Evaluation of a country (Uganda) component of the multi-country program “Mitigate the worst effects of water scarcity and hunger in Sub-Saharan Africa”

Tender Ref: RFT 375736 - UGA 1137/208/2024 On behalf of Welthungerhilfe, 17th September 2024.

1. INTRODUCTION AND CONTEXT

Deutsche Welthungerhilfe e. V. is one of the largest non-governmental organisations in Germany operating in the humanitarian assistance and development fields. It was established in 1962, as the German section of the “Freedom from Hunger Campaign”, one of the world’s first initiatives aimed at the eradication of hunger.

Similar Jobs in Uganda
Learn more about Welthungerhilfe (WHH)
Welthungerhilfe (WHH) jobs in Uganda

Welthungerhilfe’s work is still dedicated to the following vision: All people have a right to a selfdetermined life in dignity and justice, free from hunger and poverty, starting from fast disaster relief to reconstruction and long-term development cooperation projects with national and international partner organizations. Since its foundation, 12,128 overseas projects in 72 countries have been supported with about 5.07 billion euros.

In 2023, Welthungerhilfe and its partner organisations ran 630 international projects in 36 countries with an overall financing volume of EUR 322,2 million, comprised of private donations, public national and international funds.

With reference to the formulated "Cornerstones of German Humanitarian Aid in Africa 2021", a three-year Africa-wide program to mitigate humanitarian crises in – initially seven – later nine countries of Sub-Saharan Africa – Burundi, Central African Republic, Ethiopia, Kenya, Niger, Somalia, South Sudan, – was developed by Welthungerhilfe and its implementing partners in 2021. All countries were facing multi-layered emergencies which were triggered by climatic, political, and economic shocks in 2020-21. After financing was granted by the German Federal Foreign Office, the multi-country program started in January (for 5 out of 7 countries: BDI, CAR, ETH, KEN, NER) and in July 2022 (for the remaining 2 countries: SOM, SSD), respectively.

The aim of the project has been to ensure the basic provision of sufficient drinking water and access to safe sanitation and hygiene services as well as the provision of needs-based emergency aid to prevent or decrease morbidities, mortality and acute malnutrition especially for vulnerable people in acute humanitarian crises triggered by flight and displacement, droughts, floods and anticipated periods of hunger. In total, more than 575.000 people in need shall be reached through the various interventions in the seven countries.

The multi-country program was progressing well in its first year with key emergency activities undertaken in all countries. However, due to sharply risen market prices, inflation in most countries and the global impacts of the conflict in Ukraine, the estimated budget no longer covered the minimum expenditure basket for families in need in the respective program countries. As food insecurity was further driven by climatic shocks (floods and droughts), conflict and insecurity, climate- and conflict-induced population displacements, low agricultural production levels, and the cumulative effects of prolonged years of asset depletion that continue to erode households’ coping capacities and the loss of livelihoods, additional funds for the second and third project year were being sought to expand the project activities to benefit additional people in need.

By design, the requested top-up funds continued in the established intervention logic and thereby ensure the basic provision of sufficient drinking water and access to safe sanitation and hygiene services as well as the provision of needs-based emergency aid, including food and cash distributions, to vulnerable people in acute humanitarian crises in – newly – nine African countries. One focus has been on responding to the enormous needs in the Horn of Africa region during 2023, including an expansion of activities into new regions as well as an 18months extension of the Kenyan component. Furthermore, Uganda and Malawi – both countries that have been taken on refugee influxes from neighboring crisis hotspots for years were added to the multi-country program. Malawi was additionally affected by tropical Cyclone Freddy, which displaced more than half a million people in March 2023. To be able to respond to those additional needs, top-up funding was requested and granted in June 2023. With this, an additional 250.000 people and thus in total more than 810.000 people in need shall be reached through the various interventions until the end of the program duration in December 2024 (further extension request is currently pending).

