Cash Programming Analysis Consultancy

  • Added Date: Friday, 07 February 2020
  • Deadline Date: Thursday, 20 February 2020

CHILD SAFEGUARDING – Level 3

Level 3 – The responsibilities of this post may require the post holder to have regular contact with children and young people. In the overseas context, all posts are considered to be level 3.

As part of these responsibilities, the post holder will support the establishment of child safeguarding systems, promote a culture of keeping children safe, and ensure that potential harm to children (by our own staff and/or as a result of how we do our work) is identified and addressed on an ongoing basis. The post holder should report and respond to interventions as determined by position related responsibilities identified in the Child Safeguarding Policy.

1. Joint Response Nigeria:

The Nigeria Joint Response (NJR) is being delivered by a consortium of 5 Dutch Relief Alliance (DRA) member organizations and five national partners who work together to provide life-saving humanitarian assistance to the affected population in Borno state of North Eastern region of Nigeria. NJR is providing emergency assistance to affected people in 5 target local government areas (LGAs) of Borno state and would directly reach to 90000 affected people during the current implementation year of 2019.

NJR partners are striving to provide integrated humanitarian assistance in FSL, WASH, Protection, Health and Nutrition sectors to the affected population of Konduga, Mafa, Dikwa, Monguno and Gwoza LGAs with financial and technical assistance provided by DRA, an intermediary body between Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs and its partner organizations.

1st July 2019 is the start date of one-year additional funding approved by the Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MoFA). As part of this additional funding, the NJR focused on scaling up and piloting different modalities of cash transfer programming. B**y using unrestricted Multi-Purpose Cash (MPC), secondly a cash-for-health pilot and lastly, a cash-for-protection pilot.** These life-saving services are being rendered to most vulnerable groups in the target LGAs of Monguno, Dikwa and Mafa LGAs in Borno State Nigeria.

The findings from the pilots will serve as learnings for future cash programming in Nigeria and NJR partners aim to showcase the feasibility and effectiveness of using the piloted modalities in Nigeria.

2. Evaluation Objectives:

The NJR is seeking to procure the services of an independent external evaluator to:

· Conduct a comparative evaluation and to assess the 3 different cash pilots within the NJR project against the OECD DAC criteria to determine the suitability of each modality in the context of North-East Nigeria.

· As part of the comparative evaluation study, conduct an assessment to determine the capacity of the NJR partners (both INGOs and local partners) involved in the cash programming on design and delivery of cash programming.

To this end the evaluator will:

· Comparatively assess the 3 pilots’ performance and achievements against the NJR project’s objectives identifying factors of success or failure;

· Measure how the different pilots impacted the local economy (market), affected population, local partners and DRA members.

· Evaluate how the pilots have been adhering to basic cross-cutting issues including gender, conflict sensitivity, do no harm principles, localization and inclusion while undertaking the intervention.

· Examine how the ever-changing context in the project area has affected the implementation of the project and how pilots have been adaptive to the operational context.

· Assess the replicability of the pilots and sub-sequent outcomes in other similar settings for upcoming phases/cycles of joint response in Nigeria.

· Draw conclusions, lessons learned and recommendations which could inform future programming, policy-making and overall organizational learning.

2.1 Evaluation Methodology:

The consultant shall use mixed methods including desk review, key informant interview, sample survey, and observation using simple but numerically sensitive tools to collect data. The sample size must be statistically representative of the population. The analysis will involve statistical and content analysis using appropriate packages as deemed fit by the consultant. The analysis among others should show trends and to the extent possible should be disaggregated by gender and location. There should be adequate female representation and participation throughout the data collection process. Where necessary, focus group discussions should be conducted separately for men and women.

The consultant will closely work with MEAL Community of Practice (CoP) established as part of the NJR programme to ensure effective engagement of all NJR partners in the designing of data collections tools and methodology. The research design shall be participatory in its core and engage all the consortium members, implementing teams, external stakeholders, main and subgroups of the affected population.

