Lead Evaluator/Company for Final Evaluation of EIDHR Action
Empowered Youth for Mutual Understanding and Respect and Increased Tolerance
Myanmar and the Philippines
About People in Need
People in Need (PIN) an international, non-profit organization, providing humanitarian and development assistance around the world.
In Myanmar, People in Need started to work in 2002, when it launched the financial assistance to civil society groups and independent media. After 2008, PIN provided humanitarian and relief aid to people affected by typhoon Nargis. Since 2012, PIN has been operating directly from Myanmar, our programs focuses primarily on knowledge transfer, capacity building and support of local initiatives in remote areas. Through these activities, communities are able to find solutions to problems, alleviate tensions in a non-violent way and secure harmony. In addition, we are working in areas affected by armed conflicts in Rakhine State and in Kachin State providing humanitarian assistance. In the Philippines, PIN has been present since its recovery support after Typhoon Haiyan/ Yolanda. PIN works in E. Samar on sustainable livelihood resilience, N. Samar on renewable energy, and in Northern Mindanao on peacebuilding and social cohesion. Its overall objective is to contribute to the country’s sustainable development, with a specific attention to women, youth, and marginalized communities.
About the Project funded by EIDHR
Funded by the European Instrument (EIDHR), People in Need, together with 2 local partner organizations, has implemented a 3-year project ’Empowered Youth for Mutual Understanding and Respect and Increased Tolerance‘ scheduled to conclude in February 2022. The overall objective of the project is to enhance mutual understanding and respect between individuals of different faiths (or none), contributing to inclusive communities and societies accepting diversity and capable of addressing potential conflicts in a peaceful manner. The action was designed, implemented and monitored by these 3 organisations and focused on Mindanao in the Philippines and Mon, Kayin and Rakhine States in Myanmar.
- Implementation Period: December 2019 to November 2021 (for Philippines), February 2022 (for Myanmar)
- Overall Objective: To enhance mutual understanding and respect between individuals of different faiths (or none), contributing to inclusive communities and societies accepting diversity and capable of addressing potential conflicts in a peaceful manner.
- Direct beneficiaries / Target Groups:
- Myanmar: At least 12 CSOs/CBOs, 180 youth community leaders, 30 religious leaders and 1200 community members (e.g. parents, children, teachers, traditional leaders, youth, etc.), 15 youth citizen journalists
- Philippines: In the Philippines, at least 8 CSOs/CBOs, 120 youth community leaders, 20 religious leaders and 800 community members (parents, children, teachers, traditional leaders, youth, etc.), 15 youth citizen journalists.
- Implementation Areas:
- Myanmar: Kayin State, Mon State, and Rakhine State
- Philippines: Greater Iligan city and its coastal area, Munai in Lanao del Norte, Marawi City and Butig in Lanao del Sur province.
- Key Activities:
- Project advisory group meetings;
- Capacity building of youth community leaders, including creation/adaptation of the training curricula;
- Community-sharing sessions;
- Supporting community building projects through sub-grant provision to working groups;
- Selection of CSOs and their capacity gap analysis;
- Tailored capacity building and sub-grants to CSOs for tolerance-promoting activities;
- Training of trainers for youth CSOs;
- Provision of mental health and psychosocial support training and direct treatment, support to CSOs with appropriate security management capacity building and sub-grants to respond to community needs;
- Closure forum events to compile lessons learned;
Objective and Scope of the Evaluation
The evaluation will aim to provide assessment of achievement of project objectives, make judgement on how intended or unintended, positive or negative changes came about; levels of attribution and participation of the target groups. The evaluation will provide lessons and recommendations that will assist implementing partners and other stakeholders to enhance the impact of their future interventions. The Development Assistance Criteria (DAC) of Relevance, Effectiveness, Efficiency, Impact, Coherence and Sustainability will be used.
- Evaluate to what extent the project has met its goals based on the objectives in the project proposal/logical framework.
- Assess the added value of the project to the peacebuilding intervention and positive impact to communities.
- Identify and assess key lessons learned, challenges and draw recommendations for future programming
Geographical scope: Myanmar: Yangon, Kayin State, Mon State, and Rakhine State, Philippines: Mindanao, Manila
Period under review: 1 December 2018 – 30 November 2021 (Philippines), 1 December 2018 – 28 February 2022 (Myanmar)
Key final evaluation questions
The Consultant will be responsible for developing the evaluation design and methodology in order to meet the evaluation’s goal and objectives. Details about the approach and the data collection methods to undertake this task should be included in the bid. The evaluation is expected to apply qualitative methods of research – semi structured interviews, focus group discussions, desk research of related secondary data including project and the program documentation. The methodology is subject to discussion with PIN. The work to be carried out by the Consultant will be based on the following six criteria:
- Was the program designed in a way to meet the needs of the target groups specifically of youth and community members, including in the changing context of COVID-19 pandemic and political developments?