The country component of the multi-country program in question here, Uganda, currently hosts over 1.5 million refugees, the highest number in any country in Africa. Nearly 60% of the refugees are from South Sudan and about 30% from the Democratic Republic of Congo, of which more than 950,000 have settled in the West Nile region (UNHCR). South Sudanese continue to flee from their country due to a combination of reasons, notably tribal conflict, violence, extreme climate, and hunger. Meanwhile, fighting between the government forces and rebels, as well as ethnic killings are the main reasons that necessitate the flight of Congolese new arrivals to Uganda. As a result, new arrivals continue to enter the country. The increased number of refugees and the overall increase in population in the West Nile region has led to significant pressure on community resources with economic, social, and developmental consequences.

Within the scope of the multi-country program, Uganda aims to improve the Food and Nutrition Security and WASH situation of the refugees and the host population in the West Nile Region. The project targeted to reach over 19,500 people, 65% refugees and 35% host population from the Districts of Terego, Madi Okollo and Yumbe, within the 17 months project period. The project is well aligned to the comprehensive Refugee Response Framework that was launched in March 2017 led by the Ugandan Government in collaboration with the local and international development partners as well as the Job and Livelihoods Integrated Response Plan for 2020/21 to 2024/25.

The target groups of the intervention are the following:

• Internally displaced persons, refugees, repatriated people, asylum seekers,
• Host communities (hosting refugee/IDPs settlements),
• Returnees,
• vulnerable communities (mostly agro-pastoralists) already in stressed food security situation and likely to be affected by water scarcity, droughts, floods, and famine in the next three years (continued crisis or deterioration anticipated).

Assistance will be particularly tailored to the needs of children, women, the elderly, and people with disabilities.

Emergency capacities of selected local organizations will be strengthened, and they will be directly involved in the implementation of emergency measures.

The main expected outcome and outputs of the multi-country program are as follows:

Outcome: Improving access to safe drinking water and sanitation and providing immediate emergency assistance in periodic humanitarian crises in nine countries in Sub-Saharan Africa.

Output 1: Access to essential water supply and safe sanitation facilities in vulnerable communities has improved to meet the demand.

Output 2: Providing local and immediate emergency assistance to protect especially children, women, elderly and people with disabilities in humanitarian crises.

Output 3: Target population is enabled to cover individual basic food and non-food needs in the short-term.

The mode of implementation has been a mix of self-implementation and implementation through local partners – depending on each country context. In total,13 implementing partner organizations have been involved in the program to varying degrees.

2. EVALUATION PURPOSE

The overall purpose of this evaluation is to assess the effectiveness of the multi-country program in achieving its stated objectives in the participating country components as the funding is coming to an end. The final evaluation will examine the impact (clear link between intervention and outcomes) of the services provided on participants and their families, focusing on improvements in access to safe drinking water and sanitation, immediate emergency assistance, and the ability of the target population to meet basic food and non-food needs in the short term.

The evaluation will also document best practices, lessons learned, challenges, and opportunities encountered during the program's implementation and design phases in the individual countries. It aims to generate knowledge for learning, informing future program design and implementation. Insights will be shared with stakeholders to support continuous improvement and effective decision-making in humanitarian programming.

3. SCOPE OF THE EVALUATION

The evaluation will be a final evaluation and will assess the Uganda component of the multicountry program in terms of its effectiveness in improving access to safe drinking water and sanitation, providing immediate emergency assistance, and enabling the target population to meet their basic needs in the respective country. The evaluation will cover all project locations and the complete program duration of the respective country as specified in the project proposal document.

More specifically, the evaluation will:

1- Assess the project’s relevance by examining whether the funding and support provided align with the local needs, priorities, and possibilities, including those of local partners.

2- Evaluate the achievement of the project’s outcomes and results as defined in the project’s logical framework, focusing on improvements in water and sanitation access, emergency assistance provision, and the ability of the target population to meet basic needs.

