Deadline to apply:May 22nd, 2015
Required: Final Evaluation Consultant
Mercy Corps is looking for a Consultant to carry out the Final
Evaluation of the Disaster Resilience Initiative for Vulnerable
Communities (DRIVE-C) programme. Please find below the Scope of
Work. If you are interested, please submit your cover letter,
CV with relevant experiences and sample of previous work
through the Mercy Corps website no later than COB on 22nd May
2015. Please indicate your daily rate to carry out the
evaluation and a rough idea on how you will achieve the
objective of the evaluation in your cover letter. Only
shortlisted candidate(s) will be contacted for interviews.
Program Description
Program Title: Disaster Resilience Initiative for Vulnerable
Communities (DRIVE-C)
Program Sites: DKI Jakarta, Banten, and West Java Provinces
Implementation Period: 1 January 2013 – 30 June 2015
Funded by: A private foundation
Program Goal
To improve the resilience of urban and peri-urban textile
worker communities vulnerable to hazards through strengthening
the capacity of local communities, local government, and
private sector actors to reduce risks.
Background
Mercy Corps considers disaster risk reduction programming of
particular strategic importance as Indonesia is a country that
faces extremes in quantity and severity of hazards and
disasters, including earthquakes, tsunamis, volcanoes,
landslides, flooding, droughts, and storm surges. Indonesia’s
challenge to manage urban and peri-urban development in
disaster prone areas is complex. Urban and peri-urban areas
generally are extensively built up, exposing the communities to
greater risk when a disaster happens. The complexity is both
economic and social, as well as the environmental
considerations which any area would be exposed to during and
following a disaster. In an attempt to mitigate some of this
risk, the community should have an understanding and the
capacity in terms of knowledge, skill, and organizational
ability to anticipate the disaster risk and thus reduce their
vulnerability to it. In addition, although the ultimate
responsibility should lie with the government, strong linkages
between the authorities and the vulnerable communities, civil
society and private sector are critical in supporting any DRR
approaches.
One of Mercy Corps Indonesia’s programs, Disaster Resilience
Initiative for Vulnerable Communities (DRIVE-C) Program that
focuses on the Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) and Climate Change
Adaptation (CCA), has been promoting disaster risk reduction to
textile workers community in urban and peri-urban areas.
DRIVE-C Program goal aims to improve resilience of the
population’s vulnerability to hazards through strengthening the
capacity of local communities, local government, and private
sector actors. The program has been designed to meet three
objectives over a 2-year implementation timeframe:
- Objective 1: Improve community capacity for practicing DRR
program
Performance of objective 1 depended on achievement of 3
outputs, including:
Output 1.1: Disaster preparedness team (DPT) establishment
Output 1.2: Vulnerability and capacity assessment conducted by
DPT
Output 1.3: Local action plan conducted by DPT
- Objective 2: Assist community in developing, prioritizing
and implementing relevant DRR pilot projects based on the local
action plan
Objective 2 will be achieved through implementation of3
outputs, including:
Output 2.1: Pilot project determination based on local action
plan
Output 2.2: Pilot project budget plan development
Output 2.3: Pilot project implementation
- Objective 3: Improve community capacity in accessing
external funding to support their action plan
Performance of objective 3 depended on achievement of 2
outputs, including:
Output 3.1: Partnership development between community,
government, and private sector
Output 3.2: Increased community capacity for dissemination of
DRR best practice document
Purpose of Final Evaluation
The program was designed to have two evaluations, mid-term and
final. . The mid-term evaluation was undertaken in August 2014
and program activities are now nearing completion. Thus the
final evaluation is now required to examine activities against
objectives and offer findings and recommendations for program
improvement (for a potential phase II). In addition, there is
additional value added from this evaluation as findings and
recommendations can also be applied to strategies and
approaches of other complimentary DRR projects to ensure
efficient, aligned and effective programming across the wider
Mercy Corps Indonesia portfolio.
Scope of Evaluation
The final evaluation will cover a set of key topics across the
DRIVE-C program namely relevance, effectiveness, and efficiency
as well as evaluating sustainability and impact as follows:
1 Relevance Assessment
- Assess the relevance of program approach and strategy in
producing outputs, outcomes, and achieving the goal to improve
resilience of urban and peri-urban community.
- Analyze whether the technical assistance and project’s
community based approach addresses the needs and demands of the
beneficiaries.
- Assess the effect and relevance of technical assistance
(capacity building through trainings and workshops) and of the
identified pilot projects for the community members.
1 Effectiveness Assessment
- Evaluate achievement of outputs based on set of program
indicators.
- Evaluate effectiveness of assessment to identify
appropriate target geographical area and beneficiary groups.
- Assess the performance of the project so far with
particular reference to qualitative and quantitative
achievements of outputs and targets as defined in the program
documents and work-plans.
1 Efficiency Assessment
- Identify factors and constraints which have affected the
efficiency of the logical sequence of program implementation
including technical, managerial and overall program approach.
In addition considering any unforeseen external factors.
- Assess the qualitative and quantitative aspects of
management and other inputs (such as equipment, monitoring and
review, technical assistance and budgetary inputs) employed by
the program for the achievement of outputs and targets.
- Assess the timeline and quality of the reporting followed
by the program.
1 Sustainability and Impact
- Assess preliminary indications whether the program results
are likely to be sustainable beyond the program implementation
period (both at the community and government level), and
provide recommendations for strengthening sustainability.
- Provide success stories and/or key achievements supported
by evidence and explanation..
- Provide recommendations for design, planning, and
implementation of future DRR program based on a summary of
relevance, effectiveness, and efficiency assessments.
- Evaluate the degree of actor representation and stakeholder
participation (including beneficiaries, government and private
sector) in the program implementation process with a view to
analyzing and anticipating continued support to ensure
sustainability of the program beyond the current phase.
