Terms of Reference
Protection Assistance for host and refugee communities in Ukhia Upazila, Bangladesh
ECHO Action 2019 - 2020 External Evaluation – March 2020
Evaluation Summary
Project Title: Protection Assistance for host and refugee communities in Ukhia Upazila
Timing of Evaluation: End of April to June 2020
Purpose: The aim of this advertised consultancy is to conduct an evaluation of the DRC, Cox’s Bazar Bangladesh ECHO funded project implemented between April 2019 and April 2020 with a focus on effectiveness, appropriateness, impact and connectedness.**
Type of evaluation: End of Project Evaluation
Evaluation Manager: Nour Khalil, MEAL Manager
Objectives of the Evaluation
The objectives of this end of project evaluation are based on the DAC/OECD standard evaluation criteria with a focus on effectiveness, appropriateness, impact and connectedness. The key objectives are summarized as follows:
· To assess the effectiveness of the project in terms of achieving the set objectives and the ability of beneficiaries to have a safe and dignified environment
· To assess the impact of the project and effects on both individual and community level
· To assess the extent of the project ability to support longer-term goals focusing on sustainability and community-led programming
· To extract and analyse the lessons learned and to provide specific, practical and actionable recommendations for sustainability and future programming.
Intended use of the Evaluation findings and recommendations
For DRC Bangladesh, the key stakeholders include: Senior Management, Protection and shelter teams (office and field based), MEAL unit, affected communities supported through the project implementation.
In light of the pilot project implemented and the overall effort being put into learning from different pilots and projects, this evaluation will be used to:
· Improve existing project design and processes, including next steps, and recommendations for sustainability
· Inform future interventions by reflecting and learning from experience
· Document and utilize best practices
Other stakeholders include: ECHO, DRC HQ, regional offices, other protection actors in the response including and not limited to UNHCR, IOM and Protection Working Group Task Team. The evaluation results will be used to:
· Contribute to the wider global organizational and programmatic learning whereby actors can draw on the experience and disseminate learning in other countries
· Make an informed decision on ways of improvement of DRC’s ongoing work and improving strategies and long-term planning
· To assess whether the project had been effective and efficient in realizing the goals set
Context and background to the project
The Danish Refugee Council (DRC) is a leading international, non-profit, non-governmental organization with its headquarters based in Denmark. DRC is one of the world’s leading NGOs and provides relief, protection and resettlement services to refugees and displaced persons worldwide.
DRC has been registered in Bangladesh since 2013 but set up its emergency response and has been actively responding to the Rohingya influx from Myanmar since October 2017. As of October 2019, over 840,000 stateless Rohingya refugees have been residing in Ukhiya and Teknaf Upazilas with the vast majority living in around 34 congested camps.
Focusing on the response to the influx of refugees targeting both refugees and host communities with protection, site management, shelter and site development, in 2019 DRC operated in 14 camps and 4 wards in host communities. DRC implemented a comprehensive protection programming including General Protection (GP), Child Protection (CP), and Gender-Based Violence (GBV) and integrated these programs with other sectors in which DRC operates such as Site Management Support (SMS), shelter and infrastructure. General Protection (GP), Gender-based violence (GBV) and infrastructure, Energy and Environment programming are implemented in host communities as well as in refugee camps.
Building on previous projects and activities implemented with the Rohingya refugees and host communities specifically 2018 ECHO-funded intervention, the 2019 – 2020 ECHO Action aims at reducing protection risks through targeted protection assistance, community-led programming, evidence -based advocacy and improved humanitarian coordination.
The proposed intervention aimed to strengthen the protective environment for Rohingya refugees and host communities affected by the displacement in Ukhiya Upazila, Bangladesh focusing on 4 axes:
Provide access to tailored protection services to Rohingya refugees and host community individuals facing protection risks, including GBV to strengthen their capacity to address their protection needs and risks. Building on the accomplishments of 2018 ECHO funded project, DRC initially implemented GBV programming in host communities and aimed to expand the activities into two refugee camps, where gaps in GBV response had been identified by DRC protection case management teams and where DRC had a well-established multi-sector presence to facilitate community acceptance and effective response.
Provide community-based protection programming to strengthen the community members self-protection capacities and resilience targeting. The projects aimed to respond to protection concerns including factors driving tensions, focusing on specifically women, girls and less empowered groups. The community-based programming supported a bamboo treatment plant providing livelihood opportunities to host communities through sustainable and environmental programming. In addition, for this specific project, DRC leveraged on its established presence, local knowledge and trained teams and expanded a full General Protection package since January 2019 in both camps 8E and 8W. Community-based protection, protection monitoring, and protection case management activities were supported complementing Site Management and Community Infrastructures funded by IOM for both camps 8E and 8W.