3- Document challenges, programmatic lessons learned, and key recommendations for future project improvements and similar interventions.

The evaluation will employ a mixed-methods approach, including quantitative surveys, qualitative interviews, focus group discussions, and direct observations. Data will be disaggregated by gender, age, disability status, and other relevant demographic factors. The evaluation will involve extensive stakeholder engagement, including participants, local communities, project staff, government/local authorities, and partner organizations. Ethical considerations, such as confidentiality and informed consent, will be strictly adhered to throughout the evaluation process.

4. USERS OF THE EVALUATION

The intended users of the evaluation results are divided into primary and secondary users, each with distinct roles in utilizing the findings.

Primary Users:

1- Welthungerhilfe Project Staff: To assess project effectiveness, identify areas for improvement, and integrate lessons learned into future project design and implementation.

2- Project Participants: To inform understanding of the impact of the project on their communities and provide feedback for future projects.

3- Project Partners: To enhance collaboration, align activities with evaluation insights, and improve the effectiveness of joint efforts.

4- Welthungerhilfe Head Office: To assess the return on investment and make informed decisions about future funding allocations and support.

Secondary Users:

1- Other Humanitarian Organizations: To learn from the project’s experiences and best practices and apply these insights to their own interventions.

2- Donor: To understand the impact of funded projects, foster transparency and accountability, and guide future funding decisions.

3- Respective country governments (where necessary): To show the impact of the project in the affected regions of intervention and to derive learnings and best practices for their own interventions.

The evaluation results will be disseminated through detailed reports, executive summaries, presentations, and stakeholder meetings to ensure all relevant users are informed and can act upon the findings.

5. EVALUATION QUESTIONS (AND CRITERIA)

The evaluation will address the following evaluation questions based on the OECD DAC criteria of Appropriateness, Effectiveness, and Impact. It was decided to limit the evaluation to these three criteria to go into depth and focus on finding out how well the intervention was suited for the needs expressed in the participating countries, how effective the measures were, and which impact they have had on the lives of the people the multi-country program wished to serve. Additionally, questions will be raised about the usefulness of the multi-country program as a tool to respond to the various humanitarian crises in the participating countries.

5.1 Relevance / appropriateness

A. Alignment with Participant Needs: • To what extent did the project’s objectives and design address the immediate needs of the participants?

• How well did the project adapt to the evolving needs of different participant groups, including children, women, the elderly, and people with disabilities?
• What barriers to access were identified that may have prevented certain groups or individuals from benefiting from the project? How were these barriers addressed, and what strategies were implemented to enhance coverage? B. Relevance to Partner Institutions:
• In what ways did the project support and enhance the capabilities of local partners to respond to humanitarian crises?

C. Stakeholder Engagement and Feedback:

• How effectively did the project incorporate feedback from participants and stakeholders to ensure its continued relevance and appropriateness?

5.2 Effectiveness

A. Achievement of Objectives:

• How effectively did the project enable the target population to meet their needs, particularly in terms of access to safe drinking water, sanitation, emergency assistance, and addressing of basic needs? B. Outcome Level Indicators:
• How did the project perform against the key outcome indicators as stated in the LogFrame?

C. Inclusion of vulnerable groups:

• How effectively did the project identify and reach the most vulnerable and marginalized groups, including children, women, the elderly, and people with disabilities?
• Were there any groups that were underrepresented or missed by the project’s interventions?

D. Effectiveness of Interventions:

• Which specific interventions (e.g., provision of water supply, sanitation facilities, emergency assistance or recovery of livelihoods) were most effective in achieving the project’s objectives?
• Were there any interventions that were less effective, and if so, why?
• Were there any innovative solutions or best practices that emerged from overcoming these challenges?
• How efficient were the monitoring and evaluation systems in tracking project progress and informing decision-making?

