Consultancy- Oxfam Gb

OXFAM PURPOSE: To work with others to find lasting solutions to poverty and suffering   TEAM PURPOSE: To act with poor people a force for change in addressing the causes of poverty, suffering and injustice and alleviating their symptoms. Project title: Integrated Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene Promotion (WASH), Winterisation and Protection Response for Refugees Fleeing Syria, Living in Lebanon   Donor: Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development Canada (DFATD)   Project locations: North Lebanon (in three areas of Tripoli +5: Tebbaneh, Kkobe, and Bcharreh)   Project duration: October 4th 2013 to September 30th 2014                 1. Background:   The present conflict in Syria, now in its fourth year, has led to large scale population displacement including an estimated 6.5 million internally displaced persons (IDPs) within the borders of Syria and more than 2.9 million Persons of Concern (refugees registered with UNHCR or pending registration) as of July 2014, across Syria’s borders to the wider region including Jordan, Lebanon, Turkey and Iraq.   In Lebanon, UNHCR estimates the combined number of registered and those awaiting registration exceeds 1,120,000 (as of the first of week of July 2014), while the Government of Lebanon (GoL) estimated the total number of people who have crossed the border as a result of the conflict is in excess of this number. The combined result has been that the population from Syria in Lebanon currently equates to approximately 30% of the population of Lebanon.   During the first eighteen months of refugee movement into Lebanon, most refugees (both Syrians and Palestinian Refugees from Syria) settled in the northern and central regions of Lebanon. The influx of refugee families was proving to be an increased burden on services and resources available to host communities, often the poorest in Lebanon. Rent prices have also increased as has competition for unskilled labour opportunities, thus driving wages further down.   In February 2013, a rapid needs assessment was conducted in Tripoli + 5 areas, which was followed by a gender vulnerability and capacity analysis with the purpose of assessing the gendered impact of the crisis on men, women, boys and girls. Program design has been formulated to effectively address the immediate and critical needs of refugees and the communities hosting them within the sectors that Oxfam has substantial humanitarian expertise in and can add value to the overall response.   2. Target Group:   DFATD-IHA funding targeted 1,250 households (6,250 people), including Syrian Syrian (SS) refugees and 15% of the most vulnerable Lebanese returnees and Lebanese host communities who directly benefited from the project, whereas an additional 3,000 HHs (15,000 persons) were targeted to benefit indirectly through solid waste management and hygiene promotion initiatives. 50% of direct beneficiaries are women, and approximately 3,000 children under 18 years of age. The project directly benefited refugee population residing predominantly in rented accommodation in three under-privileged areas of Tripoli (Tebbaneh, Kkobe, and Bacharreh). Out of 1,250 targeted households, almost 200 of these are host community households.   Oxfam is implementing this project through a local partner, Utopia, which has been operational in the targeted areas as an officially registered NGO since July 2012, working on conflict awareness and community mobilization.     3. EXPECTED RESULTS OF THE PROJECT:   Through WASH, protection and winterisation interventions the project aimed to achieve the following outcome: An estimated 6,250 people (1,250 households) have reduced vulnerability through improved access to water, sanitation, hygiene and protection services, as well as winterisation support. The following five results were identified to be attained by the end of the project:   Result 1: An estimated 6,250 people (1,250 households) have access to safe water through the provision of water trucking and the improvement of water storage and water supply points; Indicator: At least 80% of targeted families will have access to safe drinking water and sanitation facilities as per SPHERE standards by EoP Indicator: 80% of women and children expressed their satisfaction with WASH facilities and services by EoP Indicator:  At least 50% of the WASH volunteers are women from refugee communities by EoP.             Result 2: An estimated 6,250 people (1,250 households) have access to adequate sanitation through the construction/rehabilitation of facilities and distribution of sanitation kits; Indicator: 100% of the bathing facilities and latrines and water points will reflect the demands of women by EoP Indicator: 100% of toilets have inner locks to maintain privacy and dignity by EoP.   Result 3: An estimated 6,250 people (1,250 households) have improved hygiene through public health promotion and the distribution of NFI vouchers through an in-kind or voucher modality; Indicator: 80% targeted families are using hygiene material and expressed satisfaction in PDM by EoP Indicator: At least 80% of targeted families are aware and perform good hygiene practices by EoP.   Result 4: An estimated 2,500 people (500 households) have improved access to information and referral mechanisms for relevant assistance services; Indicator: At least 75% of refugees who receive information about services are referred to relevant service providers Indicator: At least 75% of the targeted beneficiaries are briefed on existing GBV referrals by EoP.   Results 5: An estimated 6,250 people (1,250 HHs) are prepared for winter through provision of winterization support; Indicator: At least 90% of targeted households report satisfaction with the winterization activities after five months of provision.   4. PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF EVALUATION   The DFATD-IHA funded project will end in September 2014 and an external summative evaluation is planned to take place after completion of all project activities. As this is a summative evaluation, its objective is to assess the extent to which the project has delivered against its expected results. The scope for examination is determined using OECD-DAC criteria for evaluating humanitarian action, and relevant criteria are associated with a number of key questions (under section 5) that are to be addressed and explored.   