Terms of Reference for Midterm Evaluation of the BMZ funded Project “Strengthening food security and local egg production in Bong County and the rural parts of Montserrado County, Liberia”, Reference Number LBR 1064-19 Project

Type of Assignment: Consultancy for Midterm Evaluation

Application deadline: October 8, 2021

Start of Assignment: October 18, 2021

• INTRODUCTION

Serving Humanity for Empowerment and Development (SHED) is a Liberian NGO working for just and resilient society, established in 2017 as a national NGO birthed out of Finn Church Aid Mission to Liberia. SHED focuses on improving the livelihoods of targeted communities households and residents (rights holders) through poultry farming and vegetable production. In the same vein, SHED operates a semi-commercial level farm that functions as a social enterprise that is committed to tackling local social problems, improving household and community nutritional intake, providing people with increased access to employment and improving their skills for self-employment, production, and contributing to an overall green economy. In order to achieve the above, SHED works closely with local duty bearers, the Ministry of Agriculture, other government agencies, and the private sectors through collaboration and partnership.

SHED is currently implementing the Federal Ministry of Economic Cooperation and Development (Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung BMZ), grant through Welthungerhilfe (WHH) funded project titled “Strengthening food security and local egg production in Bong County and the rural parts of Montserrado County, Liberia” for the period December 2019- December 2022. The thirty-seven month project seeks to contribute to reducing poverty and improving the diet of vulnerable households in the counties of Montserrado and Bong. It also aims at targeting women, youth and elderly people in rural communities to improve their economic and nutritional livelihoods through localized, commercial egg and vegetable production.

As the project has now reached the midpoint (December 2019 through August 2021) and in accordance with the requirements of the Grant Agreement, a mid-term evaluation is being commissioned to assess the project progress toward achieving its objectives. The study will identify lessons learnt and provide concrete recommendations for the refinement of the project approach, if necessary, and to inform subsequent implementation phases of the project.

About the Project

SHED is implementing eggs production project in Dennis Town, Low Cost Village, and neighbouring communities in Upper Montserrado County and vegetable and corn productions in Bong Mines, Fuamah District, Lower Bong County to empower 200 rural women in poultry production, 30 street vendors for the marketing of eggs, and 500 rural farmers in corn and vegetable productions for income generation. The vast majority of this direct target group is single mothers aged 31 to 50, who are in the care of households with 2-10 people.

The Objectives and Intermediary Outcomes/results of the Project are as follows:

2. Rational, Purpose and Priority Objectives of the Evaluation

The thirty-seven month project implementation period reached the midpoint in July 2021. Against this background, SHED is seeking an external consultant to conduct the midterm evaluation and to write a report on the evaluation’s findings. The main objective of this evaluation is to examine the extent to which the project has been able to achieve its set results through implementation of activities geared towards fostering the necessary change in the results areas. Furthermore, the evaluation is to appraise the overall planning, implementation and monitoring processes of the project in relation to the realization of the set objective, expected results and related impact. The evaluation process aims at critically and objectively reviewing and documenting achievements, challenges and lessons learnt and giving concrete recommendations for the strengthening of ongoing implementation. More precisely, to determine the extent to which key results and targets are being achieved and to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the project implementation.

The evaluation will consider the assessment of the relevance of objectives, the efficiency, the effectiveness, the impact, and the sustainability. The evaluation will assess whether the program has achieved the intended results, the sustainability mechanism in place while the project is ongoing, the need for and appropriateness of future related work, and the lessons learned as well as advancing relevant recommendations. The evaluation will report on results that are in line with the outputs and outcomes in the results framework.

3. Scope of the Evaluation and Evaluation Questions

The evaluation is intended to make an assessment, as systematic and objective as possible, of the above-mentioned project, its design, implementation and results. The aim is to determine the relevance and fulfillment of objectives, developmental efficiency, effectiveness, related impact and sustainability. The evaluation should provide credible and useful information, enabling the incorporation of lessons learned into the decision-making process of both SHED and the donors, the BMZ and the WHH.

Moreover, the scope of the evaluation should cover the overall and specific objectives, and key results of the project as well as taking into consideration the following five key parameters stated earlier for the evaluator to study:

• Relevance: Assess the relevance of the project design (its activities and objectives) in addressing the priority issues in relation to the improvement of Women’s economic and nutritional livelihoods through localized, commercial egg and vegetable production. It should focus on the appropriateness of project objectives to the problems that it was supposed to address, and to the physical and policy environment within which it operated. It should include an assessment of the quality of project preparation and design – i.e. the logic and completeness of the project planning process, and the internal logic and coherence of the project design. Some key questions the evaluation is seeking to answer include:

–Did the project address the priority issues?