5.3 Impact

WHH has recently developed a new definition of impact stating that: "Impact refers to the outcomes that are either contributed to or directly attributed to interventions, which are relevant to those affected by hunger and poverty." Hence, there is a clearer distinction made between outcomes and impact by emphasizing causality, meaning that strong evidence must be presented that shows that the outcome was caused (partially or in full) by the intervention. The subsequent questions shall be applied following this logic and shall focus particularly on the causality link:

A. Overall Impact on Participants:

• What have been the significant short-to medium-term changes in the lives of participants as a result of the project’s interventions? Have there been any long-term changes as well?
• How has the project contributed to improvements in health, economic conditions, and overall well-being of the target population? B. Impact on Vulnerable Groups:
• How has the project specifically impacted vulnerable groups such as children, women, the elderly, and people with disabilities?
• Are there any notable differences in impact among these groups that can be contributed to the interventions?

C. Community-Level Changes:

• How has the project influenced community practices and behaviors related to water, sanitation, hygiene, and emergency preparedness? D. Unintended Impacts:
• What unintended positive impacts have emerged from the project’s interventions?
• Are there any unintended negative impacts, and if so, how were they addressed?

E. Comparison with Baseline:

• How do the current conditions of participants and communities compare with the baseline data collected at the project’s start/beginning of each project year (in case of changing participants)?
• What measurable improvements can be attributed to the project’s interventions? F. Participant Perceptions:
• What stories or testimonies illustrate the project’s impact?

5.4 Multi-country program design

Questions reflecting on the usefulness of the intervention being designed and set up as a multicountry program:

• How did the multi-country structure of the program influence the overall coherence of the interventions in the respective country, especially in terms of quality?
• In what ways did the coordination between the participating countries of the multi-country program contribute to or hinder the effectiveness of interventions in each specific country context?
• Were there any synergies or challenges that arose from the multi-country approach in the respective country, and how did they affect the coordination with national and local actors?
• Was the multi-country approach setting beneficial for cross-country learning and exchanges amongst the participating countries?
• How can the reach (in terms of participants, locations, volume, impact, etc.) of this multicountry program intervention be evaluated compared to single-country interventions in the respective country?
• How can the “administrative workload” of multi-country programs be compared to singlecountry interventions in the respective country?

6 EVALUATION DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY

A final agreement on the evaluation design and methodology will be discussed on the basis of the submitted offer and the result of interviews which will potentially be held with the top-ranked candidates.

Generally,

• The evaluation methodology has to allow for gender-age-disability-disaggregated data, showing how males and females as well as people of different age groups and with or without disabilities benefit from the project.
• The methods and data sources should be triangulated for enhancing the validity of evaluation findings.
• Existing data (e.g. baselines, endlines, secondary data, data stemming from the project feedback and complaints mechanism) must be included, where appropriate, for the evaluation’s purpose and scope.

The evaluation will employ both qualitative and quantitative methods, utilizing primary and secondary data sources. The approach will involve comprehensive data collection and analysis to ensure a robust evaluation of the project’s effectiveness, relevance and impact.

Data Collection Methods:

A. Primary Data Collection:

• Interviews: Conduct Key Informant Interviews (KII) with project participants, implementing partners (IP) project staff, non-IP staff (e.g., community leaders), and other stakeholders.
• Most Significant Change (MSC) Tool: Use the MSC technique to capture qualitative stories of significant changes experienced by participants.
• Surveys: Implement participant surveys to gather quantitative data on project outcomes and impacts.
• Outcome harvesting or comparison group: To align with WHH’s new impact terminology appropriate tools should be used to properly measure the link between intervention and outputs/outcomes translating to actual impact.
• Field Visits: Conduct site visits to observe project activities and gather contextual information.
• Photos and Videos: Collect substantiating photos and videos to provide visual evidence of the project’s impact.

B. Secondary Data Collection:

• Document Review: Analyze existing project documents, including the original proposal, M&E plan, work plans, monitoring data, monthly/quarterly reports, and other relevant materials.
• Data Review: Examine existing datasets and monitoring data to supplement primary data collection.

