Evaluation of ReBuild Project, Resilience Building for Refugees, Internally Displaced People and Host Communities

  • Added Date: Wednesday, 14 August 2019
  • Deadline Date: Monday, 26 August 2019

Similar jobs

Endline External Evaluation of CARE International’s Syria Resilience Project
Organization: CARE
Added: Wednesday, 08 January 2020
Deadline: Wednesday, 05 February 2020
Project Manager - Recovery and peace building of the conflict-affected communities in North-East Nigeria Project (JSB)
Organization: UN Office Africa
Added: Tuesday, 21 January 2020
Deadline: Tuesday, 04 February 2020
Evaluation of the project “Saving Maternal and Newborn lives in Refugee Situations” in Cameroon, Chad and Niger
Organization: UN High Commissioner for Refugees
Added: Friday, 10 January 2020
Deadline: Monday, 03 February 2020


Evaluation of ReBuild Project

Resilience Building for Refugees, Internally Displaced People and Host Communities in Ethiopia and Uganda

ReBuild – from 1 September 2017 to 31 August 2019)

Project Countries: Ethiopia and Uganda, with support from International Office Eastern & Southern Africa (ESAF) in Addis Ababa - Ethiopia and the International Branch Office in Nairobi - Kenya.

Project Number:

o ADA Contract Number: 2826-12/2017

o SOS GMS Number: 002003-2017


SOS-Kinderdorf Österreich (SOS Children’s Villages Austria / SOS AT)) was founded in 1949. The idea of “a loving home for every child” has since spread all over the world. Today SOS Children’s Villages is present in 135 countries, organized as a federation with SOS Children’s Villages International as an umbrella body.

SOS Kinderdorf Österreich (SOS AT) is part of the federation and is implementing as well domestic as international programmes, together with the respective national SOS CV member associations (MA). SOS CV Uganda is one of the focus MA’s for SOS AT. The cooperation with SOS UG and SOS ET is defined by the following principles of strategic and bilateral cooperation (non-exhaustive list)

  • Goals:

• Individual support of focus countries to develop their programmes and portfolio

• Individual support of focus countries to reach their goals within strategy 2030

• Generating knowledge within the organization

  • Activities:

• Knowledge exchange depending on the specific need of the MA

• Partnerships between locations in Austria and in the focus countries

  • Public Funding:

• Watching out for funding opportunities (preferred for focus countries but also for others)

• Joint proposal development

• Implementation of projects funded by institutional donors (especially Austrian Development Cooperation)

SOS Children’s Villages believes in:

· Child development is best realized within a caring family environment.

· A child’s parents have the primary responsibility for the upbringing and the development of the child (Article 18, UNCRC).

· The state is the principle duty bearer in promoting and protecting child rights.

· The child has a right to receive special promotion and assistance from the state when deprived on his/her family environment and to be provided with alternative care (Article 20, UNCRC).

· Civil Society Organizations, such as SOS Children’s Villages organization, have an obligation with regard to children’s rights. Working with governments can support the state in fulfilling its responsibilities in regard to children’s rights

ReBuild is a two-year intervention representing its first phase. It is implemented through a partnership between SOS Austria, SOS Children’s Village International (CVI), the National Associations of SOS Ethiopia and SOS Uganda and local Community Based Organizations in cooperation with the Governments of Ethiopia and Uganda. The themes identified are in line with the current programmatic and strategic themes and model of SOS family strengthening program (FSP) and ADA policies.

The main objective of the ReBuild project is to contribute to improved resilience of IDPs, refugees and host communities in Ethiopia and Uganda. Based on the assumption, that it takes multidimensional approaches in order to achieve sustainable results in regards to resilience building of the target group, the main interventions strategies of the ReBuild project are described here. The intervention logic is based on four thematic pillars.

Economic empowerment

Instead of relying on hand-outs beneficiaries are empowered to employ strategies to meet their needs independently.

Psychosocial support and life skills

Having gone through the stress of migration and being uprooted, psychosocial support and life skills are an important element of regaining stability and becoming resilient.

Gender equality and child protection

Children are more vulnerable in general and even more so in a migration context. Women also face sometimes extreme challenges (e.g. exploitation, GBV, etc.) when they are forced to leave their homes. Girls, suffering from the intersectionality of those threats, are in a particularly difficult and vulnerable situation. It was therefore indispensable to include gender and child protection in the design of this project.