Evaluation Methods
Key Focus
Key Questions
Data Collection Methods
Relevance Assessment
Application of resilience, disaster risk reduction, and
community development approaches evident through program
outcome, output, and key activities
1 How the program strategy and approach has been applied based
on the program design?
- In-depth interviews with program team
- Content analysis from program documents (program narrative,
agreement, log-frame, reports, and other relevant document)
- Field observation
- In-depth interview and/or focus group discussion (FGD) with
beneficiaries and other relevant stakeholders
1 What are contributions of the achieved outcomes and outputs
to disaster risk reduction at community level?
Effectiveness Assessment
Justification of substance/material utilization for each
activity to produce the output, including working area
selection criteria, training/workshop theme/topic, and
partnership development
1 How effective was the process to select working area and
targeted beneficiaries?
- Content analysis from program reports
- Field observation
- In-depth interview and/or focus group discussion (FGD) with
beneficiaries and other relevant stakeholders
1 How effective were the tools, techniques and approaches used
during the program – based on degree of participation and
demonstrated knowledge and skill in practicing DRR (such as
development and use of local action plan) 2 How have
communication and coordination among the program management
team, beneficiaries, and other stakeholders been conducted and
maintained?(Including information sharing, role division, and
satisfaction level among stakeholders)
Efficiency Assessment
Resource utilization for activity implementation
1 How efficient was resource management for implementing
program activities? (Including human resource, budget, assets,
scheduling)
- Content analysis from program reports
- In-depth interviews with program team
Sustainability and Impact
Findings, feedback, and suggestions for program
sustainability/replication in resilience and disaster risk
reduction based on best practices and lesson learned
1 What interesting stories can be gathered from the program
implementation process? 2 What changes have been encountered at
community level as a result of the project implementation? Can
the changes be identified as opportunities for sustainability?
3 How did engagement in DRIVE C program optimize the role of
each stakeholder in the program and how sustainable is that
engagement following the end of the current program?
- Content analysis from program reports
- In-depth interviews with program team
- In-depth interview and/or focus group discussion (FGD) with
beneficiaries and other relevant stakeholders
Evaluation Work-plan
The final evaluation would be start on June 1st, 2015 and
should be completed in 22 working days with detail as follows:
Activity & Deliverable
Consultant Days
Design and Planning
Discussion with Program Team & Desk Study
2 days
Tools designed and finalized
1 days
Implementation
Data collection & management
7 days
Analysis
3 days
Reporting
Report writing & editing
5 days
Draft Report submitted
1 days
Report Finalized
3 days
Total Days
22 days
Consultant Description
1 Consultant Objectives
DRIVE-C Program seeks a professional consultant to conduct the
final evaluation of the program independently. In addition to
measuring the program achievements, the final evaluation will
also highlight issues and challenges affecting effective and
efficient implementation of activities to achieve program
outputs, their contribution to program outcomes and
contribution to the program goal.
The consultant is responsible for:
1 Developing detailed work-plan and arranging every evaluation
activity independently. 2 Performing evaluation process based
on described evaluation methodology in SOW during the set
time-frame. 3 Reporting the evaluation results based on
mutually agreed format which meets Mercy Corps minimum
standards. 4 Consultant Qualifications
The consultant must have a strong record in conducting
evaluations, particularly in Disaster Risk Reduction and
Climate Change Adaptation issues. The consultant should have
excellent knowledge of monitoring and evaluation in theory and
practice. Good understanding of disaster risk reduction and of
participatory processes is required. The consultant should have
the following skills and competencies:
1 Demonstrable experience of producing high quality and
credible evaluations (we require sample or summary of previous
evaluation project). 2 Experience working with/evaluating NGO
work. 3 Experience knowledge in Disaster Risk Reduction,
(ideally in urban contexts), participatory processes, and
stakeholder engagement. 4 Ability to write concisely, analyze
data and information precisely, and present any key findings in
a well-defined and well-articulated structure. 5 Excellent
writing and presentation skills in English.
Deliverable
The consultant should develop a very clear and simple
evaluation report. The main content of the report should not
exceed 20 pages, including executive summary and
recommendations. Technical explanation should be comprised in
appendices, including lists of informants, data, and other
supporting information. The information should have relevance
to the report’s analysis, findings, and conclusion.
The consultant should explain the evaluation methodology
clearly and how the methodology is applied to the analysis
through relevant data and information. The assessment of
program achievements should be justified in a logical framework
and evidence in order to support the recommendations. The
recommendations should include details on how to implement in
the next program phase. The report is expected to be relevant
for internal discussion and learning and external discussion
with all stakeholders, including the beneficiaries and local
government.
The list of report contents are:
1 Cover page 2 List of Acronyms 3 Table of Contents 4 Executive
Summary 5 Brief of program description, Purpose of the
evaluation, and Evaluation Methodology 6 Synthesis and Result:
program relevance, efficiency, effectiveness, impact of program
activities, with recommendations for sustainability 7
Recommendation and Lessons learned: Assessment of attainment of
indicators, operational and developmental lessons 8 Annexes:
TOR, Work plan, List of people interviewed, List of documents
reviewed
Budget
Item
Quantity
Cost per Unit (€)
Total Costs (€)
Consultant Fee
22 days
300
6,600
International Flight
1 round trip
1,300
1,300
Expenses for Data Collection Activities
Per Diem for Lodging & Local Transport
(May 31 to June 15)
15 days
150
2,250
Per Diem for Meals
15 days
50
750
Meeting/Focus Group Discussion supplies
9 events
150
1,350
Communication
1 package
50
50
Office supplies (document copy & print)
1 unit
50
50
Total Costs
12,350
