Project: « Cross-border engagement between Côte d’Ivoire and Liberia to strengthen social cohesion and border security – Phase II »

RECRUITMENT OF A NATIONAL CONSULTANT IN LIBERIA FOR THE FINAL EVALUATION OF THE PROJECT

Terms of reference

1. CONTEXT AND PROJECT RATIONALE

Côte d’Ivoire and Liberia are two neighbouring countries that share a border of more than 700 kilometreslong. The communities residing on both sides of the borders are socially, culturally, and economically interlinked. Despite their secular connections, the political crises that have destabilized the two countries over the last decade have exacerbated the existing tensions within bordering communities.

These tensions are diverse and strongly embedded. The main tensions concern:

• Conflicts regarding lands are especially common. They are often generated by border encroachment due to the absence of an official demarcation and/or land occupation by the host communities, by migrants / refugees or members of a same family or clan;
• The inefficient cooperation mechanisms at the operational and decentralization levels. Tensions are often palpable between the different security forces operating on both sides of the border zone, despite excellent bilateral diplomatic relations between Liberia and Côte d’Ivoire;
• Illicit activities such as migrant smuggling, arms and drug trafficking that are facilitated by the borders’ porosity. These create tensions at the community level but also between security forces and communities, especially when the alleged perpetrators are housed by their families living across;
• Harassment and corruption by some security forces. Women and youths are often victims since most of them essentially depend on cross-border trade for subsistence;
• The security forces’ limited capacity to intervene in remote areas without the necessary technical and operational means to ensure their efficiency.

In order to address these challenges and in addition to the retreat of the United Nations Mission in Liberia and the United Nations Operations in Côte d’Ivoire, which respectively took place in June 2016 and July 2017, the United Nations Peacebuilding Fund granted the International Organization for Migration (IOM) and the United

Nations Development Programme (UNDP) a first subvention for the implementation of the project “Cross border cooperation between Côte d’Ivoire and Liberia for durable peace and social cohesion”.

This joint initiative phase of the project was limited to the meridional areas of the joint borders (Tabou and Taï in Côte d’Ivoire; Maryland and River Gee in Liberia). Following its successful implementation, the donor renewed its trust for the recipients by funding of the second phase of the project “Cross-border engagement between Côte d’Ivoire and Liberia to strengthen social cohesion and border security”. The total funding over two years between 16 January 2020 and 15 January 2021 amounted to 3,000,000 USD. The scope of the project as well as the lessons learned were extended to the northern areas (Danané and Touleupleu in Côte d’Ivoire; Grand Gedeh and Nimba in Liberia) that particularly face intercommunity tensions.

The objective of the project is to facilitate cooperation and strengthen confidence between border communities of the Ivorian and Liberian security forces through community engagement and cross-border social, cultural, and economic activities contributing to pacific coexistence. The project will contribute to strengthen border and human security and to diminish the risks of regional instability and increasing intra- and intercommunity conflicts. It also aims to support the rising cross-border and regional approach promoted by

UNOWAS and other regional actors such as the Mano River Union.

In collaboration with partner NGOs, the implementation enabled for the creation and dynamization of 60 peace committees, including 23 in Liberia and 37 in Côte d’Ivoire. Through this project, the technical capacities of more than 500 community leaders were strengthened in the fields of conflict management, rumour management, identity-based conflict management, generational conflict management and the roles and responsibilities of the community leaders and the youths in promoting pacific coexistence. Moreover, 320

members of local authorities, security forces, border management agents and government representatives now have an enhanced knowledge on border management and conflict prevention. 07 border units were also rehabilitated and/or equipped to ensure basic services. Furthermore, 34 community infrastructures were installed in response to the needs expressed by the beneficiaries in terms of water, markets, primary schools, health centres, motorized dugout canoe, conflict prevention and resolution halls, etc. Additionally, 18 associations and groups of women or youths benefitted from support in income-generating activities to allow communities to work together, tackle prejudice and strengthen pacific cohabitation. 12 peace and restauration days were also organized following 41 sensibilization activities led in the communities and 37 local radio transmitted sensibilization activities focusing on the fight against COVID-19.