Specific Objectives: To assess the level/degree of quantitative and qualitative achievements of the project against its expected results; To assess the design, planning, delivery and management of the project by Oxfam and its partner in accordance with Oxfam Programme Standards, Minimum Standards in Emergencies and Gender in Emergencies Guidelines; To identify and assess key internal and external factors (positive and negative) that have contributed, affected, or impeded the achievements; To assess how the project has impacted upon the protection of the target and affected population and contributed to a reduction of factors of vulnerability; To assess how the project has addressed women’s needs and contributed to a reduction of gender specific factors of vulnerability, as identified in the gender vulnerability and capacity analysis; To draw key lessons and learning from the project that will help inform Oxfam’s formulation and design of future projects that will benefit the refugees of the Syria Crisis.   Primary users of the evaluation findings are Oxfam and Utopia programme management and staff, DFATD and other actors directly involved in the implementation of the project.   5. KEY QUESTIONS TO BE ADDRESSED IN THE EVALUATION:   The following provides a guide to the questions to be addressed by this evaluation:   Relevance and Appropriateness: Have Oxfam and its partner selected relevant operational areas for their work? Have Oxfam and its partner targeted the most vulnerable people, and women and children in particular? To what extent did the project respond to and meet the specific needs and priorities of targeted populations?  Are the activities carried out in the most appropriate and relevant manner, given the circumstances, and in line with the priorities of the refugees? To what extent did the key changes, threats and opportunities that arose during the implementation influence and inform project implementation? Are the activities in line with the outputs and results of the project, as stated in the logical framework? How and to what extent were the monitoring, evaluation findings used to inform decision-making and the improvement of project implementation?   Efficiency: Was the project implemented based on the best use of existing resources/capacity; e.g. its partner and other actors physical presence, skills? What key limitations exist on this front? What could Oxfam’s future projects do to increasingly develop and invest in existing resources? How has been the financial management of the project and have resources been spent judiciously? How cost effective was the intervention? What cost-effective alternatives could have been used?   Effectiveness: What have been the results of the activities planned in the project? To what degree did the intervention address the WASH, winterization, and protection needs of the targeted beneficiaries and contribute to reduced vulnerability?   What were the main challenges of the project and how well were they addressed? How were the beneficiaries selected and were the beneficiaries informed of the selection criteria?; What effect did beneficiary selection criteria have on the overall outcome of the project?; How effective were the strategies employed and implemented by the WASH, EFSL and protection teams? How well are the activities carried out in terms of the approach adopted, the timeliness of the intervention, its quality, and the level and quality of community participation (women in particular)? How and how well were gender considerations incorporated into the project? What were the effects of this? What unintended consequences (if any), whether positive or negative, has the intervention had on local populations? To what extent have the various cross-cutting issues, including those outlined in the original proposal, been mainstreamed into the project, with particular emphasis on the protection of vulnerable or marginalised groups such as women, children, those living with illness or disability, and the elderly? Generally, were the activities carried out in line with the original plans? If not, were the changes adequately discussed, documented, and justified? How well were the activities, outputs and outcomes monitored? What kinds of systems and tools are developed and in practice? Was project design consistent with the Do No Harm principle? What system and mechanism are in place to ensure accountability to the beneficiaries?     Partnership: What role has partnership played in the project, and how might this be built upon in the future? To what extent has the partner in this project been involved in proposal development? Have the ways of working with the partner and the support to the partner been effective and did they contribute to the project’s achievements? Were Oxfam and partners’ staff sufficiently trained and guided to carry out monitoring activities? What kinds of systems are developed for mutual accountability between partners and Oxfam? What are the key issues related to the technical and managerial capacities of Oxfam and the partner’s team for the effective implementation of the project? How effectively have these issues been addressed and what are the suggestions/recommendations to address these issues?   6. METHODOLOGY:   It is expected that the evaluation will be carried out in conformity with the ‘Evaluating Humanitarian Action using the OECD-DAC Criteria’ and evaluation best practices. The Evaluating Humanitarian Action using the OECD-DAC Criteria can be accessed through this link: http://www.alnap.org/resource/5253.aspx   The evaluation will use a mix of quantitative and qualitative methods, and draw on both primary and secondary data collection techniques. The evaluator is expected to develop a detailed methodology (to be endorsed by Oxfam).   We anticipate that this summative evaluation will be a participatory review and learning exercise. Thus, it requires the consultant(s) to be experienced in participatory approaches to learning and inquiry, and especially in seeking the views and perceptions of key stakeholders that include: Targeted beneficiaries Partners and actors directly involved in the project at different levels: Implementing partners; Community leaders (if applicable) and representative bodies of the affected population; Local authorities, regional Government, involved in coordination of humanitarian interventions of the affected population; Oxfam staff involved the implementation of the project e.g. country and field teams; Staff of Oxfam Quebec, who were involved in project monitoring.   