Consultancy: Evaluation Of Oxfam Protection Programme In Lebanon

Terms of Reference Evaluation of Oxfam Protection Programme in Lebanon Programme lifespan From 2013 to February 2017 Geographical coverage Lebanon - Bekaa, North Lebanon and Palestinian camps Send application to lebanonjobs@oxfam.org.uk Deadline March 21st, 2017   Introduction Oxfam is seeking an external consultant to undertake an independent evaluation of the Protection programme implemented in Lebanon starting in 2013, and that is still ongoing to date. The programme has been funded by different donors, through various projects. The evaluation must be completed by mid April 2017. Oxfam’s Protection Programme Oxfam has been implementing a protection programme in Lebanon since the beginning of the Syria crisis response, in 2013. The main areas of coverage of the protection programme have been the Bekaa and North Lebanon, and the Palestinian camps across the country, in addition to representation and advocacy work done at the national level. The programme has been implemented both directly and in collaboration with national and local partner organisations, and has had a strong focus on community-based protection and on research. Since 2013 the programme has been funded by DFID, Irish Aid, GAC, DFAT (AusAid), ECHO, UNHCR, Stanley Thomas Johnson Foundation and Oxfam Appeal funding. The funding has been mostly organised in cycles of 12 months, with only few limited exceptions, as in the case of Stanley Thomas Johnson. The programme has now reached its fifth year and it is currently implemented in Bekaa, and in North Lebanon, as well as the Palestinian camps. The objective of the programme is to improve the safety of civilian population in the target areas through a multi-layered approach. Pillar 1: Community-based protection approach aimed at capacitating female and male community members to address threats and enhance their protection. This is achieved through a number of different activities, including: Capacity building of community members (including local authorities and CBOs) on protection Community identification of protection issues and risks, and measures to mitigate them (including use of cash assistance) Mapping and dissemination of information on referral services Pillar 2: Research activities and evidence gathering aimed at supporting advocacy positions for protection and at creating spaces for target population and national civil society to voice their priorities and solutions Protection monitoring and participatory protection researches Local and national level advocacy Pillar 3: Collaboration with other Oxfam programmes and with national organisations with a view to increase services and means for protection offered to the target population. Stakeholders The primary stakeholders for the evaluation report are the Oxfam country programme in Lebanon (with a particular focus on the Protection and MEAL teams, but also the WASH and livelihoods sectors for the elements of programme integration); and the Oxfam Global Protection team and GHT. Externally, at the country level, the evaluation report will be presented to and provide a platform for dialogue with programme partners and affected Communities consistent with Oxfam’s commitments under Core Humanitarian Standard 4.  Findings of the evaluation will also be shared with other NGO actors and partners in country including the Protection working group. The evaluation report will be made available on-line. Objectives of the Evaluation The primary objective of the evaluation is to provide an assessment of the overall effectiveness of the programme approach and of its’ individual components. The evaluation is expected to focus in particular on the community-based approaches that have been used across the various components of the programme, with the aim of informing the programme and respective approaches going forward. The evaluation process is expected to enrich our learning process, and to support strengthening of future programming by Oxfam and partners. The evaluation shall specifically seek to achieve the following: To assess the extent to which the programme has delivered against its objective and expected results, particularly with regard to community-based protection; Highlight programme successes and shortcomings (both at project-level theory of change and implementation levels) and identify significant factors that facilitated or impeded the achievement of the programme objective; To draw key lessons from the programme, and incorporate them in recommendations that will help inform the design and implementation of future interventions by Oxfam and partners.   The scope for examination is determined in line with Oxfam’s Evaluation policy, and relevant evaluation criteria (relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, impact and sustainability) are associated with a number of key questions that are to be addressed and explored. Evaluation Criteria and questions The evaluation questions to be addressed by this evaluation are expected to be further modified or refined in consultation with the consultant during the inception phase of the evaluation process. It is anticipated that the evaluation will address the specific questions set out below providing an evidence base for conclusions drawn and proposing recommendations for future action. The following questions should be addressed considering the relevant programme pillars: 1)      What overall evidence is there