Terms of Reference (TOR) for Final Evaluation for Saferworld Addressing Root Causes of Conflict (ARC) Programme, Somalia

TERMS OF REFERENCE

FINAL EVALUATION FOR SAFERWORLD ADDRESSING ROOT CAUSES OF CONFLICT (ARC) PROGRAMME, SOMALIA.

Background and context

Saferworld is an independent non-governmental organization that works with governments, international, regional and local civil society organizations – especially in fragile contexts – to reduce violent conflict, promote cooperative approaches to security and contribute to long term recovery and stability. We work with civil society, governments and international organizations to encourage and support effective policies and practices through advocacy, research and policy development, and through supporting the development of local capacities and structures.

Since its establishment in 1989, Saferworld has actively worked internationally to encourage the development and implementation of international policies and approaches to address violent conflict and insecurity, and have made significant progress on a range of conflict prevention issues, including, promoting effective and accountable security and justice sector development and supporting initiatives to tackle small arms and light weapons control. In the context of conflict prevention, we focus on community safety and security promotion and the development of civil society actors’ capacity to engage on security and justice issues.

Saferworld has over 15 years’ experience in Somalia and Somaliland. Since 2004, we have been working with partners to promote democratization, ensure governance is more inclusive, and to improve community security. We work with three non-state actor platforms in South Central Somalia, Somaliland and Puntland to promote and coordinate civil society involvement in peacebuilding, state building, governance and democratization. We introduced community action forums in three regions of Somalia to enable communities to identify and determine how to address their own safety and security challenges

Project objectives and outcomes

Saferworld is implementing Addressing Root Causes (ARC) programmes in Somalia, which is funded by the ARC Fund from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) of the Netherlands and is running from 2017 to 2021. Their overall goal is to reduce root causes of armed conflict, instability or irregular migration.

Together with our partners Somali Women Development Centre (SWDC) in Mogadishu, Somali Women Solidarity Organization (SWSO) in Kismayo and Isha Human Rights Organization (IHRO) in Baidoa, Saferworld is implementing the programme ‘Restoring Stable Communities in Somalia’. The programme strengthens the capacity of local civil society groups and communities to research and facilitate broad dialogue across clan and state-society divides about local security issues, provide resources for implementation of joint conflict prevention and community security initiatives, support cross-regional community exchange to share experiences and common security problems; and link community members with existing dispute resolution mechanisms. At the state level, it seeks to re-establish bodies that promote community-responsive policing, acting as a link through which information on security provision is channeled, and form bridges between local, state and national levels. Learning and insights from all levels will be fed upwards through national-level civil society networks, promoting community-focused security provision at national and international levels. Broadly, the programme aims to improve the roles and responsibilities among communities, administrations, police and courts in the three state capitals, in the interest of mutual accountability. This will result in improved state-society relations, especially in the provision of security services, through improved perceptions of safety and security, and practically, a more functional and responsive formal security sector. See Annex I for Theory of Change visualization.

The programme seeks to contribute to the following:

Outcome 1: Communities and civil society in Benadir, Jubaland and South West State, including marginalized groups such as women and youth, work together across clan lines to resolve safety and security issues, advocate with relevant authorities for appropriate responses and promote cross-regional cooperation.

Outcome 2: Police and state institutions coordinate, share information, implement inclusive responses to communities’ security needs and are actively engaging with Police Advisory Committees (PACs) to discuss and respond to issues and concerns raised by Community Action Forums (CAFs), resulting in increased citizen-state trust.

Outcome 3: National (FMS and Mogadishu), regional and international policy makers reflect the security needs of local communities, in particular the concerns of women and youth across clan divides, in policies and practices on security in Somalia.

Concurrently, Saferworld is implementing a similar peacebuilding programme in Sudan under ARC, which is also coming to an end in 2021 and will be subject to an external evaluation running alongside this one.

Evaluation purpose

The purpose of the evaluation is to assess the results of the project at different levels and determine the level of the project’s contribution to its outcomes. Evaluation is an integral part of our overall project management cycle to ensure effective oversight of the project and to guide both programmatic and organizational learning.