3. Scope of Work:

Save the Children International requires the services of a Cash Programming Expert to work with the NJR consortium coordinator and other joint response partners to ensure the learning from the cash pilots are captured and can be shared with the wider humanitarian community and factored in for multi-year planning and program designing by other joint responses. In order to do so, the consultant will visit project locations in Borno state of Northeast Nigeria and engage all the partners (local and international), cash working group in Borno and Abuja, private sector service providers and affected population (beneficiaries). The consultant will also need to develop the necessary tools to enable the project staff to track the progress of the different pilots. The tools should be delivered as an annexe to the inception report.

Tools developed will include:

· Tracking tool for actual implementation

· Tracking tool for learnings

· Tracking tools for cross-cutting themes (including gender equality and diversity & inclusion)

Tools and criteria for measurement should be based on global humanitarian standards.

This assignment will be undertaken in June 2020, with (remote) development of the required tools starting from February.

3.1 Key questions on comparative analysis:

The consultant will conduct a comparative evaluation of the newly piloted MPC modalities based on OECD DAC criteria. Guiding questions are set out below.

3.1.1 Relevance/appropriateness:

The interventions designed under “additional funding” are relevant to the needs of most affected and vulnerable groups in northeast Nigeria. The cash modalities are tailored in line with local context, target populations are benefited appropriately and in a dignified manner. Cash programming help implementing agencies to establish a lasting and trustworthy, credible relationship with communities they serve as well as partner delivered cash programming in a more accountable and transparent manner.

· Were the pilot designs appropriate in the local context?

· To what extent have the pilots addressed the identified problems or real needs on the ground?

· Was affected population’s short term need to be covered by the interventions?

· To what extent are the objectives of the program still valid?

· What alternative strategies would have been more effective in achieving its objectives?

3.1.2 Coherence:

The project design complies with DRA MPC framework as an exclusive and separate sector of humanitarian programming, national and state-level cash working group’s guidelines and ensures the service provision in line with national (EFCC) and state-level government policies and regulatory frameworks. To assess and capture the evidence about the coherence of intervention in line with Grand Bargain commitments and defined guidelines for adopting cash as a tool to deliver humanitarian assistance keeping affected populations’ dignity fully intact.

· Are the pilot designs fully coherent with DRA MPC framework and Grand Bargain Commitments?

· Are the pilots' interventions in compliance with guidelines set out by cash working group in Nigeria?

· Do members deliver the assistance in line with national and state-level policies and regulations?

3.1.3 Efficiency:

The consultant should assess the overall quality and quantity of the cash programming designed and delivered by all members of joint response in northeast Nigeria. He/she should also evaluate the different cash modalities/approaches adopted by multiple members for delivering humanitarian assistance to target populations in project LGAs of Borno state. Timeliness (delivery on time, within a stipulated time frame and in line with people’s needs) would be assessed as a key contributory factor to the success or failure of the programming.

· Was the process of achieving results efficient? To what extent were the pilots implemented in a timely and cost-effective manner?

· Do the results in terms of quantity and quality justify the resources used? What factors contributed to implementation efficiency?

· What are the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats of the project implementation process?

3.1.4 Effectiveness:

Cash programming is intended to achieve certain objectives and purposes well defined in the project documents. A core component of this assignment is a comparison of various approaches/modalities adopted by JR members in order to capture the evidence from the field and establish the effectiveness of the programming, in line with recommendations set out by sector Nigeria Cash working group.

· To what extent have the planned results (outputs, outcomes) been achieved?

· How effective were the strategies, methodologies and activities used in the implementation of the pilots?

· What were the supporting factors and barriers that affected these achievements?

· How did the project coordinate with and/or complement other similar actions in the field - geographical and thematic?

· Which actions have been most successful in addressing cross-cutting themes, including gender inequalities and why?

3.1.5 Impact:

Assessing the overall impact of cash programming and how it contributed to achieving intended and unintended results in the field.

· To what extent has the project contributed to longer-term outcomes and goals?

· Do the cash pilots support resilience building of the target population, if so, to what extent?