that the Protection programme objective of improving the safety of beneficiaries has been achieved, as outlined in the various project proposals and log frames? -          How are affected communities better positioned to independently, or with increased independence, address their own current protection needs? And how are they prepared to respond to future risks or crisis? -          How far did the programme positively contribute to improving the ability of affected communities to improve their safety through advocacy? -          Are there differences between communities, or among groups within the same communities? -          To which extent has the evidence-based advocacy contributed to strengthening Oxfam’s policy asks and advocacy work on protection issues? -          What internal and external factors have influenced the achievement of programme objectives? 2)      What have been the positive and negative, expected and unexpected changes that the project has contributed to for different target groups[1] and to what extent are these likely to be sustained? -          To what extent did the intervention respond to the needs and priorities of the people and communities it targeted? -          To what extent was the community-based approach relevant to the objectives of the programme? How do communities (women, men, girls and boys and other marginalised groups), partners and other stakeholders value the program outcomes? -          To what extent do targeted women and men have improved capability to accessing the needed services in safety, to self-refer or to request assistance to access necessary services? -          To what extent and how effectively has sustainability been considered in the project? and what evidence is there of the likelihood of sustainability of activities following the completion of the project? 3)      How effectively and appropriately have we worked with others and involved them in relevant stages through the process? -         How effective was Oxfam engagement with community facilitators and community groups throughout the project in supporting achievement of intended results? -         To what extent have organisations participating in or contributing to the programme engaged and developed a relation with targeted populations that contributed to increasing their ability to access services or protection? -         What has been the impact of the engagement and collaboration with a range of different organisations on the extent of the cooperation among those actors? -          What has been the impact (positive & negative) of Oxfam’s approach to partnership on project implementation and effectiveness of the responses (including project quality), and on mutual accountability and learning (including support to increasing partners’ capacity)? -         How effective was the integration of WASH and protection components? And how effective was the integration of cash or livelihoods and protection components? What factors supported and hindered this integration? 4)      How effectively and efficiently have our resources been used? -          Is there any evidence of the community-based approach contributing to increasing the efficiency of the programme? -          How effective and appropriate has been the development of in-house research and policy capacity? -          How effective and appropriate were the strategies and modalities employed and implemented by Oxfam and partners? Which strategies have proven to be more effective/influential to achieve the programme objectives? -          What factors have supported and hindered accountability to affected populations?   Cross-cutting 5)      How effectively has the programme integrated gender analysis (particularly with a view to GBV preventions) & mainstreaming actions and to what effect? 6)      To what extent and how has the programme integrated risk analysis and mitigation measures into planning and implementation? How was safe programming implemented? How were power dynamics reflected and taken into account? Deliverables It is expected that the timeframe and methodology will be shared with and discussed with the Protection programme team ahead of the start of the evaluation. Once that is agreed upon, the data gathering must be completed by the 20th April 2017 at the very latest. The consultant is expected to deliver: A draft evaluation report to be submitted within 10 days from the end of the data gathering; The final evaluation report within one week, following the date of receiving feedback. The report will include changes/modifications, agreed between Oxfam and the consultant. The final evaluation report shall systematically answer the key evaluation questions and cover the evaluation questions, fairly and clearly represent the views of different actors/ stakeholders, and give clear conclusions substantiated by the available evidence. The report should be of approximately 30 pages (excluding annexes), of publishable quality with a stand-alone executive summary of no more than 4 pages (in English). Main report sections are as follows (Details of the report outlines will be shared and discussed with the Supervisor upon contracting): Executive Summary Introduction Description of the methodology Evaluation Findings/answered questions Conclusion and lessons Learned Specific actionable recommendations for Oxfam and partners In addition, the report should contain the following annexes, as well as any other relevant