- How relevant is the project to country context? (Myanmar, Philippines)
- To what extend did the project activities contribute to reaching the outcomes?
- To assess to which extent the project contributed to the EIDHR goals?
- To what extent have the intended objectives been achieved? Especially:
- To what extent were each of the projects’ objectives achieved?
- How properly was the project executed in terms of quality and timeliness?
- What were the major factors influencing the achievement or non-achievement of the objectives?
Efficiency (sound management and value for money):
- To what extent were the financial and human resources used economically and efficiently?
- Were the management mechanisms proving to be appropriate to achieve planned outputs and contribute to outcomes?
- How were the project resources used to achieve results of the desired quantity and quality?
- What was the capacity of the project management team to respond to challenges and needs?
- Was the management, coordination and monitoring of the project efficient and appropriate?
- To what extent were the net benefits of the intervention continue, or are likely to continue?
- What were the major factors that influenced the achievement or non-achievement of sustainability of the project?
- Is there something under control of PIN that could have been done differently to achieve higher sustainability?
- What real difference has project made to target groups (intended or unintended, positive or negative)?
- What can be observed as the most significant changes due to the project?
- What could be done to enhance the sustainability of project results?
- How compatible is the intervention with other interventions in the Philippines/Myanmar, and in peacebuilding sector?
- What has been the impact of the project on youth leaders, local networks and community groups?
- Are there changes in perception or behaviour of community members or clients of CSO/CBO projects (such as observation or experience of decreased fear, improved tolerance, less discrimination)?
- Are there any other unintended, positive or negative effects or impacts of the project?
PIN will require specific and data-supported answers to each of the agreed evaluation questions or strong justification for why the data could not be obtained. Justification of data unavailability must be communicated by the consultant without any delay as soon as it becomes apparent and approved by PIN.
- Projects‘ logical framework and description of action, including its amendments/revisions
- Baseline assessment
- Project and partners‘ reports
- ROM report
- Training Reports
Field Data Collection
- Key informant interviews with project team members, partners and target CSOs
- Focus Groups Discussions with project beneficiary youth
- Most Significant Change, Outcome Harvesting, or similar participatory qualitative approaches
- Surveys (for the Philippines)
- Semi-structured interviews (for KIIs)
- FGD Guide
The data collection process is in the responsibility of the consultant, however, PIN will oversee and follow up on the data collection process, and the project partners will help facilitate communication with the project stakeholders and beneficiaries. Data collection will take place in both Myanmar and the Philippines; the modality of data collection will also depend on the health situation in both countries in relation to COVID-19, and the political context.
- Desk review of project documents
- Development of methodology to be used for conducting evaluation, including data collection tools
- Data collection, including interviews with project staff, partners, and other relevant stakeholders
- Data analysis and presentation of preliminary findings
- Inception Report, including presentation of main findings
- Preparation of final evaluation report (maximum of 25 pages excluding annexes and executive summary)
Milestones and Expected Deliverables (tbc)
Methodology Design/tools Complete 22 Oct 2021
Data Collection Complete 5 Nov 2021 20 Jan 2022
Presentation of preliminary findings to the team 5 Nov 2021 20 Jan 2022
Inception Report 22 Nov 2021 4 Feb 2022
Feedback from PIN 26 Nov 2021 8 Feb 2022
Final Report Due 15 Feb 2022
Final Evaluation Report (max. 25 pages excluding annexes)
The Final Evaluation report should include (but is not limited to) the following:
Executive Summary (maximum 3 pages)
Learning and Good Practices
Annexes (including evaluation tools)
Maximum 33 days, including writing the Final Report.
Preparatory phase: 10 days
- Desk review
- Evaluation Design (methodology and instruments)
Field research: 12 days
- Meetings with PIN team and partners
- Data Collection
- Presentation of preliminary findings
Data analysis and draft report: 8 days
Report writing: 3 days
- Strong expertise and experience in peacebuilding and social cohesion programming, preferably in Southeast Asia context.
- Strong experience in applying participatory qualitative methods such as Most Significant Change, Outcome Harvesting, or similar approaches that entail working with communities to identify changes in complex situations where success is hard to define and measure.
- Good command of the languages used in these communities
- We are ideally looking for a lead consultant/company supported through in-country local consultants.
How to apply
Qualified candidates are requested to submit a cover letter and CV to firstname.lastname@example.org with subject line “Consultancy – Final Evaluation of EIDHR Action” by 18 October 2021. Please indicate your proposed approach and your ability, availability and daily rate to undertake the terms of reference above.
The applications will be considered on a rolling basis, so early applications are highly encouraged.
Only shortlisted candidates will be contacted.