TERMS OF REFERENCE
PROJECT FINAL EXTERNAL EVALUATION


Resilience and Empowerment: Accompanying Community-Based Development in Port-Earthquake Haiti

LA-HAI-3-001-10 / World Neighbors




Implemented by World Neighbors finance by Lutheran World Relief and multiple donors








January, 2012


1. BACKGROUND INFORMATION AND RATIONALE

World Neighbors (WN) has had a continuous program presence in Haiti since 1966, serving rural populations that are socially and economically marginalized. WN integrated rural development programs in Haiti — focusing efforts within the nexus of livelihoods, community health and natural resource management — has also placed a premium on the formation and support of community-led development efforts, largely through collective action and the formation of local community based organizations (CBOs).

Since the 7.1(on the Richter scale) earthquake on January 12, over 5,500 émigrés (people affected by the earthquake who have fled the capital city) from Port-au-Prince (PAP) have arrived and stayed in rural communities. Over 1,300 rural families in communities that work with WN have received and ‘hosted’ these émigrés. With technical support and funding from WN and Lutheran World Relief (among others), the eight WN partner community-based organizations (CBOs) have labored to respond to the immediate basic needs of these émigrés, including activities to address their food, shelter, water and sanitation, and livelihood needs, as well as continuously monitoring the fluctuating population and its emerging needs. World Neighbors and its partner CBOs have provided a critical ‘support system’ to the émigrés and host families, in light of limited or no support from the public sector (local government).

After the immediate response period, WN has mobilized its local CBO partners who have conducted comprehensive assessments of the impact of the PaP émigré population’s arrival in the rural communities. CBO leaders, volunteer promoters and ‘model farmers’ collected information and identified priority strategies and activities the majority of which were included in the project to evaluate.

The project started in July 2010 and ended in December 2012. Agreement between WN and Lutheran World Relief, one of the main founders of the project is calling for an independent evaluation at the end of the project.

The project aim was to improve the well-being-community health, food and nutrition security and livelihoods-of new and existing households/families in the rural communities served by World Neighbors local partner community-based organizations, with a focus on émigrés from Port-au-Prince, and especially youth and women. It was implemented in five departments in Haiti (Ouest, Centre, Nord-Est, Nord and Artibonite), in 105 communities, with more than 8,600 direct participants and 40,000 beneficiaries.

Objective 1: To support community-based program efforts to respond to the basic livelihood and health needs of approximately 2,000 to 2,500 Port-au-Prince internally displaced persons (IDPs), or émigrés, that have been received across the 180-200 rural communities supported through World Neighbors and its local community-based organization (CBO) partners in Haiti.

Objective 2: To contribute to overall community well-being in the 180-200 rural communities, focusing on improvements to community health, food and nutrition security, as well as rural livelihoods, with an emphasis on the more than 1,000 ‘host families’ of IDPs/émigrés.

Objective 3: Strengthen the nine World Neighbors local partner community-based organizations (CBOs) to plan, implement and assess community-based rural development initiatives, and to coordinate and support the continued development of two regional CBO networks as platforms for participatory sustainable development in the regions of Artibonite and Nord.


2. SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES OF THE EVALUATION AND EVALUATION QUESTIONS

The objective of this evaluation is to assess the design, implementation process and results of the completed project, determining whether the project contributed to the change proposed as well as to examine those aspects that could have hampered its success.

This evaluation should provide evidence-based, credible, reliable and useful information to identify and incorporate lessons into the decision-making process. Using qualitative and quantitative data, the evaluation should address the relevance, efficiency, effectiveness, impact, sustainability and participation. The next table presents the concepts and general questions to address. It is expected that the evaluator complements the questions, making them more precise as well as answering them.

Evaluation Criteria Questions
Relevance:
Global analysis of whether project objectives are still valid considering the needs of target population. Analysis of the consistency of the project design. Are the messages and actions of the project in line with national priorities and WN strategic priorities?
Are objectives and activities relevant and important to participants, CBO partners and the population in general?
Efficiency:
Relationship between the quality and quantity of the results achieved and the resources and means used to achieve them. Is the project delivered in a timely and cost-effective manner?
Have resources been used cost effectively?
Do the results -- quantity and quality – justify the resources expended?
Effectiveness:
Level of execution of planned activities, achievement of project objectives and results, analysis of the processes that facilitated or impeded them. To what extents are planned results achieved.
What are the reasons for the state of achievement?
What supports and barriers have affected achievement?
Impact:
To identify the effects caused by the intervention, positive or negative, expected or not, direct and indirect and induced or collateral. The impact analysis has to focus on those effects attributable to the project. Has the intervention contributed to achieve the proposed goal?
To what extent has the project contributed to longer-term outcomes and goals of WN?
Are there unanticipated positive or negative consequences?
Why did they arise?
Sustainability:
To assess the continuity in time of the positive effects generated by the intervention after the end of the project; level of involvement and participation of local authorities, partners and beneficiaries. Is there an enabling environment that supports ongoing positive impacts?
Can the outcomes be sustained beyond the life of the project?
Will impacts continue to be realized?
Participation:
To identify actors that have been implicated in various stages of project, considering their decision making role. How these actors have affected (positively or negatively) the inputs, outputs, outcomes and impact of this project?
Which actors have participated in each phase of the intervention?, To what extent?
Were there effective participatory strategies and tools?


3. APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY

The evaluation will entail a combination of: comprehensive desk reviews and document analysis; consultations with key stakeholders; and in situ observation and discussions visiting at least five localities where the project was implemented.

The evaluator has to use a participatory and consultative approach, ensuring the involvement of key actor such us local leaders and authorities, volunteers, participants and beneficiaries.

3.1 Preparation phase:
a) The Consultant will prepare an evaluation work plan that will operationalize and direct the evaluation. The workplan will describe how the evaluation is to be carried out, bringing refinements, specificity and elaboration to these terms of reference. It will be approved by World Neighbors LAC regional office and act as the agreement between parties for how the evaluation is to be conducted. The evaluation work plan will address the following reporting elements:
 Overview of Program/project
 Purpose of the Evaluation
 Roles and Responsibilities
 Evaluation Methodology
 Evaluation Framework
 Information Collection and Analysis
 Reporting
 Work Scheduling
b) Compilation of documentation will be done in preparation of the consultation by WN regional and country teams.

3.2 Implementation phase:
a) Desk study of relevant documents will include programme and financial material.
b) Field research will include interviews with staff at regional, country office levels as well as partners in the field, beneficiaries and stakeholders. Field research should also focus on case studies and creative (and participatory) methodology to enhance impact considerations.
c) Review reports.

3.3 Reporting phase:
a) A draft report will be submitted to regional office for comments using the report structure.
b) The final report will be a professional and technically sound document incorporating analysis with strategic direction; including an executive summary (see section 8 for more details).


4. GUIDING PRINCIPLES AND VALUES

 Openness of information given, to the highest possible degree to all involved parties.
 Broad participation. The interested parties should be involved when relevant and possible.
 Reliability and independence. The evaluation should be conducted so that findings and conclusions are correct and trustworthy.
 Competence. Evaluators should remain competent and rigorous in their practice of evaluation.
 Integrity, honesty. Evaluator must show honesty, integrity, objectivity and fairness in the entire evaluation process.
 Respect for People. Evaluator must respect the rights, security, privacy, dignity and self-worth of respondents, programme participants, and other stakeholders with whom they interact.

The title rights, copyrights and all other rights of whatever nature in any materials used or generated under the provisions of this consultancy will exclusively be vested with World Neighbors.

5. PROFESIONAL QUALIFICATIONS

The evaluation will be carried out by an external consultant who will take overall responsibility for the assignment. The external consultant is expected to be:
 Advanced university degree in social sciences, with specialized training in evaluation and project/program management;
 At least 5 years of international experience in designing and managing program/project evaluations as well as in international cooperation and development projects;
 Proven experience in conducting independent evaluations of projects/programmes;
 Experience in the region
 Personal skills: good communication, analytical and drafting skills;
 Fluency in English and French; fluency in Creole and Spanish is an asset.

6. DELIVERABLES AND SCHEDULE


Activity Period (suggested) Deadline
Work Plan 2 days February, 13
Evaluation mission 10 days February, 27
Data analysis and preparation of the draft report 8 days March, 13
Final report 8 days March, 26


7. BUDGET AND PAYMENT

The budget for the implementation of the evaluation is of 6,000 US dollars. This amount includes fees and travel costs to communities in rural areas. Transportation to communities will be covered by WN.

Payments will be made as follows: 30% upon signing the contract, 20% by presenting the first draft and the remaining 50% will be paid upon acceptance of the final report.

In case of delay in delivery of reports, apply all the sanctions described in the contract signed between the evaluation team / evaluator and World Neighbors.

8. ESTRUCTURE OF THE PROPOSAL AND SUBMISSION GUIDELINES

The final evaluation report has to follow the next structure:
1. Executive Summary
2. Introduction
3. Background: project description
4. Evaluation purpose and objective
5. Evaluation methodology and criteria
6. Findings
7. Evaluation conclusions
8. Lessons learned (structured and clear)
9. Recommendations
10. Annexes

The final report should not exceed 45 pages.


9. LANGUAGE OF REPORT

The report and any other deliverable must be on English.