitoring and Evaluation Officer. The DRC Country Director will be responsible for the final sign off.

DURATION OF ASSIGNMENT 

The timeframe for this consultancy is 15 days, from the time the contract is signed. The selected consultant /consultancy firm must commit to accomplishing and delivering the consultancy, including all the deliverables not later than 31 July 2018.

EXPECTED PROFILE OF CONSULTANT

Qualification of the consultant;  

• Graduate degree in a relevant discipline including agriculture, environment / natural resources management, food security and livelihoods, development economics, agricultural economics, development studies, evaluation or other fields related to community resilience.  
• Working experience in resilience and livelihoods programming, especially on pastoral / nomadic livelihoods. 
• Minimum of 10 years demonstrable experience conducting similar consultancies for complex resilience programmes in ASAL areas.  
• At least 10 years of experience in undertaking resilience measurement with specific reference to cost benefit analysis.  
• Solid experience in planning and executing qualitative and quantitative studies, both experimental and non-experimental. 
• Excellent data presentation and visualization skills.  
• Excellent technical writing and analytical skills.

TERMS & CONDITIONS 

Applications must be in English  

The consultant shall not assign this contract or subcontract any portion of it without the DRC’s prior written consent. 

All documentation related to the assignment shall remain the sole and exclusive property of DRC and the consultant may be allowed to keep a copy.

GENERAL 

Commitments: DRC has a Humanitarian Accountability Framework, outlining its global accountability committments. All staff are required to contribute to the achievement of this framework (http://www.drc.dk/HAF.4265.0.html)

APPLICATION PROCESS 

Applications should be submitted to DRC with the subject line, Project End-Term Evaluation - Community Flood Resilience Project in Kakuma. All applicants must meet the minimum requirements described. The application package should include the following:  

1. A suitability statement including CVs of participating consultants with details of qualifications and experience 
2. Technical proposal that summarizes understanding of the TOR, methodology and tools to be used   
3. Work-plan clearly indicating the activity schedule 
4. Financial proposal providing cost estimates and consultancy fees  
5. Contacts of three organizations that have recently contracted you to carry out a similar assignment.

We only accept applications sent via our online-application form on www.drc.ngo under Vacancies. Applications should be sent no later than: 19th June, 2018.