At the end of the project, an analysis of the project experiences and activities should be conducted to extract the lessons learned and propose efficient strategies to ensure the durability of the results.

The documentation and the lessons learned from these experiences will also constitute excellent inspiration tools for the government and development partners to implement other programmes and projects related to peacebuilding and community stabilization.

2. SCOPE AND EVALUATION OBJECTIVES

This consultancy will consist in conducting an evaluation assessing the performance of the project “Cross border engagement between Côte d’Ivoire and Liberia to strengthen social cohesion and border security”, through the results obtained within the framework of the project implementation. It will focus on the relevance, the efficiency, the effectiveness, and the impact of the actions carried out comparatively with the aimed objectives and the durability of the results.

The evaluation exercise will specifically assess the functioning and the performance level of the project, comparatively with the initially set qualitative and quantitative objectives.

The specific objectives of this evaluation include the following aspects:

• Assess the conformity of the project interventions in relation with the aimed beneficiaries’ expectations;
• Compare the obtained results with the initially set objectives;
• Assess the changes that can be attributed to the project interventions;
• Measure the observed progress in the participation of youths and women on conflict prevention and management as well as cross-border security preservation;
• Assess the use of the funds disbursed in relation with the needs initially identified; • Identify the constraints linked to the project implementation;
• Elaborate recommendations to reinforce the project’s lessons learned;
• Extract the general lessons learned throughout this project, that will be useful for IOM, UNDP and the governments of Côte d’Ivoire and Liberia for the implementation of future programmes in the same field;
• Determine whether the project effectively encouraged gender equality in a coherent and significant way, and according to the gender equality markers.
• Determine whether women benefitted from this project and whether the project reflected their preoccupations and interests;
• Identify the success and challenge factors of the project (project design and management) and formulate recommendations accordingly, regarding the design and implementation procedures of future potential projects for additional interventions.

3. EVALUATION CRITERIA AND KEY QUESTIONS

3.1. Relevance

• To what extent does this project match the national priorities in terms of strengthening social cohesion and security, within the framework of the cooperation for sustainable development under the United Nations system in Côte d’Ivoire and Liberia?
• To what extent does the project contribute to the theory of change relatively to the corresponding impact of the countries’ programme?
• To what extent have lessons from other relevant projects have been considered in the project design? • To what extent does the project contribute to gender equality, female empowerment and to human rights-based approaches?
• To what extent does the project adequately respond to the political, judicial, economic, and institutional evolutions in the two countries?

3.2. Effectiveness

• To what extent did the project contribute to the development of products and priorities of the two countries, of the SDGs and of the programmatic framework of IOM and UNDP?
• To what extent were the project products achieved? Which factors contributed to the achievement or non-achievement of the project products of the two countries programmes?
• Was the partnership strategy of IOM and UNDP endorsed and effective? What were the main factors that contributed to its effectiveness or ineffectiveness?
• In which domains did the project register its best performances? Why and what were the facilitating factors? How can the project reinforce or develop these results?
• In which domains did the project register its worst performances? Why and what were the limiting factors? How can or could they be improved?
• In this case, what alternative strategies could have been more effective to achieve the project’s objectives?
• Are the project objectives and products clear, practical, and feasible in this framework? To what extent have the different stakeholders participated in the project implementation?
• To what extent are the project management and implementation conducted in a participative manner, and to what extent does this participation contributed to the achievement of the project objectives? • To what extent has the project taken into account the needs of the national groups, as well as the partners’ priorities’ evolutions?
• To what extent did the project contribute to gender equality, female empowerment, and the realisation of fundamental human rights?