The specific objectives of this final evaluation are to:

• Analyse to what extent the programme addressed the priorities of the project participants, was designed and implemented in a conflict and gender-sensitive way and how the learning agenda feeds into the programme’s theory of change (relevance and adaptation to the context)
• Assess the extent to which three expected outcomes were achieved and analyse how our engagement with the Community Action Forums as well as Police Advisory Committees and other police stakeholders has worked, i.e. did the program meet the expected outcomes, have we used the right level of expertise for this work, how were communities’ issues linked to national, regional and international policy makers, etc. (effectiveness)
• Analyse to what extent the other Somalia programmes complemented the value to the ARC programme and what that means for value for money (efficiency)
• Establish what constitutes sustainability in the Somalia context and analyse the sustained effect of the ARC programming, i.e. we are building capacity of people, what roles do they have now and how are we connecting to them as part of our influencing (sustainability)
• Identify good practices and lessons learnt related to the project operational contexts, actors engaged, strategies applied in the implementation and changes observed (an action objective)
• Assess how partners were involved in project and budget design and management and how effective was the partnership (working in partnership)

The findings of this evaluation will inform the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Netherlands programming in Somalia and the learning agenda in the future, and provide Saferworld, our partners SWDC, SWSO and IHRO, the MFA of the Netherlands and key stakeholders of the ARC programme with lessons on what worked well and what did not and recommendations for both programmatic and operational improvements.

Key evaluation questions

A final list of the final evaluation study questions will be agreed between the evaluator(s) and the evaluation manager; the following list is provided to aid discussions between the evaluators, Saferworld, its partners and members of the communities where we work. All questions except those marked with ** are cross-cutting questions that also feature in the concurrent Sudan ARC evaluation (see above for details)

Effectiveness:

• To what extent has the program met its expected outcomes?
• To what extent have constructive relationships developed between communities (PACs and CAFs) and the local authorities, and how has this led to more effective peacebuilding and community security initiatives?
• What programming strategies were particularly effective, which were not and why?
• How effectively were local-, state- and regional-level activities linked to one other, and to what extent did they feed in to national- and international-level advocacy?
• Did the ARC programme Theory of Change (ToC) and its assumptions hold true? What assumptions were challenged and what adaptations did the programme need to make from the original Theory of Change?
• How effective were research and learning efforts advanced through the programme, including cross-country learning?
• To what extent did the intervention contribute to strengthening both the role of communities in their security and the capacity of community structures to influence security providers?

Relevance and adaptation:

• Is the intervention consistent with declared needs of the target groups? Does it employ technically relevant solutions to the problems it seeks to address?
• To what extent were project participants, including communities and authorities, meaningfully consulted and involved in programmatic decision-making? What, if any, effect did this have on the relevance of the programme design to the needs and priorities of the target groups?
• To what extent was the programme adaptive to changes in the conflict context? What supported or hindered the programme’s adaptability?

Efficiency:

• To what extent is the ARC programme complementary with any similar interventions operating in the program target locations? Have any other interventions established community-based structures, and if so, to what extent have these structures communicated and coordinated with the CAFs and PACs in the same locations?**
• How effective was the Saferworld partnership modality? How were partners involved in project and budget design, implementation and management?

Sustainability:

• To what extent are programme gains likely to be sustained and why?
• How successful were efforts to build the capacities and legitimacy of community structures and partners to conduct peacebuilding work?

Impact:

• To what extent did the programme contribute to addressing the political and socio-economic root causes of armed conflict and instability?

Conflict and gender sensitivity:

• To what extent were conflict and gender sensitivity integrated into design and implementation of programming? What were the main challenges and opportunities encountered for integrating conflict- and gender? What were the benefits of adopting conflict- and gender-sensitive approaches at different levels, including impact on communities, authorities, partners and policymakers?
• To what extent is there meaningful collaboration on conflict sensitivity between the partners and communities (CAFs)?**
• To what extent do the implementing organizations appear well equipped to implement the project with regards to conflict sensitivity (including beyond Do No Harm)?**

Methodology and methods

As part of this assignment, the consultancy team is expected to propose culturally and socially appropriate approaches that will be used to answer the questions raised in this ToR. A mixture of qualitative and quantitative approaches should be used as well as primary and secondary data in analysing the impact and multiplier effect of the action. The proposed methodology must be described by the evaluator(s) in the expression of interest, clearly outlining how practically they will be used during the data collection. The consultant is expected to demonstrate ability to undertake the evaluation by providing details of the process including the assessment tools, formats and methods.

Saferworld is committed to participatory MEL approaches that disrupt existing power hierarchies and provide people in the contexts where we work with the opportunity to take control of MEL priorities and activities, rather than having MEL agendas imposed upon them. With respect to this project, Saferworld, its partners and CAF representatives recently concluded an exercise of peer research, in which CAF members identified a set of learning questions and ran their own data collection activities to evaluate the performance and impact of the CAFs. The successful applicants for this evaluation will be expected to build on the learning priorities and findings of the peer research, and actively identify opportunities to involve CAF members in data collection and analysis, pending their availability and interest.

