Country: Malawi, Zambia
Closing date: 28 Apr 2016
1. Background
Concern Worldwide is a non-governmental, international, humanitarian organisation dedicated to the reduction of suffering and working towards the ultimate elimination of extreme poverty in the world’s poorest countries. Concern has been working in Zambia and Malawi since 2002 implementing projects related to livelihoods, HIV and AIDS, health and nutrition.
With funding from Accenture, Concern Worldwide has been implementing a Conservation Agriculture (CA) Project in both Zambia and Malawi since 2010. Phase 1 of the project was implemented from July 2010 to June 2013 with the main objective to equip farmers with the skills to increase yields (even in years with poor rainfall) and improve their food security. After the evaluation of Phase 1, Concern Worldwide and Accenture agreed to implement phase 2 of the project in both countries for an additional 3 years, from Sept 2013 to August 2016.
The project objective of the CA Phase 2 was to increase farm income for over 12,000 “Skills to Succeed” participants: 4,710 in Zambia and 7,444 in Malawi. The project activities were: 1) the promotion of CA skills, 2) providing access to affordable quality inputs and information, and 3) training in farm management skills. To achieve this objective the project focused on three Key outcomes:
Increased adoption of CA in Concern's target districts from estimated 5% in 2013 to 20% in 2016 (disaggregated by gender, wealth ranking and project participants/non-participants) through wide-scale promotion and practice of various CA methodologies and technologies.
Farmers increase production by at least 50% and therefore increase income though improved access to better quality inputs (seeds and information)
Farmers are trained in farm management skills which will enable them to improve the profitability of their farms (expected 20% increase in farm-based income from the baseline and expected 10% decrease in farm-related costs from the baseline) and eventually sell surplus at the market.
As the CA Phase 2 project come to an end by 31st August 2016, Concern Worldwide is planning to conduct an end of project evaluation covering the CA intervention in both Zambia and Malawi.
- Purpose of the Evaluation
The primary purpose of the evaluation is to assess if the project has met its objectives of increased level of effective adoption of conservation agriculture and improvements in production.
The evaluation will also consider the project’s contribution to improvements in the livelihoods of the target households both in Zambia and Malawi, including resilience to the 2015-16 El Niño climate event. The evaluator will compare the situation before and after the project intervention using the rolling baseline data, endline data, routine monitoring data and other information that will be collected as part of this assignment.
More specifically the evaluation will:
Assess progress made towards achievement of target indicators
Assess the relevance, efficiency, effectiveness, impact and sustainability of the project
Document lessons learned and provide practical recommendations for Concern Worldwide’s future programming especially related to Climate Smart Agriculture, including the opportunities and constraints for the scale up of CSA.
The Evaluation will address the following Key Evaluation questions:
Evaluation Criteria
Key Evaluation Questions
Relevance
· Were the outcomes and associated programme relevant, appropriate and strategic to national goals and Concern policies and guidelines?
· What was the level of participation of programme beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries of the programme? Was there awareness and active use of the Complaints Response Mechanism guidelines?
· Is the project in line with the needs and priorities of the extreme poor (men and women) in the target community?
· Is the project consistent with the policy and strategic direction of Concern Worldwide as well as the governments of Zambia and Malawi?
Efficiency
· Were resources used well? Could things have been done differently and how?
· How did the budget utilisation compare to the planned budget?
· Comment on the cost of the project vs. project outputs ( Value for money)
Effectiveness
· To what extent were the objectives of the project as reflected in the project proposal, milestones and log frame achieved?
· Are farmers practising the three principles of CA?
· Of the various seed production and distribution models tested, which was the most cost effective?
· Did the project fully involve the beneficiaries and other stakeholder throughout the PCM process?
· What are the major factors influencing the achievement or non-achievement of the objectives?
· What should have been done differently to achieve the objective, if it was not achieved?
Impact
· What indications are there of significant changes taking place beyond the programme - both positive and negative?
· How have the programme interventions impacted differently on men and women (and other vulnerable groups as identified) in the programme area?
· Are farmers practising crop rotations and have new crops been introduced into the rotations?
· Has the project increased the number of months the extremely poor people are food secure?
· How resilient were the CA farmers to the 2015-16 El Niño event compared to conventional farmers?
· Compare household economy data sets to assess if the project has increased the contribution of own crop production to the livelihoods of the target group?
Sustainability
· What sustainability mechanisms the project has put in place to continue activities after Concern’s support has ended? And how effective are they?
· Are farmers now able to access seeds, other inputs and technical advice on CA without further support from Concern?
· Is there sufficient local organizational capacity to continue after Concern’s support has ended?
· What exit strategy is in place and is it effective?
Mainstreaming issues
· Was the targeting model appropriate? Are the project benefits reaching the extreme poor?
· Was due consideration given to gender equality and for the issue of HIV and AIDS so that the project intervention did not increase target groups vulnerability and susceptibility to HIV and AIDS?
M&E and Project management
· Was the programme M&E system fit for purpose?
