Consultancy for GEAP Midterm Review (Eligible to National Consulting Firms Only) at Micro Enterprises Support Programme Trust (MESPT)

The overall objective of the Mid-term Review (MTR)

• The main purpose of this MTR will be to assess the extent to which the programme has achieved anticipated results to be attained by the end of the programme. It will also provide the programme team and key stakeholders an opportunity to reflect on what is working, what is not working; significant factors affecting the programme (both positively & negatively) and the changes that needs to be made onto the implementation arrangements and approaches used in programme successfully delivery of anticipated results. In addition, document learning will enable the team to improve internal processes, strategies and approaches for effective programme implementation and future programming for the organization.

Scope of MTR

• The MTR will cover all aspects of programme design, implementation, and management.

Programme indicators to be assessed.

• Primarily the MTR will seek to obtain data and information on all programme indicators stipulated in the programme log frame. Both quantitative and qualitative data will be collected, analysed, and presented in response to the programme indicators and the evaluation questions.

Specific tasks to be undertaken.

• Review of the relevant documents related to the programme.
• Prepare an inception report which will include a detailed methodology, sampling approach, data collection tools and a work schedule with clear timelines and budgets.
• Recruitment and training enumerators on the data collection process and assessment tools including use of handheld devices in areas where they will be needed.
• Coordinate actual data collection process which will mainly involve interviews with programme staff, beneficiaries and key partners.
• Coordinate actual data collection process including conducting spot checks to ensure the enumerators are adequately capturing the right data/info needed.
• Data Analysis, presentation and report writing while ensuring data quality is upheld.
• Review of draft report by programme management team.
• Presenting the key findings and recommendations to staff and stakeholders
• Share/ submit the finalized report including the data analytics.
• Update the programmes result framework.

Key evaluation questions include but not limited to: -

Relevance

• Are GEAP activities and outputs consistent with programme outcome and overall intended objective on accelerated decent job creation and improved competitiveness of agricultural value chains?
• Does the programme ‘intervention logic’ still hold true for the four output areas? Does the theory of change and result framework reflect reality? Are there changes that need to be made on the impact pathways and assumptions in the result framework?
• Are GEAP interventions in line with the needs and priorities of the beneficiaries in the targeted agri-value chains and counties? (i.e., smallholder farmers, Farmer organization and Agri-enterprises?
• To what extend are GEAP interventions coherent with ongoing Government development priorities and initiatives in the agricultural sector at the local, county, national and regional levels?

Effectiveness

• To what extent has GEAP met its set objectives? Are the programme objectives likely to be fully achieved in the remaining programme implementation phase?
• Is the programme on track to meet set targets per specific output area and the overall objective? Are there any major ‘red flags’ at this stage that need to be tackle for the programme to be successfully delivered?
• Are the strategies and approaches adopted by the GEAP the most realistic, appropriate and adequate for delivery of programme outputs and outcome?
• Are the partnerships with County Governments and private sectors players appropriate and effective for programme implementation?

Efficiency

• To what extent are GEAP interventions implemented within scheduled timelines and planned cost?
• Are GEAP activities and approaches the most cost effective compared to other available options?
• What parts of the programme are working well? What strategies and approaches are working well that can be enhanced and scaled up?
• What parts of the programme are NOT working well? What strategies and approaches are NOT working well? And what needs to be improved?
• To what extent do the programme structures provide for efficient implementation and monitoring of programme activities and outputs?
• Has there been any changes in the context that GEAP has been operating in since the beginning? How have any of these changes affected (positively/negatively) GEAP achievements?

Impact

• What significant changes (positive / negative) have been experienced by the target beneficiaries as a result of GEAP interventions?
• Are there unintended results (positive / negative) arising from GEAP interventions?
• What are the major factors influencing achievements and non-achievement of programme results? Are the programme indicators adequate to track and measure programme results at all levels?
• Has there been observable changes in addressing cross cutting issues including changes in participation of women and youth in value chain development, adoption of Agri- technology and innovative solutions, uptake of climate Smart Solution etc.

Sustainability

• To what extent is the overall GEAP management systems, procedures & structures in place, well aligned for effective programme implementation? Do any of the systems, procedures, roles, responsibilities etc in the programme need to be clarified, reviewed, or re-communicated?
• Will the structures, networks and partnerships established by GEAP lead to sustainability of programme impacts?
• What incentive and /or motivating factors has GEAP put in place to promote sustainability and scaling up programme results across the target groups?
• What are the key recommendations that have arisen out of this review, if implemented will improve programme implementation in the remaining period?
• What are the key recommendations that have arisen out of this review that, if implemented will improve operations, management, and sustainability of the programme interventions?