Are the objectives clear and appropriate?

Are the activities the best way of achieving the objectives?

To what extent did the project address the environmental issues identified during the project design?

These include: pressure from agricultural activities; uncontrolled exploitation of forest for charcoal and fuel wood; unplanned grazing due to lack of village land use plans; low household income; and the lack of sustainable financing system to enable sustainable small enterprise development.

• Efficiency: The evaluation is also seeking to look at the overall efficiency of the Project implementation by answering some key questions including- Was the implementation done in an efficient manner? Considering the fact that the project results have been achieved at reasonable cost and over a reasonable time period. This means assessing how well inputs/means have been converted into results, in terms of quality, quantity and time. This generally requires comparing alternative approaches to achieving the same results, to see whether the most efficient process has been adopted. The relationship between resources utilized and results achieved including activities cost-effective (input-output) to be considered under this criterion.

What is more successful, how well planned activities were carried out. i.e cost effectiveness or value for money? Were the financial resources and other inputs used efficiently to achieve outputs? Are there opportunities to improve efficiency?

1. Effectiveness: Were the objectives of the interventions met based on the baseline and set targets as per the project log frame?

To what extent is the project on track to achieve its objectives and outcomes?

Assess the major achievements of the project to date in relation to its stated objectives and intended results based on the updated logframe.

What progress has been made so far?

What factors may be limiting the achievement of intended results?

1. Impact: What socio-economic and environmental changes have taken place among the beneficiary community as a result of the project, including both intended and unintended effects? This should specifically capture changes in overall household cash and noncash incomes, with an attempt to assess attribution; as well as assessments of change in forest health and condition. What changes (positive and negative) have been brought about in the lives of the targeted groups?

1. Sustainability: Has the project intervention been sustainable thus far, and will the likely benefits produced by the project continue to flow after external funding has ended? To what extent are the project’s positive actions likely to continue after the end of the project? In particular, what environmental, economic, social, local ownership, and institutional changes are likely to be sustained beyond the project lifetime and replicable? What actions need to be taken to increase the likelihood of the project results being sustainable? To what extent will the target communities continue to harvest economics benefit from the results achieved through project interventions?

In addition, the evaluation should discuss, provide conclusions and recommendations on the following questions:

• Matching needs: Did the project/activities meet relevant needs of the beneficiaries?
• Internal coherence: Were the result indicators and their means of verification adequate?

• What possible adjustments would the consultants recommend?

• Which unmet needs do the evaluators identify that would be relevant for SHED and the donors to look into in an eventual continuation of the project?
• Identify lessons learned and provide recommendations.

4. Methodology Required & Available Data

The evaluation of the project requires both desk and field work, including using quantitative and qualitative internationally recognized evaluation methods. The desk review will focus on the relevant documents such as project documents, quarterly and annual reports, monitoring reports, and training manuals.

The consultant/s is expected to have minimum inception and final meetings with SHED, conduct a participatory evaluation and interviews providing for meaningful involvement of the projects beneficiaries, and other relevant stakeholders. Stakeholder participation is to be an integral component of the evaluation design and planning, data gathering, drafting of findings, evaluation reporting and results dissemination.

The evaluation should therefore focus not only on quantifiable results but also analyze processes and dynamics generated by the project, their scope (in terms of people and other actors involved) and their sustainability.

Additionally, the methodology should clearly outline the following:

Rationale- An opinion on the key issues related to the achievement of the contract objectives and expected results;

Evaluation questions –Formulation of the evaluation questions based on criteria presented in the above “Scope of work” section of the ToR;

Strategy-An outline of the approach proposed for contract implementation; a list of the proposed activities considered to be necessary to achieve the contract objectives; the related inputs and outputs;

Timetable of activities– The timing, sequence and duration of the proposed activities, taking into account mobilization time; the identification and timing of major milestones in execution of the contract, including an indication of how the achievement of these would be reflected in any reports, particularly those stipulated in the Terms of Reference.

5. Evaluation process

• Inception Phase: An inception meeting with SHED, inception/desk study report to be submitted one week after the beginning of the evaluation, explaining the methodology, work plan and timetable for the evaluation.
• Draft report and validation phase: To be submitted for review, feedback sharing and stakeholders’ validation
• Final Reporting: A final report to be submitted at the end of the evaluation with a maximum of 30 pages excluding annexes.