· Is there any possible unintended positive or negative impact or consequences of the pilots on target population as well as on implementing national and international partners?

· Does sustained multipurpose cash assistance influence beneficiary’s expenditure behaviour [capacity of planning and investing] or a handout mentality?

· Does the implementation of the cash pilots helped local partners gained significant experience of designing and delivery of cash intervention?

3.1.6 Sustainability:

To assess the elements of sustainability of the intervention through finding and negotiating various financial support mechanism for ongoing northeast response in Nigeria, is there an enabling environment that supports ongoing positive impacts?

· To what extent are the outcomes and results of the project likely to be sustained after the completion of the project?

· What are the contributing factors and constraints that require attention in order to improve prospects of sustainability of the project outcomes and the potential for replication of the approach?

3.2 Key questions on partNer capacity:

The cash pilots of the JR intend to strengthen the capacity of partners in the field of cash programming and the study must assess and capture the evidence of the enhanced capacity of partners through implementing cash pilot in the field. The availability of in-house capacity at national and international members of JR should also be considered as a factor to the sustainability of the intervention.

• What was the capacity of national and international partners in the NJR consortium for cash programming at the start and at the end of the program?

• How has partners’ in-house capacity changed in terms of the regulatory policy framework, procedures, internal controls, accountability towards affected populations and compliance with national and international regulatory frameworks and policy regimes as a result of their experience implementing the NJR cash pilots?

• What (further) capacity is needed to implement future cash pilots efficiently and effectively?

4. Deliverables and Timeframe

The total time frame of this assignment is 30 consultancy days: approximately 7 days for producing the inception report and tools in March 2020, and approximately 23 days for comparative evaluation between June/July 2020.

  1. The assignment shall start the latest by the first week of March 2020. A first meeting shall be held before (preferably on skype) the assignment starts in order to review the ToR and agree on a tentative work plan.

  2. An inception report shall be submitted to NJR Consortium Coordination detailing the work plan, sampling frame and data collection tools, no later than the 10th of March 2020. The consultant will finalize the report, incorporating feedback and suggestions coming from the NJR Coordinator and the counterpart based in the Netherlands.

  3. Data collection and fieldwork by the consultant would take place in June 2020. Partners’ capacity assessment would also be part of the data collection process.

  4. A draft report of the comparative analysis and partner assessment should be delivered by mid-June 2020.

  5. The final report should be delivered by end of July 2020.

  6. A powerpoint presentation of max 20 slides with methodology and main findings should be delivered along with the final report.

  7. A briefing will be conducted for partners in Maiduguri and or Abuja by the consultant on arrival.

The structure and content list of the final report of the comparative analysis would be mutually discussed and agreed by the consultant and NJR consortium coordinator before the final leg of the assignment kick starts.

The possibility to include a learning event in the country to discuss and present the findings to JR partners and other key stakeholders could be included if deemed relevant.

5. Professional Skills and Qualifications

Interested experts are required to clearly identify and provide CVs with all the details of similar type of assignments completed in the past. The proposed evaluation person/team should include the technical expertise and practical experience required to deliver the scope of work outputs and deliverables of the assignment.

5.1 Technical expertise

The applicant should demonstrate the following areas of technical expertise in his/her technical proposal:

• Evaluation design: the consultant should include skills and expertise required to design, plan and conduct mixed-method baselines and post-project evaluation exercises.

• Skills in quantitative data collection and analysis, use of sound statistical methods to identify causal relationships and address threats to internal validity.

• Skills in qualitative data collection and analysis of complex qualitative information, drawing findings from multiple sources and handling potential contradictions between data sets.

• Relevant subject knowledge and prior experience of working on cash-based programming to ensure that the baseline and post-project evaluation design and research methods are as relevant and meaningful as possible given the scope of work of this assignment.

• Primary research: gender and protection-sensitive design, management and implementation of primary quantitative and qualitative research in potentially challenging project environments, such as fragile and conflict-affected areas/regions.

• Information management: design and manage sex- and disability-disaggregated data and information systems capable of handling large datasets for MEL purposes.