Methodology:

• Mixed-Methods Approach: The evaluation will use a combination of qualitative and quantitative methods to triangulate data and ensure comprehensive analysis.
• Participatory Techniques: Engage stakeholders, including participants, in the evaluation process to gather diverse perspectives and enhance the validity of findings.
• Ethical Considerations: Conduct the evaluation in compliance with GDPR data protection regulations. The evaluator must sign an understanding to ensure the protection of personal data collected during this assignment. The evaluator will elaborate on data collection and protection methods, including the tools and IT equipment used for data storage and the duration of data storage, in the inception report.

7 MANAGERIAL ARRANGEMENTS / ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

The present Terms of References (ToRs) are part of an overarching multi-country program, meaning that the ToRs are published in each participating country and that an evaluation will take place in each respective country, though coordination amongst those is being ensured at WHH HQ level.

As each country will manage its own evaluation, the following key roles will ensure smooth coordination and support for the evaluators in-country:

A. National Head of Project from each participating country:

o Serve as the main contact for evaluators, facilitating field visits, meetings with stakeholders, and ensuring access to project documents and data.

B. National MEAL focal point from each participating country:

o Provide technical support on evaluation methods, data collection, and indicator tracking. Ensure ethical compliance and high-quality data collection.

C. Country Office staff:

o Help with organizing travel, accommodations, and setting up interviews or meetings with stakeholders (logistical and administrative support).

Furthermore, there is an extra level coordinating all countries participating in this multi-country program which will ensure harmonization and coherence amongst the countries: D. Program Coordinator:

o Serves as the main contact for the national Head of Projects. Provides guidance on harmonization and strategic alignment on the evaluation process in all countries.

E. MEAL Coordinator:

o Serves as the main contact for the national MEAL focal points. Responsible for the development and harmonization of evaluation tools/templates, for streamlining the evaluation process across all countries and ensuring the quality of data received.

8 DELIVERABLES AND REPORTING DEADLINES

All the Deliverables will be submitted to WHH soft copy (unless otherwise noted below).

1- An inception report: The consultant will share his/her inception report that details the evaluation design (rationale, methodology), data collection tools, and a detailed work plan within 1-3 days of engagement, to be approved by WHH (MEAL Coordinator & Program Coordinator).

2- Data collection tools: The Household Survey will be developed by the MEAL

Coordinator, while the qualitative data collection tools will be developed by the

consultant. All tools must be approved by WHH prior to the commencement of data collection, analysis, and interpretation.

3- Validation meeting: A meeting, online, discussing the main findings of the draft report, including project staff, partner staff, WHH MEAL staff, once data collection has ended.

4- Raw Datasets

5- Draft Evaluation Report: The evaluator will prepare a draft evaluation report with details of findings, recommendations and lessons learnt for review by WHH and partners.

6- Final Evaluation Report: The evaluator will share a final evaluation report after incorporating the comments from WHH and project partners.

7- Photos of Evaluation Activities: The evaluator will provide photos documenting the evaluation activities, such as Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) and interviews (while being mindful of confidentiality concerns), as part of the report. Additionally, relevant photos of the project activities from the WHH archive should be used to illustrate the context and work conducted during the project.

9 AVAILABLE DATA

A range of existing information/documents will be made available to the evaluator upon notification of the award. This will include (but is not limited to): the proposal of the multi-country program, the LogFrame, baseline and endline reports, monitoring data, and any other relevant documents.