Saferworld uses an adapted form of the evaluation methodology outcome harvesting (OH) to understand what changes in behaviour and relationships have taken place as a result of our work and what the significance of those changes are both in the short and long term.[1] A critical function of this evaluation will be to review outcomes gathered through project OH and then substantiate, verify, reject or add to these outcomes through collection of complementary primary datasets.

As part of the desk review for this assignment, the evaluator(s) will review the following sources of data prior to primary data collection, in addition to outcomes from OH:

• Baseline data: Review the project achievement compared to the baseline information, with particular attention paid to the conventional food security and livelihood indicators like CSI, and Food consumption score if applicable
• Key project documents: Including the project design documents, log frame, interim reports, and other circumstantial reports.
• Questions and findings of the CAF peer research: See note on peer research above
• Secondary Data: These will include cluster information as well as relevant statistics or reports from other agencies working in the area for reviewing purpose. Cross reference of information from other projects funded in the same area is essential.

The assignment will then require travel to some selected programme locations to carry out primary data collection.

• Focus Group Discussions (FGDs): Focus group discussions will be conducted with different groups in conflict and gender sensitive manner as part of the assignment to receive feedback on how our beneficiaries and stakeholders perceived the programme.
• Key Informant Interviews (KIIs): Interviews will be conducted either in person or remotely with our Somalia and Sudan based programme managers, MEL coordinators, partners, communities and different stakeholders with whom we are working. The assignment will require travel to some selected programme locations to carry out interviews and focus group discussions.
• Field observation: Where possible, evaluators should ensure time is set aside outside of formal data collection to observe tangible or visible changes (e.g. infrastructural improvements) from project activities directly, to triangulate data from FGDs and KIIs.
• Case Story: To record the most significant changes to the life of children, women, families and communities as a result of our intervention.

While evaluators will be expected to develop structured or semi-structured tools for formal data collection activities (e.g. interview questionnaires), they will equally be encouraged to adapt tools where appropriate to follow up particular lines of enquiry as they emerge during the exercise.

Role and responsibility of Saferworld 

Saferworld, through its Programmes Team, will manage and oversee the evaluation process and will provide advice on each of the deliverables. Saferworld Programmes Team will approve each of the deliverables by the evaluation team, following internal quality assurance. Saferworld will avail all project documents to the evaluation team, proposal, work plans, reports briefing papers, annual reports etc. In all project locations Saferworld through the Project Coordinators will facilitate the identification of key stakeholders (local authorities, partner CSOs, community leaders, CAFs etc.) who have been engaged in the project directly or indirectly to provide their reflections on the project. Saferworld will coordinate/facilitate necessary logistics related to field visits for the consultant (& team). Overall responsibility for the evaluation rests with Saferworld’s Somalia team led by program manager and MEL coordinator. Saferworld will facilitate all visa requirements, transport to Somalia and to all project locations. In addition, Saferworld will provide accommodation and communications equipment while in country. Saferworld will not provide personal computers and the consultant(s) has to use his/her own computer. All necessary logistical arrangements for the assessment will be coordinated through Saferworld logistics department. The chosen individual consultant(s) will coordinate with the Monitoring Evaluation and Learning (MEL) coordinator, Programme Manager and Project Coordinators in the planning and implementation of the evaluation.

Role and responsibility of the evaluator/s

The evaluator(s) will be either already based in Somalia or able to travel there (depending on the security situation). The evaluator(s) will be expected to submit the following deliverables in time in compliance with standard requirements: 

• A 5-page inception report, including the evaluation methodology and work plan/schedule, submitted alongside draft data collection tools (tools not included within 5-page limit)
• Validation Workshop of evaluation findings with project stakeholders after generating the draft evaluation report. A short presentation of outcome findings, insights into contribution pathways and feasible recommendation must be shared with the project team a day before the validation workshop.
• Final Evaluation report of no more than 25 pages (excluding executive summary, references & annexes). This will be presented to Saferworld in 2 hard copies and soft copy.
• Other documents/materials such as raw data files, quantitative data files, transcripts of interviews, FGDs, photographs taken etc.

 Deliverables and outputs

The task and report should be completed by 28 February 2021. Based on the timeline below, the total time requirement is 36 days, including four days of travel time.

