Consultancy: Integrated Emergency Food Security Vulnerability And Livelihoods (Efs-Vl), Water, Sanitation, And Hygiene Promotion (Wash), Winterisation And Protection Response For Refugees Fleeing Syria, Living In Lebanon

1. BACKGROUND:The present conflict in Syria, now in its third year, has led to large scale population displacement including an estimated 6.5 million internally displaced persons (IDPs) within the borders of Syria and an estimated 2.5 million Persons of Concern (refugees registered with UNHCR or pending registration) 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 900,000 (as of the last of week of February 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 1.2 million. During the first eighteen months of refugee movement into Lebanon, most refugees (both native-Syrian and Palestinian Refugees from Syria) settled in the northern and central regions of Lebanon. The combined result has been that the population from Syria in Lebanon is thought to have increased five-fold since the start of the conflict and as of December 2013, equates to approximately 25% of the population of Lebanon.Refugee families were proving to be an increased burden on host families, often the poorest in Lebanon, reducing space available to Lebanese families, increasing household expenditures on food and non-food items and minimising the space left to allow for segregation between the sexes. Rent prices have also increased as has competition for unskilled labour opportunities, thus driving wages further down. Palestinian families are especially vulnerable, and are offered more limited employment opportunities under Lebanese law than their Syrian counterparts.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:This evaluation covers two consecutively implemented projects (Activation I and Activation II) funded by the Government of Australia (DFAT) through Oxfam Australia (OAU) and the Humanitarian Partnership Agreement.2Activation I targeted 3,750 vulnerable newly arrived households, and Activation II targeted 1,493 households. In both projects, the targeted refugees are either awaiting UNHCR or UNRWA registration or had not been benefitting from assistance in Lebanon.Three of Oxfam’s project partners in Lebanon were the implementing partners for both projects. Najdeh Association, Federation of Zgharta Municipalities and Jadawel Al Kheir (JAK) are well embedded within the communities in which they work. Najdeh Association works with Palestinian refugees in the Palestinian refugee settlements and focuses on refugee women, the Federation of Zgharta municipalities manages local services for those residing in local communities under the jurisdiction of the Federation, and JAK implements humanitarian programs including in EFS-VL (Emergency Food Security and Vulnerable Livelihoods), NFI (Non Food Items) distribution, WASH (Water, Sanitation and Hygiene Promotion), psycho-social support for children, and public health awareness.3. EXPECTED RESULTS OF THE PROJECTS:Activation I is expected to have achieved the following results:Result 1: New arrivals or those awaiting registration and assistance have access to food during 6 months, starting May 2013;Indicator: Within six months, 18,750 individuals will have access to food for one monthIndicator: At least 80% of targeted households report an increased access to food.Result 2: New arrivals or those awaiting registration and assistance will have access to hygiene materials in Tripoli + 5 areas during 6 months, starting from May 2013;Indicator: Within six months, 18,750 of men, women and children have access to hygiene materialsIndicator: At least 80% of targeted beneficiaries report voucher value is sufficient for one month of hygiene needs.Result 3: New arrivals or those awaiting registration and assistance have access to information about refugee registration, basic and specialist services during 6 months, starting May 2013;Indicator: Within 6 months, at least 50% of targeted beneficiaries receive information about basic and specialist servicesIndicator: Within 6 months, 75% of those who approach project staff for assistance are referred to a relevant service provider.Activation II is expected to achieve the following results (this project is still operational as of end of February 2014)1:Result 1: To protect 1,493 vulnerable households from adverse effect of winter on their health, safety and wellbeing during winter season 2013-2014 in Tripoli + 5 areas;Indicator: At least 90% of targeted HHs express their satisfaction with quality and quantity of 'start-up' winterization package.Results 2: Refugees in Triploi+5 areas are better organized into collectives for information access, (self) referrals and community level actions to claim their rights and entitlements (1,140 households in total)Indicator: Within 6 months, 75% of targeted refugee population report that they have access to information about services availableIndicator: Within 6 months, service providers have acted upon 50% of referrals by protection committees.4. OBJECTIVES AND TIMING OF THE END OF PROJECT EVALUATION:As this is a summative evaluation, its objective is to assess the extent to which both projects have delivered against their expected results, especially considering the key questions that are to be addressed under section 5 below.1 The activities in Activation II could change and will need to be factored into the evaluation. This will be done with the selected evaluation through briefings.3Specific Objectives: To assess the level/degree of quantitative and qualitative achievements of both projects against their expected results; To assess the design, planning, delivery and management of the projects by Oxfam and its partners in accordance with Oxfam Programme Standards, Minimum Standards in Emergencies and Gender in Emergencies Guidelines and all process modalities as stated in the original proposals, in light of their results; To identify and assess key internal and external factors (positive and negative) that have contributed, affected, or impeded the achievements; To assess how both projects have impacted upon the protection of the target and affected population, addressed women’s needs and contributed to a reduction of vulnerability; To assess the criteria used in beneficiary selection and whether beneficiaries were informed of these criteria; To assess how beneficiary selection had an impact on the overall outcome of the project; To assess the relevance of the Exit Strategy and consistency with the Do No Harm principle; To assess whether the lessons from the first project then fed into the second project; To draw key lessons and learning from the projects and make recommendations on how the projects can be adapted and improved (if any).The findings and lessons learned from this evaluation will help inform Oxfam’s formulation and design of future projects that will benefit the refugees of the Syria