3.3. Efficiency

• To what extent did the project management structure indicated in the project document enable the achievement of the expected results?
• To what extent was the project implementation strategy developed by IOM and UNDP and its execution were efficient and cost-effective?
• Were the human and financial resources used cost-effectively? Were the resources (funds, staff, time, expertise, etc.) strategically affected to obtain the results?
• Were the resources used efficiently? Were the strategic activities cost-effective? • Did the resources used for gender promotion correspond to the allocated resources in the project design?
• To what extent were the funds and the project activities delivered on time?
• To what extent did the Monitoring and Evaluation systems used by IOM and UNDP enable an efficient and effective project management?

3.4. Effects / Impacts

The consultant will qualitatively and quantitatively, when possible, evaluate the indicated impact of the activities accomplished until now within the framework of the two project results. This evaluation will be based on the project document’s logical framework, but the consultant will be able to suggest other evaluation elements considered more relevant. Special attention will be paid to the analysis of the need’s assessment field reports and of the end of activities reports by the operational implementing partners of the project activities.

3.5. Coherence

• To what extent is the project compatible with other interventions conducted within the framework of the PBF country portfolio, within the framework of the PACoP and within the national framework in general? What synergies were developed?
• Are there any interventions by other organizations / structures in the same domain? What were the complementarity actions with these interventions, and especially in terms of gender? • To what extent did the project bring an added value while avoiding any duplication with other internal or external projects?

3.6. Sustainability

• Was the sustainability of the project achieved?
• Are there any social or political risks that could threaten the sustainability of the project products or the contributions of the project to the products and impacts of the PACoP or of the country programme?
• Do the legal, political, and structural frameworks and the governance structures and processes in which the project is developed represent a risk for the sustainability of the project benefits? • To what extent do the actions of IOM and UNDP represent an environmental threat to the sustainability of the project results?
• To what extent does the stakeholders’ appropriation level represent a risk for the sustainability of the project benefits?
• To what extent do procedures and policies in place enable stakeholders to sustain the results obtained in the fields of gender equality, female empowerment, fundamental rights, and human development? • Are men and women’s long-term aspirations adequate with the obtained results? • Did the project succeed in making changes in gender relations; if yes, are they likely to be durable? • To what extent do stakeholders support the long-term objectives of the project? • To what extent are the lessons learned consistently documented by the project team and disseminated among relevant stakeholders who would benefit from the knowledge acquired within the framework of the project?
• To what extent do the IOM and UNDP strategies encompass well-conceived and planned disengagement activities?
• Which measures could be adopted to strengthen the disengagement strategies and the sustainability of the project?

3.7. Cross-cutting issues

Fundamental rights

• To what extent have the poor; the autochthon, allochthon, and allogeneic populations; the individuals suffering from physical difficulties, women and other disfavoured and marginalized groups benefitted from the actions of IOM and UNDP?

Gender equality

• To what extent have gender equality and female empowerment been considered in the project design, implementation, and monitoring?
• Does the affected gender marker reflect the reality?
• To what extent did the project encourage positive evolutions in terms of gender equality and female empowerment? Have there been any unexpected impacts?

4. EVALUATION METHODOLOGY

This exercise will allow to collect qualitative and quantitative data in relation with the results obtained or to assess the relevance, coherence, effectiveness, efficiency, and sustainability of the project, in addition to the consideration of human rights and gender equality according to the OECD-DAC evaluation criteria. The evaluation will necessitate the services of a national consultant in Liberia to contribute to the joint production of a final evaluation report with one national consultant for Côte d’Ivoire and one international consultant, in charge of the team coordination.

4.1. Approach

The evaluation will be based on a quantitative and qualitative methodology as well as on the consultant’s methodology. Data collection and analysis will reflect this approach. The quantitative part will aim to document the main impacts of the project through figures collected from direct and indirect project beneficiaries. For this part of the evaluation, the baseline will be the project results. The evaluation will gather necessary data to inform the indicators for the outcomes in the results framework. This will include in some cases establishing reference values for certain indicators through retrospective surveys.