Capacity development

Investing in the development of the capacity of local NGO’s, CBO’s and CSO’s to plan, implement and monitor projects with an LRRD approach is a key endeavour for sustainable resilience building in their respective communities.

The ReBuild project, which is 70% co-financed (of total EUR 714,285) by the Austrian Development Agency (ADA) with EUR 500.000 and 30% by SOS Austria at EUR 214,285 is running from 01.09.2017 to 31.12.2019. Therefore, this external evaluation of the project covers the period from 01.09.2017 up to the time when the evaluation takes place (probably October/November 2019).

Contributions to and integration into the larger context

1. SDGs

ReBuild aims at contributing towards the following global goals for sustainable development:

Goal 1. End poverty in all its forms everywhere

  • 1.1 By 2030, eradicate extreme poverty for all people everywhere, currently measured as people living on less than $1.25 a day
  • 1.4 By 2030, ensure that all men and women, in particular the poor and the vulnerable, have equal rights to economic resources, as well as access to basic services, ownership and control over land and other forms of property, inheritance, natural resources, appropriate new technology and financial services, including microfinance

Goal 2. End hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture

  • 2.4 By 2030, ensure sustainable food production systems and implement resilient agricultural practices that increase productivity and production, that help maintain ecosystems, that strengthen capacity for adaptation to climate change, extreme weather, drought, flooding and other disasters and that progressively improve land and soil quality

Goal 4. Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all

  • 4.4 By 2030, substantially increase the number of youth and adults who have relevant skills, including technical and vocational skills, for employment, decent jobs and entrepreneurship
  • 4.7 By 2030, ensure that all learners acquire the knowledge and skills needed to promote sustainable development, including, among others, through education for sustainable development and sustainable lifestyles, human rights, gender equality, promotion of a culture of peace and non-violence, global citizenship and appreciation of cultural diversity and of culture’s contribution to sustainable development

Goal 5. Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls

  • 5.1 End all forms of discrimination against all women and girls everywhere
  • 5.2 Eliminate all forms of violence against all women and girls in the public and private spheres, including trafficking and sexual and other types of exploitation
  • 5.5 Ensure women’s full and effective participation and equal opportunities for leadership at all levels of decision- making in political, economic and public life

Goal 8. Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment and decent work for all

  • 8.3 Promote development-oriented policies that support productive activities, decent job creation, entrepreneurship, creativity and innovation, and encourage the formalization and growth of micro-, small- and medium-sized enterprises, including through access to financial services
  • 8.6 By 2020, substantially reduce the proportion of youth not in employment, education or training


The ReBuild project aligns well with and contributes to the following EU GAP II thematic priorities and objectives:

  • Objective 7. Girls and women free from all forms of violence against them (VAWG) both in the public and in the private sphere.
  • Objective 9. Protection for all women and men of all ages from sexual and gender based violence in crisis situations; through EU supported operations.

  • Objective 14. Access to decent work for women of all ages.

  • Objective 15: Equal access by women to financial services, productive resources including land, trade and entrepreneurship.

  • Objective 19: Challenged and changed discriminatory social norms and gender stereotypes.

3. National Development Plans of Ethiopia and Uganda

The ReBuild project has been designed in line with the national development plans of the governments of Ethiopia and Uganda and their respective policies as relevant to the ReBuild topics. In Ethiopia, coordination with government policies and strategies regarding TVET is key. Trainings that will be held with the private sector and possible arrangements will be made through the government. Trainings could be as well formal as informal but will however be in line with the government’s TVET, Education Sector Strategy Programme (ESDP) III and Industrial Development Strategy policy frameworks.

In Uganda, SOS has a working relationship with Ministry of Gender Labour and Social Development and it’s a member of technical working group on child protection, gender reference working group. Elsewhere, SOS CV Uganda collaborates with the Ministries of Health; Education and Sports; Internal Affairs and Office of the Prime Minister mandated to handle migrants for technical support resources to improve quality of service provision and child protection. SOS is also an active member of the Uganda Child Rights NGO Network UCRNN). This network is involved in coordinating over 200 child care organisations and spearheading formulation and implementation of child related policies for the well-being of the children. At the grassroots level, SOS collaborates strongly with community leadership structures both government and civil society engaging in community advocacy awareness, capacity building interventions

4. ADC Strategy

Further details on ADA’s strategic focus can be found here: http://www.entwicklung.at/en/ada/

5. SOS CV Strategy 2030

The overall objective of ReBuild is to contribute to SOS Children's Villages global strategic objective 2020 (one child, one friend, one movement) to respond to the needs and rights of 1,000,000 most vulnerable boys and girls and enable them to grow in a caring and responsive family and community environment.