S/N	Activity	Approximate time allocated	Deliverable
1.	Initial briefing meeting with Saferworld Somalia team	0.5 days	Inception Report, including data collection tools
2.	Saferworld preparation and review of the inception report	2 days	Comments and feedback from SW
3.	Desk review of existing programme documentation (including country strategy, proposal documents, annual community security assessments, outcomes collected through regular outcome harvesting with partners and community members, and partner reports)	4 days	First Draft Report
	Training of research team on SW policies (E.g. safeguarding)	1 day
5.	Outcome harvesting workshop with ARC program team and partners	3 days
6.	Face-to-face interviewing with ARC Somalia staff (e.g. MEL Coordinator, Programme Manager (PM), Area Project Manager, Field Coordinator)	1 days
7.	Field visits, interviewing staff, partners and stakeholders in selected field offices (this can be face-to-face and through Skype).	10 days
8.	Meet the project teams from Saferworld and partners to validate the findings prior to drafting the evaluation report.	1 day
9.	Writing up evaluation report. The final report should not exceed 25 pages (not including relevant annexes and case studies) and should be in English.	8 days
10.	Incorporating Saferworld feedback into final evaluation report	2 days	Final Evaluation Report and PowerPoint presentation
11.	Feedback meeting with Saferworld	0.5 days	Final Report

The consultant will be required to produce a final report, not exceeding 25 pages (not including relevant annexes and case studies). The consultant will agree the format of the report with Saferworld.

Management and timing

The final evaluation work schedule is outlined above. This is provisional and contingent upon the security situations and availability of partners and staff. The consultant(s) must adhere to Saferworld’s security and safety and safeguarding policies. Saferworld and partners will support the consultant(s) during the visits with logistics, contextual information and security briefings. Over all the process will led by the program manager and MEL coordinator with the support of London-based MEL adviser.

Profile of consultant/s 

The consultant or consultancy team will be expected to demonstrate that they can bring the following experience profile and skills to the exercise:

• 5 years’ experience of leading evaluations and in designing and administering evaluations, of peacebuilding and community security projects in conflict settings (if submitting as part of a team, the lead consultant must have 5 years’ experience);
• Strong experience and capacity in facilitating qualitative, participatory data collection methods, including FGDs and KIIs at the community and administrative levels;
• Experience managing a diverse team and providing capacity building and training support, and ability to mobilize any field research assistants considered necessary to assist with data collection in the project network;
• Practical experience in Outcome Harvesting (desirable)
• Experience developing community security projects in conflict settings;
• Proven ability to manage highly confidential and sensitive information;
• Experience managing projects in complex and dangerous environments;
• Experience working in active conflict environments in conflict- and gender-sensitive ways;
• Demonstrable experience of producing high-quality, credible reports;
• Excellent English written (essential for lead report writer) and verbal communications skills;
• Excellent Somali verbal communication skills (essential for any consultant involved in data collection);
• Eligibility to travel to project locations;
• Sound knowledge of Somalia is essential; and
• Experience of working with security providers. 

Application Process

Saferworld invite you to submit and expressions of interest from teams or individuals with the required skills and experience. Saferworld is seeking a suitably qualified and experienced consultancy team or individual with a strong track record in conducting end-of-project evaluations for community security and peacebuilding projects. Candidates will manage the evaluation process with support from Saferworld’s Somalia team. Candidates will have an excellent knowledge of monitoring and evaluation in theory and practice, and a good overall understanding of how community security feeds into wider conflict, security and development processes. The expression of interest should comprise:

• An expression of interest (5 pages max)
• Capacity and experience to meet the requirements of the ToR, including a short CV for all team members, cover letter and samples of previous work relevant to the assignment (written by the lead consultant if submitting as part of a team)
• A broad outline of the approach that you would use to review the programme (1-2 pages max), including a description of the team management structure and roles of each team member if applicable
• Indicative budget (0.5 page) covering daily rate(s). Rates should be in USD and inclusive of VAT. International flights, visas and international accommodation will be arranged for and covered by Saferworld.

Please submit completed expressions of interest with all supporting information to jobs@saferworld.org.uk. Your e-mail must have the subject heading indicating ARC Project Final Evaluation-Somalia. Only selected evaluator(s) will be contacted for further processes.

• Binding agreements will be drawn in a form of a contract to which this TOR will serve as an annex or addendum. The contract will stipulate all the legal and statutory obligations as required by law and relevant to the two contracting parties.

Deadline for applications is 16 November 2021, 4:30 Pm EAT.

[1] See our learning paper Doing things differently for more detail on Saferworld’ s approach to OH

 

………………………………………………………………………………………

QaranJobs.com

………………………………………………………………………………………

PLEASE JOIN US – QARAN JOBS

Follow us on our Social Media:

Telegram: https://t.me/qaran_jobs

Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com/QaranJobs.so  

Facebook Group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/somaliajobs

Linkedin: https://so.linkedin.com/company/qaranjobs

Twitter: https://twitter.com/QaranJobs

Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/qaranjobs

………………………………………………………………………………………