· Identify strengths, weaknesses and challenges of the M&E activities of the project particularly in terms of the quality of the data and recommend possible changes for future learning?
· How effective was DDG as (a) a management tool, (b) as an evaluation tool?
· Did the project incorporate learning from the previous intervention?
3. Proposed Methodology
The end of project evaluation makes use of the available data from the rolling baseline surveys (beneficiary registration database), routine monitoring data, together with data that will be collected at the endline survey, which will be done as part of the end of project evaluation.
The evaluator will be expected to develop appropriate methodology for the evaluation. The evaluation process should be participatory involving different stakeholders including beneficiaries, partners, Concern staff and other stakeholders. Proposed methodology of the evaluation includes the following:
Meet with project staff and Concern Zambia and Malawi senior management team to get a briefing on the project, and skype calls with Dublin staff involved in the project.
Review of project documents which will be provided (phase 1 reports, proposal, progress reports, baseline and end line reports, etc.) and review of data sets (yields, HEA data, etc).
Visit the farms of randomly selected project beneficiaries to determine the level of CA adoption, benefits and challenges at the household level. Interview key informants
Conduct case studies of selected households that will give insight to the reported cases of change in the condition of the households
4. Suggested Activities
Concern responsibility:
Conduct Endline data
Organize and share with the evaluator the project documents for review including datasets, progress reports, beneficiary lists, proposals, and feedback on the project both in Zambia and Malawi
Inform partners and key stakeholders about the evaluation
Evaluator responsibility:
Define the methodology for the evaluation
Prepare the evaluation schedule and communicate with both Concern teams in Zambia and Malawi
Review key project Prepare the evaluation inception report
Prepare field data collection checklist and share with the Concern team for review and approval
Select beneficiaries for farm visits
Prepare the first draft of the evaluation and present to the Concern teams Produce the final report incorporating feedback from Concern and partners with the management response to recommendation.
5. Deliverables
Inception report clearly showing the methodology to be followed, and the evaluation schedule
Data collected from the fields
First draft and presentation to the Concern team either through skype or in a workshop
Final evaluation report, based on Concern’s standard format, incorporating feedback from Concern and partners staff with management response to recommendations. The report should be a maximum of 25 pages excluding annexes
6. Timeframe
The timeframe for this evaluation will be 5 weeks from the date of the commencement of the work that is proposed to be conducted from 1st of June 2016 to 8th of July 2016. This duration is inclusive of the time required for all work including document review, field visit in Zambia and Malawi debriefing and final submission of the evaluation report.
7. Qualification and application Requirement
The evaluator(s) should be an agriculturalist with expertise in the area of Conservation Agriculture as practised by smallholder farmers in Sub Saharan Africa, and experience of evaluating agricultural projects. The evaluator should have experience in agricultural/ rural economics and farm business management at the smallholder level. Additional experience in data analysis and Household Economy Analysis experience will be preferred.
Interested evaluator(s) should submit their technical and financial proposal. The technical proposal should clearly show an understanding of the TOR and the methodology to be followed for the evaluation together with the CV of the evaluator. The financial proposal should clearly spell the proposed budget breakdown.
8. Lines of Communication
The Evaluator will communicate with each of the Director of Programme in Malawi and Zambia as a first contact. However, he/she will work closely with CSA coordinator, and project managers, PSOs in the course of the evaluation.
PROTECTION OF BENEFICIARIES AND OTHER PROGRAMME PARTICIPANTS
Concern has a Staff Code of Conduct and a Programme Participant Protection Policy, which have been developed to ensure the maximum protection of programme participants from exploitation and to clarify the responsibilities of Concern staff, consultants, visitors to the programme and partner organization, and the standards of behaviour expected of them. In this context staff have a responsibility to the organization to strive for, and maintain, the highest standards in the day-to-day conduct in their workplace in accordance with Concern’s core values and mission. Any candidate offered a job with Concern Worldwide will be expected to sign the Programme Participant Protection Policy and the Concern Staff Code of Conduct as an appendix to their contract of employment. By signing the Programme Participant Protection Policy and the Concern Staff Code of Conduct, candidates acknowledge that they have understood the contents of both the Concern Staff Code of Conduct and the Programme Participant Protection Policy and agree to conduct themselves in accordance with the provisions of these two documents.
How to apply:
The evaluator(s) should be an agriculturalist with expertise in the area of Conservation Agriculture as practised by smallholder farmers in Sub Saharan Africa, and experience of evaluating agricultural projects. The evaluator should have experience in agricultural/ rural economics and farm business management at the smallholder level. Additional experience in data analysis and Household Economy Analysis experience will be preferred.
Interested evaluator(s) should submit their technical and financial proposal. The technical proposal should clearly show an understanding of the TOR and the methodology to be followed for the evaluation together with the CV of the evaluator. The financial proposal should clearly spell the proposed budget breakdown.
Applicants from interested consultants to be submitted by 28th April 2016. Please submit expressions of interest toFelicitas.Floerchinger@concern.netand toMichael.hanly@concern.net