While the strategy 2020 was the guiding element for SOS Children’s Villages by the time of designing the ReBuild project, a new strategy has since been developed and was adopted in 2017. The new Strategy 2030 is henceforth the guiding document for strategic program development and needs therefore be taken into account for this evaluation in order to produce relevant information that can be used for new program and project designs.

ReBuild Objectives and results

The project’s strategy is based on a process oriented approach, which is highly participatory, involving all stakeholders in defining needs and responses and which provides opportunity for communities to develop more detailed action programs based on stronger knowledge and understanding of what is possible, what addresses needs most appropriately and what will work. The main outcomes anticipated from this approach are:

a) an increased capacity of the target communities to organize, articulate their needs, negotiate interests and entitlements, plan and support their child care, protection and development initiatives;

b) the strengthening and/or creation of self-managed local institutions/community structures that support community-based child care and development initiatives;

c) the emergence of community-level extension agents or volunteers able to advocate for the rights of children and to mobilize resources to support their communities’ development priorities.

(please refer to the Project Logframe for more information)

Partnership and cooperation

SOS Austria is cooperating with the three project implementing partners: SOS Ethiopia, SOS Uganda and the Regional Office for Eastern and Southern Africa (IOR ESAF): IOR ESAF is located in Addis Ababa / Ethiopia and has a branch office in Nairobi / Kenya where the financial coordination of the ReBuild project is located. The role of the SOS International Office Region (IOR) Eastern and Southern Africa (ESAF) in this project is to provide program, financial management and organizational support to National Offices / Member Associations (SOS Ethiopia and SOS Uganda) and strengthen measures for child protection, gender, transparency/accountability and anti-corruption. The IOR has also the role of monitoring and controlling the Member Associations operations and ensures compliance with federation policies and standards through advice, guidance, information, knowledge sharing and capacity development.

Target group


The project directly targeted 200 women headed families in the camps with their children and youth. This is because statistics shows that there are more women and children refugees reported to be vulnerable compared to their male counter parts. They have limited and or no access to socio-economic services to enable them to survive in the host country. Within the host communities, additional 100 families have been supported according to the vulnerability assessment. The selection was supported by the community structures so that the right families were mapped and regularly monitored. Besides 16 SOS staff/partner/service provider were targeted with various interventions.


The project will be implemented at Gode town of Shebele zone Somali region. This is one of the big cities in the region where high numbers of internally displaced people, especially youths, migrate. As a consequence, it serves as transiting site to and from other towns in the region, to and from African countries such as Somalia and Libya. In this town, the project will directly reach; 180 families with their 270 youth/children from IDPs and 20 families and their 30 youth/children from the host community. Besides, an estimated 3000 (60% women) community members (youths, religious leaders, clan leaders, CBO leaders and government officials) have been reached through capacity development and awareness raising interventions. 13 SOS CVE co-workers and 80 government officers were targeted with training & experience sharing activities.

All the project interventions of ReBuild aim to reach the main target group of SOS Children’s Villages, directly or indirectly. The main targets of this intervention are vulnerable boys and girls especially those who have lost or are at risk of losing parental care. These include orphans, those children living with chronically-ill parents/caregivers (living with AIDS or under other life threatening conditions), children living in orphan-headed households (sheltering one or more orphans), and children separated from parents or living with elderly caregivers. Other target groups include care givers, key implementing partners, community support structures and SOS member associations; namely SOS Ethiopia, Uganda and member associations in ESAF and IOR ESAF. The project will therefore focus on the two categories of beneficiaries as follows:

1. The Partners

a) Name of Organization in Austria

SOS-Kinderdorf Österreich, Stafflerstraße 10a, 6020 Innsbruck, Austria

b) The Implementing Partners

SOS Children’s Village of Uganda Trust, P.O. Box 27510, Kampala, Uganda

SOS Children’s Villages Ethiopia, Bole Sub City, Kebele 03/05, House No 2/229, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

SOS Children’s Villages International, Regional Office for East and Southern Africa (ESAF) P.O. Box-2491, 1000 Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

c) Austrian Development Agency (http://www.entwicklung.at/)

The Austrian Development Agency (ADA) is the Operational Unit of the Austrian Development Cooperation (ADC). It is in charge of implementing all bilateral programmes and projects in ADC's partner countries and administers the budget earmarked for this. Another focus of ADA’s operations is education and information in Austria to convey the issue of development cooperation to a broader public.