Time-frame: The evaluation is to be carried out in August 2014 [exact dates are to be confirmed with the selected consultant(s)]   Key activities and expected level of effort:   Total expected level of effort: 17 working days   Review essential documents of the project, including but not limited to the original project proposal, interim or on-going internal reports, and evaluations and lessons learned exercises undertaken thus far and review the key questions suggested and if necessary propose adjustment (3 days); Develop a detailed Evaluation plan (to be endorsed by Oxfam) (1 day); Primary data collection (5 days); Data analysis and preparation of draft evaluation report (4 days); Workshop to share and validate the findings from the evaluation (1 day). Selected Oxfam and partner staff will participate in this workshop; Finalize the final evaluation report and send it to Oxfam (1 day). Oxfam will then prepare a management response to be annexed to the evaluation report; Additional time for travel (from the home location of the consultant to Lebanon and back) will be included based on the home location of the selected consultant(s). – (travel time is estimated at 2 days).   Reporting: The consultant will report directly to the Oxfam Monitoring, Evaluation, Accountability and Learning (MEAL) Officer in Lebanon and will closely work with other Oxfam staff in Lebanon.       7. EVALUATOR QUALIFICATIONS:   This summative project evaluation should be led by a person (or persons) with a minimum of 5 years experience in humanitarian interventions including demonstrated experience in monitoring and evaluation of, WASH programming, and/or cash transfer/voucher modalities, gender in emergencies programming, and social protection, including the use of participatory quantitative and qualitative methods. Strong facilitation and English writing skills are also required and a familiarity or direct experience working in Lebanon or in the Middle East broadly, and the working modalities of Oxfam, is preferred.   8. EXPECTED OUTPUTS:   a)     Draft evaluation report in English to be presented to Oxfam (no more than 30 pages excluding annexes, including executive summary not exceeding 2 pages); b)    Workshop to present the draft report (including the findings of the evaluation and the lessons learned), and to give feedback to Oxfam staff and partner agencies; c)     Submit a draft electronic copy of the final evaluation report within one week (7 days) of the workshop. Feedback from Oxfam will be provided within one (1) week after the submission of the draft report. The final report will be produced in one week (7 days) of submission of the comments. It will include changes/modifications, agreed between Oxfam in Lebanon and the consultant. The report should systematically answer the key questions posed; It should fairly and clearly represent the views of the different actors/stakeholders; It should give the conclusions of the evaluator, in a way that is clear and substantiated by the available evidence.   9. Payment:   Payment will be done in two instalments, 25% upon contract signature, and 75% upon Oxfam’s approval of the final evaluation report.   What costs to include in the offer: Consultants should include the following costs in their offer’s budget: daily rate, cost of international travel (home location of consultant to Beirut and back), per diems (please use the standard Oxfam rate of $27 per day), accommodation in Beirut, communication costs (SIM card and phone credit to be purchased in Lebanon, to be estimated at $100), visa costs (depending on nationality of consultant(s)), and miscellaneous costs.   What costs not to include in the offer: Oxfam will pay for and procure the following for the evaluation and therefore the following costs should NOT be included in the offer: pick-up/drop-off of consultant(s) from airport, travel inside Lebanon for data collection and meetings, interpretation services during meetings with beneficiaries/the partner, printing/photocopying costs, and hiring data collectors/enumerators.   Note that payment will be made based on the budget in the offer (not based on actual expenses incurred by the consultant). No receipts will be requested from the consultant towards the end of the evaluation, so estimates of costs in the offer should be as accurate as possible, as any extra costs incurred by the consultant during the conduct of the evaluation cannot be reimbursed by Oxfam.   10. Codes of Behaviour:   The evaluation process will be directed by Oxfam’s guidelines for the ethical conduct of evaluations and research, guiding the evaluation team 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…     11. Sharing and using findings:   The Oxfam International’s Policy on Program Evaluation requires Confederation members to act on the commitment to transparency by making public the Executive Summary and a Management Response to all final evaluations. The Policy is available at this link: http://www.oxfam.org/sites/www.oxfam.org/files/oxfam-program-evaluation…   12. Disclosure:   Although free to discuss with the authorities on anything relevant to the assignment, under the terms of reference, the consultant is not authorized to make any commitments on behalf of Oxfam. All data collected as part of this consultancy belongs to Oxfam and public dissemination of the data and evaluation products can only be done with the written consent of the Oxfam.   13. EXPRESSIONS OF INTEREST (EOI):   Oxfam invites EOI from organisations, or individuals, with the experience and skills described above. The EOI must include: 1. A cover letter of no more than 2 pages introducing the evaluator/organisation and how the skills and competencies described above are met, with concrete examples. Please also use this cover letter to indicate the consultants’ availability for the proposed period; 2. An outline of no more than 2 pages of the proposed process and key considerations including: a. Key considerations for this evaluation; b. Proposed outline methodology for this evaluation; 3. A CV for the evaluator, including 3 referees (with phone number and email address); 4. A one-page budget covering all major anticipated costs; 5. Two examples of reports from previous evaluations/reviews relevant to this consultancy