• Statistical analysis: a range of statistical modelling and analysis of impact data; highly proficient user of SPSS, STATA or equivalent; and qualitative data analysis techniques.

Language Proficiency: Proficiency in English and the ability to produce good quality written documents in English is a mandatory requirement of this assignment.

5.2 Highly desired requirements:

The incumbent should have prior experience of developing baseline and post-project evaluations for cash programming for a protracted crisis with a fragile security context.

Regional experience: it is particularly desirable that the potential consultant has experience working in the West-African context.

5.3 Child Safeguarding and PSEA:

Safeguarding considerations: Ensuring the whole evaluation process adheres to best practice for research with children including the implementation of child safeguarding policy and procedures to ensure the safety of participants.

5.4 Conflict of interest:

The incumbent is required to demonstrate the necessary independence and declare any conflict of interest and potential biases, including bias towards any of the stakeholders, target groups, type of approach etc.

6. Submission of Application:

Interested candidates who meet the key qualifications and have relevant experience in designing and delivering similar type of assignments must submit their technical and financial proposals to Save the Children International Nigeria using the link provided below.

6.1 Technical Proposal:

Technical proposal should contain a clear outline of research methodology, data collection and analysis techniques and a tentative work plan with clearly defined milestones to achieve within the given timeline of the assignment. Consultant’s CV, samples of previous work and two references should also be attached as annex to the technical proposal.

6.2 Financial Proposal:

Financial bid must be prepared and submitted with clearly defined breakdown of consultant’s daily fee and other associated costs. Please read carefully section 7 (Payment Schedule) of the ToRs while developing and finalizing financial proposal.

6.3 Disqualification:

Save the Children International reserve the right to revoke the call or stop the process of hiring services without giving any prior reasons to the applicants. Incomplete application, applications submitted after deadline or application without a financial proposal or vice versa; will not be considered for including in selection process.

7. Payment Schedule:

The consultant will be paid in two instalments with the following terms and conditions;

  1. 25% advance payment will be released upon acceptance of inception report and tools by assignment focal point.

  2. 75% payment would be released upon successful completion of the assignment in the field and acceptance of deliverables by assignment lead.

The consultant will be paid a fixed fee as per signed contract after deduction of all taxes applied by Nigerian Law. Save the Children will cover field travel and accommodation in Maiduguri and Abuja during assignment days, rest of all other costs including international travel, life and health insurance, visa and other costs associated for travelling to Nigeria, will be borne by the consultant and should be included in the financial proposal.

Note: Above mentioned terms and conditions would apply on the payment schedule for the second leg of the assignment.

THE ORGANISATION

We employ approximately 25,000 people across the globe and work on the ground in over 100 countries to help children affected by crises, or those that need better health care, education and child protection. We also campaign and advocate at the highest levels to realize the right of children and to ensure their voices are heard.

We are working towards three breakthroughs in how the world treats children by 2030:

  • No child dies from preventable causes before their 5th birthday
  • All children learn from quality basic education and that,
  • Violence against children is no longer tolerated

We know that great people make a great organization and that our employees play a crucial role in helping us achieve our ambitions for children. We value our people and offer a meaningful and rewarding career, along with a collaborative and inclusive workplace where ambition, creativity, and integrity are highly valued.

Save the Children is committed to ensuring that all our personnel and programmes are absolutely safe for children.

We undertake rigorous procedures to ensure that only people suitable to work with children are allowed to join our organization and all candidates will, therefore, be subject to this scrutiny.

We need to keep children safe so our selection process reflects our commitment to the protection of children from abuse.

Applicants are advised that Save the Children International does not require any payment or expense during the entire recruitment process. Any request in this direction should be immediately reported as it is contrary to the values and practices of our organization.

Due to the volume of applications received, Save the Children may not provide feedback to all applicants. Only shortlisted candidates will be contacted.

Qualified candidates are encouraged to apply as soon as possible, as applications will be reviewed as received. Save the Children reserves the right to change the closing date, if considered necessary.

Recommended for you