The Austrian Development Agency cooperates with non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and combines official development assistance with numerous civil-society initiatives. This way, government and civil society make a joint contribution to poverty reduction and improving the conditions of life in developing countries.

The framework programme for Austrian NGOs is one of the various co-financing instruments in the collaboration with NGOs. The projects are based on the NGO’s own initiatives and are directed at meeting the actual needs of the target groups in developing countries. Per definition, an ADA framework programme consists of coherent and interactive programme interventions with a common strategic and development objective.

2. Purpose

The overall purpose of this evaluation is to determine the results ReBuild Phase I achieved in terms of its outcome and output. Furthermore, the evaluation should be formative, improvement and learning oriented to inform the design of the next project phase (ReBuild Phase II), in order to build on the learnings during the design of the next phase. In that sense the evaluation is part of the design process and will bring about some key inputs to ensure adequate responses to the needs of the target group.

An external evaluation, assessing the outcomes and outputs at Gode/Ethiopia and Rwamwanja/Uganda participating in the ReBuild project is foreseen. The project evaluation is to be carried out in the last couple of months of the project by an external consulting team in order to be able to feed findings and recommendations into the planning of ReBuild Phase II project 2020 onwards.

The international consultant, if he/she is neither Ugandan nor Ethiopian, is expected to team up with local consultants from these countries. Furthermore, the team of consultants will have to work closely with the respective project coordinators of SOS Uganda, SOS Ethiopia and the regional office IOR ESAF in order to facilitate a comprehensive understanding of the organization and easy access to information and contact persons.

The evaluation is specifically intended to contribute to:

· Learning: insights and knowledge gained through the evaluation will contribute to planning and steering of the ongoing project implementation and development of upcoming ReBuild Phase II project, which is currently under development. This is the most important focus of the evaluation and needs therefore appropriate attention by the consultant.

To a relatively lesser extent, however not to be left out entirely, the following elements also need to be considered:

· Exchange of best practices between stakeholders

· Improvement of policies of the implementing organisations, processes and methods of ongoing and eventually future projects, such as the above mentioned

· Recommendations for Austrian NGO and local partner/s as well as the ADA concerning future programming and cooperation

· Accountability towards the stakeholders

3. Objective

The main objective of the evaluation is to assess and present results (output, outcome), conclusions, lessons learnt and recommendations.

The evaluation is taking place in the last quarter of last year of implementation. The reason for his timing is mainly for gaining essential insights and inputs that should feed into the design of the new upcoming project starting in 2020.


The evaluation needs to involve all relevant stakeholders at all levels (international, regional, national, local) including project participants and final beneficiaries, implementing local partners (SOS and CBO’s), local government, relevant institutions, etc. Everyone involved should be able to benefit from the process and its findings. The donor agency, as well as government authorities should get relevant information about outcomes and outputs and key learnings. In addition to this, the implementing agencies need to get input for future programming, in particular in regards to LRRD (Linking Relief, Rehabilitation and Development) (opportunities and needs of the target group).

The results need to give relevant information for the design of the next phase. Insights are expected on what should be continued, done better or should not be done anymore. In addition, the process should bring about answers to questions around opportunities for the target group in regards to LRRD and how this could serve as a lever to improve their lives. Furthermore, the report and the final evaluation workshop, where the findings will be presented and discussed, need to be suitably packed for the beneficiaries.

As the evaluation results are supposed to inform the planning of the next phase, and this being an important purpose of the evaluation, the OECD DAC evaluation criteria (relevance, impact, effectiveness, efficiency and sustainability) need to be given weighted attention. Effectiveness and sustainability are the top priorities, followed by efficiency, relevance and impact. In the light of this, the evaluation team have to analyse the following points:

A. The design and coherence of the project including the design of the log frame matrix/programme theory and its assumptions.

B. The extent to which the project has already achieved its outcomes and outputs or is likely to achieve them, including the extent to which the lives of the project beneficiaries (women, men, girls, boys) have already been improved. Also the extent to which supported institutions have already benefitted people.