6. Timetable

7. Deliverables & Payments

• Technical proposal (including budget) using SHED format (to be included in annex)
• An inception report will be requested at the beginning of the consultancy
• Include a debriefing with SHED team after field evaluation and submission of draft report

• Submission of Final Report with the maximum length of 30 pages excluding annexes. The final evaluation report shall be structured as follows:

1. Executive summary
2. Main section:

1. Introduction:

1. Project description
2. Evaluation objectives and methodology

1. Analysis of the findings according to the evaluation criteria

1. Conclusions and recommendations
2. Lessons learnt
3. Annexes:

1. ToR Evaluation
2. Completed Logical framework of the project
3. List of actors consulted
4. List of Literature and documentation consulted
5. Other technical annexes including questionnaires

• The phases payments against specific outputs (see below – indicative only)

REQUEST FOR QUOTATION

8. Qualification and Desirable Competencies

Applications from individuals or teams are welcome and will be assessed on their ability to demonstrate the following qualifications and competencies:

• The lead researcher should possess a Master’s Degree in Natural Resources Management, Agriculture, Natural Resources Assessment, Sustainable Development, Economics or related subject and practical knowledge in conducting evaluations;
• Master’s Degree in Agriculture, Social Sciences or related field or equivalent working experience;
• A minimum of 5 years’ experience in carrying out impact evaluations, demonstrable academic and practical experience in qualitative and quantitative research methodology, evaluation design and implementation;
• Good understanding of poultry value chain;
• Experience in evaluating BMZ projects, especially access to livelihood;
• Strong analytical, facilitation and communication skills;
• Ability to produce effective and clear communication in English, both written and verbal;
• Previous experience and understanding of the local context required;
• Excellent reporting and presentation skills.

9. Budget

• Provide a detailed breakdown of the budget at VAT 0 to ensure clear and fair comparison during the assessment of the bids

• The budget format is included in the Technical Proposal Template

10. Bids assessment

• The below criteria in addition to others shall be the basis on which the bids will be assessed:

11. Terms of contract

• Confidentiality – Highlight any confidentiality concern;
• The Consultant is responsible for payment of all social costs, other employment related costs and insurance contributions and for all other liabilities of a statutory nature;
• The consultant will have to abide by SHED’s Child Safeguarding policy and any other relevant policies;
• The consultant will provide a debriefing session to present the main findings and recommendations;
• Copyright for the report will remain with SHED.

12. Submission process (Interested evaluators or firms are requested to submit)

• CV – including a short summary of relevant competences and previous evaluation work conducted, not more than 2 pages. Only CVs for the specific individuals that will form the proposed evaluation team should be included;
• A sample of an evaluation report for a similar project completed within the last 36 months (this will be treated as confidential and only used for the purposes of quality assurance);
• Two references (including one from your last client/employer);
• Technical Proposal (using the SHED template);
• Budget excluding VAT (VAT 0) for assessment grid.

Please provide all the above documentations into a single consolidated document.

Late, incomplete or partial bids will be rejected.

All documents must be submitted by email to the Executive Director Joyce Queeglay-Pajibo (joyce.pajibo@kua.fi ) copied to the leon.zoegar@shed-liberia.org

Annexes

• Technical proposal template Technical Proposal template, see below
• Inception report template Inception Report template​, will be provided
• Evaluation report template Evaluation Report template, will be provided

Technical Proposal Template

To be filled-in by the candidates, in compliance with the following instructions

1. Rationale (max. 1 page)

Any comments on the Terms of Reference of importance for the successful execution of activities, in particular its objectives and expected results, thus demonstrating the degree of understanding of the contract. Any comments contradicting the Terms of Reference or falling outside their scope will not form part of the final contract.

An opinion on the key issues related to the achievement of the contract objectives and expected results

(Optional: An explanation of the risks and assumptions affecting the execution of the contract)

1. Evaluation questions (max. 2 pages)

Evaluation questions formulated on the basis of the criteria presented in the Terms of Reference’s

Sub-section 4.

1. Proposed Methodology (max. 3 pages)

An outline of the approach proposed for contract implementation;

A list of the proposed activities considered to be necessary to achieve the contract objectives;

The related inputs and outputs.

1. Timetable of activities (max 1 page)

The timing, sequence and duration of the proposed activities, taking into account mobilization time

1. Financial proposal (max 1 page)

Please provide a detailed budget of the evaluation (at VAT 0).