Crisis.5. KEY QUESTIONS TO BE ADDRESSED IN THE EVALUATION:The following provides a guide to the questions to be addressed by this evaluation:Relevance: Have Oxfam and partners selected relevant operational areas for their work? Have Oxfam and partners targeted the most vulnerable people, and women and children in particular? Are the activities carried out in the most appropriate and relevant manner, given the circumstances, and in line with the priorities of the refugees, and the projects’ logical frameworks? To what extent did the key changes, threats and opportunities that arose during the implementation influence and inform project implementation? Are the activities linked with the outputs and results of the project, as stated in the logical framework?Efficiency: Were the projects implemented based on the existing resources/capacity; e.g. partners 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 projects and have resources been spent judiciously? How cost effective were both interventions? Was the partners’ submission of reports timely and regular?Effectiveness: What have been the results of the activities planned in both projects? To what degree did both interventions contribute to addressing the WASH, food security, winterization, and protection needs of the targeted beneficiaries? What were the main challenges of the projects and how were they addressed? How well are the activities carried out in terms of the approach adopted, the timeliness of the interventions, their quality, and the level and quality of community participation (women in particular)? To what degree were the projects able to incorporate gender considerations? How effective were the strategies employed and implemented by the EFSL and protection teams? To what extent have the various cross-cutting issues, including those outlined in both original proposals, been mainstreamed into the projects, with particular emphasis on the protection of4vulnerable or marginalised groups such as women, children, those living with illness or disability, and the elderly? Generally, are the activities carried out in line with the original plans? (provide quantitative and qualitative analysis). If not, were the changes adequately discussed, documented, and justified?Monitoring, Evaluation, Accountability and Learning (MEAL): Was the baseline study and subsequent data collected appropriate to the proposed Logical Framework and relevant to the intervention? Were staff, volunteers, community members and other participants involved in the monitoring process trained and sufficiently competent to undertake their designated roles? Is the MEAL system taking into account women, people with disability and other vulnerable groups of the targeted communities? How well are the activities, outputs and outcomes monitored? What kinds of systems are developed and in practice? What systems and mechanism are in place to ensure accountability to the beneficiaries? What feedback and complaints mechanism exists? How were complaints handled in the project? What are the key lessons and learning that can be drawn from the project? How and to what extent were the MEAL findings used to inform decision-making and the improvement of project implementation?Partnership: What role have partnerships played in the project, and how might this be built upon in the future? To what extent have the partners in this project been involved in proposal development? Have the ways of working with partners and the support to partners been effective and did they contribute to the projects’ achievements? What kinds of systems are developed for mutual accountability between partners and Oxfam? How have beneficiaries been involved at different stages of the project? What are the key issues related to the technical and managerial capacities of Oxfam and the partners’ team for the effective implementation of the projects? 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.aspxWe 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:o Implementing partners;o Community leaders (if applicable) and representative bodies of the affected population;o Local authorities, regional Government, involved in coordination of humanitarian interventions of the affected population; Oxfam staff involved the implementation of both projects e.g. country and field teams; Staff of OAU involved in project monitoring.Time-frame: The evaluation is to be carried out sometime in April - May 2014 [exact dates are to be confirmed with the selected consultant(s)]Key activities and expected level of effort:Total expected level effort: 14 working days Review essential documents of the projects, including but not limited to the original project proposals, 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 (2 days);5 Develop a detailed Evaluation plan (which will to be endorsed by Oxfam) (1 day); Primary data collection (4 days) Data analysis and preparation of draft evaluation report (3 days); Workshop to share 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 daysReporting:The consultant will report directly to the 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 the design, implementation and monitoring of cash transfer/vouchers modalities, and social protection including the use of participatory quantitative and qualitative methods. Strong facilitation and 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);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.o The report should systematically answer the key questions posed;o It should fairly and clearly represent the views of the different actors/stakeholders;o It should give the conclusions of the evaluator, in a way that is clear and substantiated by the available evidence.9. BUDGET:The budget for this evaluation is approximately 10,000 USD including all expenses (consultant fees, travel, per-diem, transportation, interpretation during field trips, calls, etc.).Payment will be done in two instalments: 25% upon contract signature and 75% upon approval of the final report 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 MTR 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…. 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 all6final evaluations. The Policy is available at this link: http://www.oxfam.org/sites/www.oxfam.org/files/oxfam-program-evaluation…. 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 in cash/voucher transfer programming or other relevant areas.Please submit the EOI and other documents (as mentioned in 13 above) by Friday March 21st, 2014 at 5:00 PM Lebanon time lebanonjobs@oxfam.org.uk with “Evaluation of Food Security, WASH, Winterization and Protection Response funded by DFAT” in the subject line.All questions or clarifications of a technical nature are to be sent to Maria Ghazzaoui (Monitoring, Evaluation, Accountability and Learning Officer at Oxfam, Lebanon Response to the Syria Crisis, based in Beirut) at MGhazzaoui@oxfam.org.uk