MTR Methodology

• This assignment will adopt the OECD/DAC criteria in assessing the relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, impact, and sustainability of the programme as well as provide recommendation based on the key evaluation questions. The review process will embrace a highly consultative and participatory approach facilitated by an external consultant. In overall the review will utilize a blend of both quantitative and qualitative methods. The key data collection methods will include: - Document/ existing literature reviews, use of semi/ structured questionnaires, Focus Group Discussions, direct observations, as well as Key Informant Interviews with target beneficiaries and stakeholders. A detailed methodology / approaches to be used in the review will be designed by the consultant in consultation with the MEAL Manager and Programme Manager.

Expected Deliverables

The firm will provide the following deliverables: -

Inception Report:

• An inception report outlining the approach and work plan to be used in the evaluation. This report will be 10 to 15 pages in length and will propose the methods, source of information and procedures to be used for data collection. It will also include a proposed timeline of activities and submission of deliverables. The desk study report will propose initial lines of inquiry about the joint programme this report will be used as an initial point of agreement and understanding between the consultancy team and the MESPT MEAL manager.

Draft Final Report

• The draft final report will follow the same format as the final report (described in the next paragraph) and will be maximum of 40- 50 pages in length.

Final Evaluation Report

• The final report should be produced according to the DANIDA/MESPT evaluation guidelines and reflecting the key evaluation questions. The maximum length of the final report should be 40-50 pages in length. It will also contain an executive summary of no more than five pages that includes a brief description of the joint programme, its context and current situation, the purpose of the evaluation, its methodology and its major findingd and where necessary include photographs, verbatims, and case studies demonstrating evidence of the findings, conclusions, and recommendations. The final report will be signed by the MEAL Manager and Programme Manager.
• The firm is required to append the following items: - Terms of Reference, Data collection instruments, List of meetings/consultations attended, List of persons or organisations interviewed, List of documents/publications reviewed and cited, photo gallery of impacts documented and Updated result framework.

Datasets/ data analysis framework/ field reports

• The firm will be required to submit all the data set including the data analytics and visualizations for quantitative data and a full and final typed data set for qualitative data collected.

Administration and logistical arrangements

• The firm will report to MEAL Manager and will work closely with programme staff and Programme Manager. The MTR will be carried out with logistical support and the services of the contracted consultancy firm.

Qualifications and competencies of consultancy Firm

The lead consultant should have at least the following qualifications:

An advanced university degree (preferably master’s degree) in applied statistics, Monitoring & Evaluation, Agricultural Economics, Agri-business, Agricultural Education and Extension, Development studies, programme management and/or other related social sciences.

• A minimum of 10 years of professional experience specifically in evaluating programmes in Market Systems Development, value chain development, integrated Food Security and Sustainable Agriculture for international development initiatives preferably in Africa.
• Demonstrated expertise and capability in assessment of small and medium scale enterprise development, regional private sector development, employment creation, related national policies, and knowledge of government operational framework.
• Demonstrated experience in evaluation of green technology projects-climate smart solutions.
• Demonstrated experience in measuring projects promoting access to micro credit among the MSMEs.
• Proven experience with logical framework approaches and other strategic planning approaches, M&E methods, and approaches (including quantitative, qualitative, and participatory), information analysis and report writing.
• Knowledge and expertise in evaluating programmes using OECD/DAC guidelines.
• Knowledge and experience of the DANIDA funded programme will be an added advantage.
• Excellent communication and interview skills.
• Excellent English report writing skills.
• Demonstrated ability to deliver quality results within strict deadlines.

Associate consultant(s) should have the following qualifications:

• An advanced university degree (preferably master’s degree) in applied statistics, Monitoring & Evaluation, Agricultural Economics, Agri-business, Agricultural Education and Extension, Development studies, programme management and/or other related social sciences.
• A minimum of 7 years of professional experience, specifically in the area of monitoring and evaluation of international development initiatives focusing on Market Systems Development, value chain development, integrated Food Security and Sustainable Agriculture.
• A minimum of 5 years of professional experience specifically in evaluating development projects/programmes in the employment area, small-medium scale enterprise development or related areas of work, preferably in Africa.
• A track record of conducting various types of evaluations, including process, outcome, and impact evaluations in Kenya.
• Demonstrated experience/engagement in agriculture Value Chain development projects working with farmer groups.
• Demonstrated experience in evaluation of green technology projects-climate smart solutions.
• Demonstrated experience in measuring projects promoting access to micro credit among the MSMEs.
• Understanding of the DAC/OECD standards and evaluation guidelines.
• Excellent communication, interview and report writing skills.
• Demonstrated ability to deliver quality results within strict deadlines.