C. The strengths and weaknesses in terms of planning, management, implementation and monitoring

D. The extent to which cross-cutting issues (gender and environment mainstreaming) were applied. It is to be noted that this project contains a strong gender equality component. The evaluation team, who is expected to have sound knowledge about gender programming, needs to give this aspect due emphasis. Furthermore, in view of the thematic focus of the new project, the evaluator is also expected to have sound knowledge about LRRD in the context of the geographic intervention areas, in order to give relevant input for the design.

E. The efficiency of the project in relation to beneficiaries, cost and timeframe of the project.

F. The logframe and verifiable indicators found in the original proposal and provide post-project figures along with a narrative explaining the reasons for under/over performance achievement.

G. Conclusions, recommendations and lessons learnt for future strategy and improvements in implementation of the project.

H. The current political, social and cultural factors impacting the implementation of the project.

I. The communities’ attitude towards the project

4. Subjects and Focus

Topic of the evaluation:

Learning and inform the planning and design of Phase II

Scope of the evaluation:

The evaluation looks at the current project. It is supposed to assess all result areas in both countries. and the Umbrella/Learning component which is managed by the IOR-ESAF. While the weight regarding the OECD DAC criteria for the components in Uganda and Ethiopia are as described above, the emphasis for the umbrella component, which is being implemented by the regional office IOR ESAF, needs to be different. Priority is to be given to effectiveness and efficiency, followed by relevance, sustainability and impact.

Geographical area:

Project locations in both countries and umbrella component (IOR level)

Group of beneficiaries and/or institutions selected for being interviewed: (see also section 7 for more detail)

It is in principle left to the evaluator to select the interviewees according to the applied methodology. However, there are some key groups that need to be considered in order to get a relevant picture:

· CBO’s who participated in the current project

· Caregivers

· Children

· service providers

· local government administration

· a sample of other community structures as they seem relevant

The evaluator may wish to choose additional interviewees that are not on the above mentioned list.

In addition, regarding the evaluation of the project, it is desirable to include the following interviewees:

· Program Coordinator SOS AT

· Program Coordinator IOR ESAF

· Ethiopia Emergency program coordinator

· Ethiopia Emergency program coordinator

· Ethiopia ADA program coordinator

· ReBuild Project Team in Gode/Ethiopia

· Uganda ADA Program Coordinator

· Uganda Fort Portal Location FSP Coordinator

· ReBuild Project Team in Rwamwanja

The evaluator may wish to choose additional interviewees that are not on the above mentioned list.

OECD DAC evaluation criteria (relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, sustainability, impact):

As already mentioned above: the evaluation results are supposed to inform the planning of the next phase. Therefore, winning insights into the topic is an important purpose of the evaluation, regarding the two country components in Uganda and Ethiopia. The OECD DAC evaluation criteria (relevance, impact, effectiveness, efficiency and sustainability) need to be given weighted attention in the following order (starting with the most important):

  1. Effectiveness and sustainability

  2. Efficiency

  3. Relevance

  4. Impact (the focus being on outcomes and outputs, rather than on impact)

While the weight regarding the OECD DAC criteria for the components in Uganda and Ethiopia are as described above, the emphasis for the umbrella component, which is being implemented by the regional office IOR ESAF, needs to be different. The implementation of the umbrella component, which basically forms the learning and knowledge management of the ReBuild project, needs to be evaluated in order to define the organisational, strategic and methodological approach to learning and knowledge management in the next phase. Therefore, the priorities are the following:

  1. effectiveness and efficiency

  2. relevance

  3. sustainability

  4. impact.

5. Bid Format

The bid has to be submitted until 23:59 (CAT) on 26th of August 2019 including a company / consultants profile, experience and references. The bid has to be in EURO, showing all taxes and travel or other expenses. It has to include a suggestion of the methodology, time and action plan and if necessary, suggestions and recommendations to the Terms of References.

Submission address:

To: valerie.neuhold-maurer@sos-kinderdorf.at

Cc: Zerihun.Endale@sos-kd.org

6. Specific Evaluation Questions

As outlined under chapters 2, 3 and 4 above it is expected to focus on the 5 evaluation criteria in a weighted manner. The below are some guiding questions, however the particular weight given to the different criteria must be observed.


  • To what extent are the objectives of the project still valid for the partner country, the partner organization and its direct and indirect beneficiaries?
  • Are the expected results/outcomes/outputs of the project consistent with the outcome, immediate impact and overall goal/impact (as part of the analysis of the logframe matrix/programme theory and the presentation of the theory of change and its underlying assumptions)?
  • How is the project addressing the needs of targeted most vulnerable children family strengthening programmes in Ethiopia and Uganda? How are the objectives and achievements of the project consistent with the needs and priorities of the stakeholders and beneficiaries?