10 TIME FRAME / SCHEDULE

The duration of the assignment will be 38 working days. This evaluation will begin on 1st October 2024; preliminary works may begin earlier, such as developing the tools and reviewing the initial proposal documents. Below is a tentative schedule prepared to guide the evaluator in developing the evaluation workplan:

Activity Duration

1 Review documents and draft inception report by the evaluator(s) 3 WDs

2 WHH meeting to discuss the inception report, project details and answer any questions the evaluator(s) have 0.5 WD

3 Finalize inception report and detailed work plan, including sampling methodology 3 WDs

4 Development of tools and familiarize with tools developed by WHH to be applied 5 WDs

5 Setting up and training of enumerators on the tools using mobile data collection 2.5 WDs

6 Data collection/interviews 10 WDs

7 Debriefing meeting with relevant stakeholders in-country and HQ 1 WD

8 Draft Final Report

Note: WHH will be responsible for reviewing the first draft report within 3 WDs of receipt and will provide feedback to the evaluator(s).

10 WDs

9 Finalizing Final Report 3WDs

11 CONFIDENTIALITY

All documents and data acquired from documents as well as during interviews and meetings are confidential and to be used solely for the purpose of the evaluation.

The deliverables as well as all material linked to the evaluation (produced by the evaluator(s) or the organization itself) is confidential and remains at all times the property of the contracting party.

12 EXPERTISE OF THE EVALUATORS

This evaluation assignment is open to evaluators with substantial experience in the services outlined. To be considered for the services described herein, the consultants must meet the following criteria:

• Advanced degrees in Sociology, Development Studies, Humanitarian Studies, Public Health, or a relevant area.
• Proven experience in conducting project monitoring including baseline, midterm, and endline evaluations of emergency assistance projects in humanitarian context. Demonstration of a deep understanding of the challenges, needs, and opportunities relevant to humanitarian interventions.
• In-depth knowledge of the political and cultural local context of the country in question, including knowledge of the country's humanitarian landscape, is essential.
• Strong background and training in relevant evaluation methods, including participatory methods, qualitative methods, and quantitative surveys.
• Minimum of 3 to 5 years of experience evaluating humanitarian programs implemented by international aid organizations; experience with European Union and German-funded programs is an advantage.
• Knowledge of data protection regulatory requirements, including GDPR, ensuring the protection of personal data collected during evaluations.
• Ability to communicate in the local languages spoken by the target groups i.e. Arabic, Kakwa, Lugbara, Aringa, is an added advantage.

13 TECHNICAL AND FINANCIAL OFFER

Applicants have to provide:

• A technical and financial offer.

▪ All insurances are the responsibility of the evaluator(s).

▪ Soft copies of relevant documents will be provided by Welthungerhilfe.

▪ Welthungerhilfe staff will facilitate community entry and contacts to other interviewees.

▪ Welthungerhilfe will provide means of transport for enumerators to and from the field during the data collection exercise.

▪ Laptops need to be provided by the evaluator(s).

▪ Offers have to be signed or should include the phrase “valid without signature”.

• The technical part of the offer should include reference to the perceived feasibility of the ToR. (If required, including suggestions for specific evaluation questions.)

It should also include a brief description of the overall design and methodology of the evaluation and a workplan/adaptations to the workplan at hand (maximum 4 pages).

• The financial part includes a proposed budget for the complete evaluation. It should state the fees per working day (plus the respective VAT, if applicable), the number of working days proposed and other costs (e.g. visa costs). Proof of professional registration and taxation is also required (e.g. by providing the evaluator(s) tax number).
• CV with references and at least one written report from a comparable previous assignment.

Please note that we might make use of the option to invite the evaluator(s) having submitted the top-ranked offers for an interview prior to the selection of the final offer.

Offers will be accepted by individual consultants, commercial companies, NGOs and academics until 05:00pm on Tuesday 01st of October 2024.