Develop evidence-based advocacy products and initiatives with the aim of disseminating positive messaging to elevate the voices of refugees. Key positions papers were disseminated with the aim to engage the ADSP, INGO advocacy working group in both Bangladesh, Myanmar and regional actors.
Scale-up the activities of the NGO platform bringing together local, national and international NGOs with the purpose of collecting information on humanitarian space, advocacy around protection and repatriation. The platform created in 2019 with funding from ECHO continued its work on information sharing, coordination, humanitarian advocacy, representation, capacity strengthening and partnerships.
Scope of the evaluation
The evaluation will cover the specific work and activities implemented between April 2019 and April 2020 for the 2019 ECHO-funded project. The thematic areas to be covered should be focused on protection more specifically Community-Based Protection, Protection Monitoring, Case Management for general protection services, and Gender-Based violence. In addition, coordination and advocacy for better practices and policies central to influence change within the communities where services are implemented is to be looked at. The evaluation will not seek to cover any technical thematic areas focusing on the Bamboo treatment Plant component but rather look into the synergy of this activity with other protection services – such as referral systems and selection criteria for vulnerable people linked to this service.
The evaluation will seek to cover all geographical locations targeted by the project through field visits as needed or desk reviews if field visits are not conducted due to logical and technical issues. The areas in Ukhia Upazila mentioned are divided between Rohingya refugee camps; 8E, 8W and 6 Camps and host community localities; Rajapalong, Palongkhali. It is also to expected any locality or location even if not mentioned above if determined valuable or relevant to the scope of the evaluation for this project.
Key evaluation questions
The focus and questions for this evaluation are based on the DAC/OECD standard criteria and Core Humanitarian Standard (CHS) on quality and accountability involving the people for evaluation with a focus on effectiveness, impact and connectedness.
The key questions under each evaluation criteria are further detailed below:
Effectiveness:
To which extent were each project objectives achieved? To which extent were individuals able to meet their needs (including protection needs) in all thematic areas targeted by the project?
Have the linkages and coordination mechanisms between protection components such as GBV and the community-led project implemented in similar locations been effective in terms of targeting the most vulnerable people?
Have people been able to access protection services i.e. case management and GBV services in a safe way? Has the assistance provided been effective and able to improve their well-being and living conditions?
To what extent the information DRC provided – such as key position papers developed, through the advocacy working groups and NGO platform was informative and effective to be acted upon?
To what extent has the NGO Platform been effective in information sharing representation and coordination of NGOs both local and international in the Rohingya Refugee Response?
Appropriateness:
Was the targeting methodology able to identify the most vulnerable individuals (taking into consideration gender, age and special needs) in all thematic areas?
Was the selection of individuals for the community-led bamboo treatment plant appropriate? Was it completed in coordination with the local authorities, communities and coordinate with the protection team?
Were the Women and Girls Safe Spaces activities appropriate and relevant to the needs of the people supported? Is their perception of the activities aligned with the initial objectives of the project?
Was the NGO Platform’s coordination role well-understood and appreciated by NGO members and other relevant stakeholders- UN agencies, local authorities and donors?
Connectedness:
How did the thematic areas implemented within this project influence and affect each other?
How have protection monitoring services specifically focusing on protection monitoring been utilized by DRC and other stakeholders (specifically protection actors) to adapt programming and protection services within the targeted areas?
Did any of the protection trends observed and identified through protection monitoring been addressed and mitigated through case management (general protection and GBV) and/or other DRC programmes?
Were there any linkages or overlap with other protection actors in terms of coordination related to protection services or site management services within the targeted camps?
Was the NGO Platform able to build linkages and promote partnerships between national, local and international NGOs and between NGO actors and other relevant stakeholders in the response?
Impact and sustainability:
What impact did the community-led projects have on the individuals working within this project and on the community as a whole including local authorities and non-beneficiaries? Did it support cohesion or create tensions within the targeted area of implementation?
Are individuals supported able to sustain the community-led projects and other services such as women centres independently? Will the project implemented be sustainable and durable following the exit strategy implementation of DRC in the future?
What are the essential lessons learned and recommendations for continuing the implementation of protection programming in the future?
What needs to improve in terms of coordination systems to allow DRC to better respond to the needs of the individuals reached by its protection programming?
What are the areas in which NGO coordination through the NGO Platform can better contribute towards sustainability of the response?