material: initial and final Terms of Reference for the evaluation; itinerary and final timetable; list of events attended; list of persons interviewed; list of documents reviewed. Codes of Behaviour The evaluation process will be directed by Oxfam’s Code of Conduct and Oxfam’s guidelines for the ethical conduct of evaluations and research, guiding the evaluator(s) through careful consideration of the key ethical implications at every stage of the evaluation. These guidelines are available at this link: http://policy-practice.oxfam.org.uk/publications/undertaking-research-w…; In consideration of the sector in which the evaluation will take place, the evaluator(s) is also expected to operate in line with the ICRC Professional standards for protection work, available at this link: https://www.icrc.org/en/publication/0999-professional-standards-protect… Logistics and Reporting The evaluator will report to the Protection Coordinator, with engagement from the MEAL Coordinator Logistics within country will be arranged by Oxfam Field travel will be accompanied by an Oxfam Protection Officer and/or partner staff representatives Budget The proposed budget should include: Consultant fees International air travel (to/from Beirut), visa fees Food and drink during the stay Any other anticipated costs Oxfam will cover the costs for transport within Lebanon and hotel costs (not included in the above mentioned budget). The following table outlines the minimum number of days required for field activities, other than desk review (3 days), development of methodology (1 day), analysis and report writing (6 days). # Days required 1 day Meeting with Protection and MEAL coordinators for briefing, meeting with programme team members in Beirut Interviews with Oxfam protection policy and research staff 5 days Travel to Bekaa and meeting with staff in Bekaa, interviews with key staff Field visits and interviews with beneficiaries (2 municipalities per day) 3 days Travel to Tripoli and meeting with staff and partner for interviews Visit to selected locations and meetings with beneficiaries 3 day Meetings with partners and other relevant stakeholders 1 day Debriefing with Oxfam programme team on preliminary findings   The evaluation process is not expected to involve any primary data collection outside of the above field visits and meetings – that will include interviews and FGDs. Requirements Essential Advanced university degree or equivalent in Humanitarian/Development Studies, Social Sciences, and other related fields. At least three years of experience in conducting programme evaluations Strong experience in protection programmes implemented in displacement and refugee contexts Experience in conducting evaluations of community based programmes Strong analytical and research skills Desirable Experience of working and/or conducting evaluations within Lebanon Arabic language skills OTHER TERMS Notice of Non-Binding Solicitation. Oxfam reserves the right to reject any and all bids received in response to this solicitation, and is in no way bound to accept any proposal. We additionally reserve the right to negotiate the substance of the finalists’ proposals, as well as the option of accepting partial components of a proposal if appropriate. Quantities are estimates only at this time and will be subject to change. Confidentiality  All information provided as part of this solicitation is considered confidential. In the event that any information is inappropriately released, Oxfam will seek appropriate remedies as allowed. Proposals, discussions, and all information received in response to this solicitation will be held as strictly confidential, except as otherwise noted.Notification Oxfam shall notify the successful company that submitted the highest scoring proposal in writing and will invite for contract negotiations. Oxfam reserves the right to invite the second ranking company for parallel negotiationsRight to Final Negotiations Oxfam reserves the option to negotiate on the final costs, and final scope of work, and also reserves the option to limit or include third parties at Oxfam’s sole and full discretion in such negotiations.  Upon failure to reach agreement on the contents of the contract as stipulated in this document, Oxfam has the right to terminate the negotiations and invite the next-best rated company for negotiations.Communication All communication regarding this solicitation shall be directed to appropriate parties at Oxfam (as outlined in the ToR). Contacting third parties involved in the project, the review panel, or any other party may be considered a conflict of interest, and could result in disqualification of the proposal.Acceptance Award of a proposal does not imply acceptance of its terms and conditions. Oxfam reserves the option to negotiate on the final terms and conditions.   Applications Interested parties should send the following documents, by COB on the 21st March 2017. Please note that reviews will be made on a rolling basis. CVs of applicant(s) and a short statement outlining how you fit the criteria Two samples of a previous evaluation or research reports A budget, including all fees and costs Proposed timeline   Please note all proposals shall be assessed for value for money. Further details regarding the programme can be obtained from Valentina Bacchin at vbacchin@oxfam.org.uk.   [1] This includes Community Protection Structures, local authorities, and different groups within the wider population