The qualitative part will complete the quantitative one and will aim to deepen the analysis and corroborate ways through which the approach of the project could contribute to social cohesion, the reduction of conflict levels and the enhancement of border security. It will also aim to discover alternative explanations to effects

/changes attributed to the project but that are hardly quantifiable. Finally, the objective of the qualitative evaluation is to better understand the perspectives and aspirations of direct and indirect beneficiaries; the questionnaires and interview guides will include open questions allowing those surveyed to freely express themselves.

4.2. Data collection

The evaluation needs to make use of several qualitative, quantitative and gender-sensitive evaluation methods and tools. The consultant will develop samples and questionnaires to collect data from the beneficiaries.

4.3. Document review of all relevant documents

It encompasses the analysis of the following document:

– The project document (contribution agreement)

– The theory of change and the logical framework

– The project’s quality control reports

– The annual workplans

– The activities’ concept notes

– The consolidated trimestral and annual reports

– The meeting notes of the technical committees and the project steering group

– The technical / financial monitoring reports

– The study reports (2020 perception studies, other studies).

4.4. Semi-structured interviews with the main stakeholders

It concerns governmental counterparts, donor community members, representatives of the main civil society organizations, some UNCT members and implementing partners.

4.5. Group discussions or discussions with key informants

This includes male and female beneficiaries and stakeholders. All interviews must be conducted in the respect of confidentiality and anonymity. The final evaluation report must not establish links between comments and one or several individuals.

4.6. Field visits and one-site validation of the main tangible products and interventions

The consultant is required to adopt a consultative and participative approach and ensure that the personnel in charge of the evaluation, the implementing partners and the direct beneficiaries are implicated.

The adopted methodological approach, including the interviews’ schedule, the field visits and the list of data used for the evaluation must be clearly presented in the start-up report and must be thoroughly discussed and agreed upon by the IOM and UNDP stakeholders and the expert consultants.

5. DELIVERABLES

Under the coordination of the international consultant, it is required from the team of expert consultants to provide:

– One start-up report (10-15 pages): the report must be prepared by the consultant before starting the collection of additional data (before any formal interview, distribution of questionnaires or field visits; and before the start of the mission in the country of assignment in the case of international evaluators) after the consultancy, the provided documentation and the first interviews. The initial

report must include a detailed programme of tasks and activities while detailing the person responsible for them as well as the necessary material needed for the consultancy.

– One interim report (40-60 pages): the consultant must provide an interim report to the stakeholders so they can ensure its conformity to the quality norms.

– One final report in English and in French (40-60 pages maximum excluding annexes) with a table of contents in English and French. Its content must comply with the prescriptions in the appointment’s terms of reference (see annex).

6. DESIRED PROFILE OF THE CONSULTANT

The national expert for Liberia must meet the following requirements:

– A first-level degree in social sciences, economics, law or other relevant field is required. – At least five years of relevant work experience in the external evaluation of projects and programmes in the fields of gender and development is required.

– A good command of the results-based management of development projects and programmes is required. – Accurate knowledge and experience in the field of conflict management and peacebuilding is required. – An excellent analysis and synthesis capacity, strong writing skills, a proven scientific writing capacity and strong oral and written communication skills are required.

– Proven knowledge of the project management cycle is required.

– An expert knowledge of the Liberian context, and particularly the intervention zones, is required. – Remaining independent from all parties is required.

– Good communication skills are required.

– The previous completion of at least two evaluation reports is required.

7. EVALUATION ETHICS

The present evaluation will be conducted in the respect of the principles stated in the UNEG ‘Ethical Guidelines for Evaluation’. The consultant must observe the rights and the confidentiality of the informants, through measures ensuring conformity with the legal frameworks for data collection and publication. The consultant must ensure the security of the information collected and prepare protocols guaranteeing the anonymity and the confidentiality of information sources when necessary. The data and knowledge acquired during the evaluation process must be solely used for the purposes of the evaluation, except any other use with the express authorization of IOM/UNDP and its partners.