Offers shall be submitted through the eTender portal. Tender accessible through this link... https://eu.eu-supply.com/app/rfq/edittransaction.asp?TID=375736

. Mode of Application

• Applications should include a proposal, evidence of experience in similar assignments and reference in line with criteria listed above
• Applications shall be received strictly online through the eTender system, email and hard copy submissions will not be considered. Upload your application online on the eTender Portal under tender ID: RFT 375736 - UGA 1137/208/2024: Follow the link below.

https://eu.eu-supply.com/app/rfq/edittransaction.asp?TID=375736

Contact person details for any inquiries: procurement.uganda@welthungerhilfe.de

Guide on how to access e-Tender system by first time users, you will need to register first. Then log in and click on the link to tender you are interested in:

Go to: New Supplier Registration. Fill in the form and save- if completed. >Back to Login >Put the correct password you have registered.>Accept terms & Conditions>Then click Public RFT and select your RFT of interest, Click Accept; then go under Documents and click Access documents.

To submit: Follow the same link and Go to My Response upload >done> Submit response>

Other General Welthungerhilfe Request for Quotation/ Proposal and Purchase terms;

Welthungerhilfe reserves the right to hire one or more consultants depending on the need.

• Welthungerhilfe is a Withholding tax agent, thus the resultant order / Contract will be subject to WHT per Cap 340 of Uganda Income tax Act. If the Supplier/ contractor is not WHT-exempted, then Welthungerhilfe is obliged to deduct (6% for nationals and 15% for non -Ugandans) of the contract sum and transfer the amount directly to U.R.A. If exempted, proof of exemption should be presented.
• Welthungerhilfe renounces all forms of terrorism and will never knowingly support, tolerate or encourage terrorism or the activities of those who embrace terrorism or money laundering. Consistent with numerous United Nations Security Council resolutions, including S/RES/1269(1999), S/RES 1368(2001) and S/RES1373(2001) and the European Union, Welthungerhilfe is firmly committed to the international fight against terrorism and against the financing of terrorism. It is the policy of Welthungerhilfe to seek to ensure that none of its and its donor funds are used, directly or indirectly, to provide support to individuals or entities associated with terrorism or money laundering. Therefore, Welthungerhilfe will match their suppliers and Service providers against the Sanctions lists on a regular basis. By submitting an offer, suppliers and service providers agree to this. Please fill in your details in the screening form provided under this tender.

KEY REFERENCES / ANNEX

GUIDELINES FOR FORMAT OF TECHNICAL AND FINANCIAL OFFER (attached to the ToR – See below Annex 1 & 2)

TEMPLATE: STANDARD OUTLINE INCEPTION REPORT (will be shared after selection of consultant)

TEMPLATE: OUTLINE PROJECT EVALUATION REPORT (will be shared after selection of consultant)

STANDARD CHECKLIST: EVALUATION REPORTING QUALITY (will be shared after selection of consultant)

TEMPLATE: STANDARD MANAGEMENT RESPONSE MATRIX (will be shared after selection of consultant)

TEMPLATE: STANDARD PROJECT ASSESSMENT ACCORDING TO OECD/DAC CRITERIA (will be shared after selection of consultant)

ANNEX 1: FORMAT OF TECHNICAL PROPOSAL (MAX 10-20 PAGES)

- Cover page

- Preliminary pages

- Introduction/Background

- Understanding of /comments on the ToRs

- Capability statements

- Deliverables

- Methodology (design, sample size, data quality control, Evaluation ethics, composition & qualifications of team members, work schedules)

- Related assignments

- Implementation schedule/Planning matrix

- Appendices (e.g., report of past assignment, certificate of completion, CVs/Resumes of consulting team

etc.)

ANNEX 2 : FORMAT FINANCIAL PROPOSAL (MAX 3 PAGES)

- Financial bid submission sheet (addressee, the total price of the bid, name of submitting person and his or her capacity, signature of submitting person and date of submission).

- Summary of bid price (technical fees, reimbursable, miscellaneous expenses & appropriate tax that applies (withholding or income tax)

- Breakdown of technical fees (positions, days for work, daily rate & amount)

- Breakdown of reimbursable (transport, communication, stationery, training, Per diem etc.)

- Breakdown of miscellaneous expenses

- Term of payment and currency