Evaluation deliverables
· Inception Report presenting:
o A detailed methodology based on this ToR and initial briefings/desk reviews, including a full rationale for the choice of methods and how they will be used to evaluate the different elements of the project, planned timeframe, list of proposed stakeholders to be consulted and ethical procedures to be followed.
o Initial findings based on review of the project documentation, existing data and secondary data.
o An outline of key knowledge gaps not covered by this ToR and any suggested additional/alterations to the proposed evaluation questions and overall ToR.
· Draft and final versions of the evaluation report/outputs. The evaluation report should:
o Not exceed 15 pages, not including the executive summary and appendices
o Include an executive summary, brief of the project background, outline of the methodology used (including limitations), findings and recommendations by evaluation/review criteria and question
o Ensure the analysis is always back-up with references and relevant data
o Ensure recommendations made are specific and include relevant details for how they might be implemented
o Include at least the following annexes: (i) Terms of Reference, (ii) Schedule for field visits, (iii) List of documents reviewed, persons interviewed or involved in Focus Group Discussions, and (iv) Data collection tools.
· A power point presentation for dissemination of the final findings and recommendations
· DRC Lessons Learned Note to be filled based on the template provided.
Methodology
The methodology is expected to adopt a mixed-method approach as feasible in order to capture all aspects of the project and properly respond to the evaluation questions. The consultant/evaluator is responsible for the development of a complete and comprehensive evaluation methodology and needed tools at the inception stage. The main data collection methods that should be included are highlighted below:
· Desk review including project proposal, project documents, and relevant monitoring reports and data, evaluations conducted and completed for similar DRC or I/NGO projects
· Qualitative methods including key informant interviews and Focus Group Discussions with main stakeholders within and outside DRC, such as ECHO, IOM, UNHCR in addition to including beneficiaries supported through the project located in the geographical areas mentioned previously.
· Participatory validation workshop with key staff is also to be included as part of the evaluation in order to validate findings and come up with actionable recommendations.
Practical Implementation of the Evaluation
Schedule:
The evaluation should take place over a period of 40 working days between mid- April and June 2020, with some flexibility with the report to be finalized and submitted by 18 June 2020.
The below presents the suggested timeline for the tasks:
- Desk Review and inception phase (including feedback & revision) 7 working days
- Data Collection (field work in Cox's Bazar, Bangladesh) 15 working days
- Preliminary data validation workshop (including workshop facilitation) in Cox's Bazar, Bangladesh 3 working days
- Analysis, report writing and report finalization based on workshop results (including feedback & revision) 15 working days
Budget:
An indicative budget for this evaluation for a consultancy team is EURO 15,000.
Note: For international consultants DRC will cover the airfare from point of departure to Cox’s Bazaar (if needed) and cover the internal transport back-forth from the camps. The consultants are expected to cover their own costs for accommodation and per-diem. Daily rates would be assessed in consideration if the airfare will be arranged by DRC. Consultant will not be entitled for any other benefits. Payment will be made after making necessary deductions as per DRC policy.
International consultants or consultancy firm should be able to confirm their own entry and departure into Bangladesh, DRC will not be taking responsibility for visa processing. DRC will be available to advice.
Skills of the evaluator
The applicant is expected to meet the following criteria:
· Significant and proven experience in similar studies with focus on protection programming (i.e. general protection, gender-based violence, protection monitoring, and case management) and in using both qualitative and quantitative research methodologies and data analysis.
· Previous evaluation experience in relation to protection programming (to be provided within the CV). Experience in conducting evaluations in the context or area would be preferred (Cox’s Bazar or Rakhine).
· General protection and/or refugee and human rights background is required. GBV background will be desirable.
· Extensive experience in designing, conducting, and implementing evaluations.
· Good analytical and critical thinking.
· Good understanding of the humanitarian work and context.
· Prior experience with working with DRC is an asset.
· Ability to work on tight schedules and with minimum supervision.
· Excellent English speaking and writing skills. Bangla is an asset.
How to apply:
Application procedures
Interested parties should submit their applications to rfq.bgd@drc.ngo by midnight (BGD time) on the 19th of March.
The Email subject title should specifically mention: ECHO Action BGD – Expression of interest
Applications must include:
• Curricula Vitae (CV) of all proposed team members if applicable
• Cover letter outlining how the consultant/s meet the specifications, confirmation of availability for the timeframe indicated, and contact details
• Proposal not exceeding 5 pages, outlining a proposed approach and methodology with the time plan, indicative budget, and outline of the roles and responsibilities of each team member if applicable
• A sample of a similar piece of work previously conducted
We aim to hold the interviews Mid-March 2020 and for the successful party to start the consultancy in Mid-April 2020.