8. DURATION OF APPOINTMENT

The evaluation will start in January 2022 and will last for a period of 60 days, including the weekends. 9. TERMS OF EXECUTION OF THE CONTRACT

9.1. The Evaluation Manager

The evaluation manager gives his/her opinion regarding the final acceptance of the evaluation and the validation of the different steps of the evaluation process namely: a) the finalization of the evaluation terms of references; b) the validation of the start-up report; c) the coordination and consolidation of the comments on the interim evaluation report and d) the acceptance of the final evaluation reports.

The evaluation manager is the IOM Project Manager.

9.2. The Programme Manager

The role of the Programme Manager (specialized in the Governance and Rule of Law programme) is to support the evaluation process. In order, to ensure the independence and credibility of the evaluation, they do not directly manage the evaluation. Nonetheless, they provide the necessary documents and data and support the overall evaluation, and particularly the data collection mission.

The Programme Manager is the PBF Secretariat focal point in Liberia.

9.3. The Group of Reference

A Group of Reference composed of the representatives of the main partners and stakeholders is created in order, to support the evaluation process and propose comments and guidance during the important steps of the evaluation. The Group of Reference guarantees the transparency of the process and reinforces the evaluation results’ credibility.

It is composed of:

– The Ministry of Internal Affairs (County Administration), Ministry of Justice (LIS, LNP, NSC); – IOM;

– UNDP;

– PBF Technical Secretariat;

– PBSO New York.

9.4. The team of evaluation expert consultants

The evaluation report will be produced by a team of three consultants:

– One international expert, coordinating the two national experts;

– One national expert for Liberia;

– One national expert for Côte d’Ivoire;

The international consultant will have a coordination role within the team of evaluation experts to produce the final evaluation report.

10. PAYMENT

NB: All reports are validated and certified before payment.

11. MODALITIES OF APPLICATION

Applicants must submit two proposals (technical and financial), according to the advertisement. The application must include:

11.1. A technical proposal, including:

– The understanding of the TORs, the evaluation matrix and the proposed methodology; – A workplan of the tasks, detailing the human and material means affected to each step; – The applicant’s bio presenting his experience in project evaluation;

– The applicant’s resume.

11.2. A financial proposal, including:

– The consultancy fees;

– The costs linked to the necessary human and material resources.

12. EVALUATION CRITERIA OF THE TECHNICAL AND FINANCIAL PROPOSALS
13. a) The number of points attributed to each technical criterion is as follows:

1. b) The minimal technical score required is 70 points

Any applicant whose technical offer does not reach 70 points will be eliminated and their financial offer will not be considered.

1. c) Financial evaluation

The formula used to determine financial scores is the following: FS=100 x Fm /F, where FS is the financial score, Fm is the least distant proposal and F the price of the considered proposal.

1. d) Final evaluation

The final grade is the weighted average of the technical score and the financial score, with the following weighting coefficients: technical score (70%) and financial score (30%). The weights attributed to the technical and financial offers are: T= 0,70 et F=0,30.

The contract is attributed to the proposal that obtains the highest global score. e) The two proposals must be placed in separate sealed envelopes and must be labelled

The proposals must be addressed to the following postal address in sealed envelopes: UN Migration (IOM) Liberia, One UN House Plaza, and email to: iomliberiavacancy@iom.int Copy : MCDIALLO@IOM.int, with the label:

SELECTION OF NATIONAL CONSULTANT FOR THE PERFORMANCE OF THE FINAL PROJECT EVALUATION: « Cross-Border Engagement between Liberia and Cote d’Ivoire to Reinforce Social Cohesion and Border Security »

13. ANNEXES OF THE TORs
14. Results framework and theory of change of the intervention;
15. A list of the main stakeholders and other people to consult, with information regarding their parent organization, their importance to the evaluation process and their contact information;
16. List of sites to visit;
17. List of documents and websites to consult;
18. Evaluation matrix;
19. Evaluation report template;
20. Code of conduct.

You can download the Terms of reference pdf copy here….

link: https://liberiahrjobs.com/Vacancy-Notice-PBF-EVALIATION-CONSULTANT.pdf