  • To what extent has the project already achieved its expected results/outcomes/outputs or will be likely to achieve them?
  • What were the major factors influencing the achievement or non-achievement of the outcome(s)/expected results/outputs? (Also consider any which were possibly beyond the control of the project)
  • What was the most effective way in which the project addressed the problem identified?
  • Was the project managed as planned? If not, what issues occurred and why?
  • To what extent have all project stakeholders collaborated as planned?
  • Did the project contribute to capacity building as planned? If not, what were the reasons?
  • To what extent was gender mainstreaming included in the project and to what extent were recommendations from the ADA gender-assessment considered and implemented?
  • To what extent was environmental mainstreaming included in the project and to what extent were recommendations from the ADA environment-assessment considered and implemented?
  • To what extent were the social standards monitored by relevant partners? Have any issues emerged, if so which ones and why?
  • To what extent was the SOS organizational structure (IOR ESAF, SOS AT, MAs) helpful or hindering the effectiveness of the implementation of the project?


  • To what extent were all items/equipment purchased and used as planned under this project?
  • Was the project implemented in the most efficient way (time, personnel resources)? Have any issues emerged, if so which ones and why?


For this evaluation it is envisaged to focus more on outcomes and outputs than on impact.

  • How many women, men, girls, boys and people in total have already benefited from the project?
  • What exactly has already changed in the lives of women, men, girls, boys?
  • Which positive and/or negative effects in terms of gender and environment can be possibly be attributed to the project?
  • Which institutions have already benefitted from the project and how? What has changed for whom?
  • Are there any other important aspects regarding impact?


  • What were the major factors which influenced the achievement or non-achievement of sustainability of the project?
  • What needs to be done and/or improved to ensure sustainability?
  • Which are the learnings that could be replicated?

7. Approach and Methods

The evaluation consists of several phases:

Contract and Kick-off meeting: Contract is signed and a discussion of the assignment takes place. First documents, including available data, are provided to the evaluation team.

Desk Study: The evaluation/review team studies all necessary project documents; re-construct and analyse the intervention logic/programme theory and theory of change and its assumptions. Existing data needs to be analysed and interpreted.

Inception-Phase: In the inception report the evaluators will describe the design of the evaluation and will elaborate on how data will be obtained and analysed. The use of a data collection planning worksheet or a similar tool is required. First interviews take place.

Data triangulation and quality control are very important and need to be discussed in the inception report.

The field trip will only take place upon official approval of the inception report by the contractor.

Field-phase: Data needs to be gathered, analysed and interpreted. It is expected that the evaluation will include quantitative and qualitative data disaggregated by sex.

Presentation: Presentation of key findings (feedback workshop) at the end of the field trip.

Final Draft Report: Submission and presentation of final draft report, inclusion of comments from partners and contractor.

Final Report: Submission of final report, see reporting requirements under point 10.

For the different phases it is expected that data and information will be obtained through different methods such as: analysis of documents, structured interviews, semi-structured interviews face-to face or by phone, group discussions, online-survey, others.

All data collected needs to be disaggregated by sex.

It is expected that the evaluation team will present concrete recommendations which are addressed to the specific stakeholders.

The Guidelines for Project and Programme Evaluations developed by the Austrian Development Agency need to be considered throughout the entire evaluation process and can be downloaded here:

a. Methodology

The evaluation will be based on the secondary analysis of available documents as well as on primary data collection among key partners. The evaluation is expected to deploy a mix of (qualitative and quantitative data collection and analysis, e.g. income improvement) methods and (primary and secondary data) sources. Different data need to be triangulated to enhance the validity of results. Consultants are expected to suggest the detailed methodology and action plan as part of the proposal.

Some suggestions are:

• Review of the available documentation and reports (compare Annex 1)

• Interviews with key project-staff such as

Ø Program Coordinator of SOS-Kinderdorf Österreich

Ø SOS Children's Villages Regional Offices in Addis Ababa and Nairobi:

o Regional Program Development Advisor

o Regional M&E Advisor

o Regional Grants Advisor IOR ESAF

o Regional Director of Programs

Ø Project partners of SOS Children’s Village in Uganda and Ethiopia

Ø SOS Children’s Villages Uganda:

o National Director

o National Family Strengthening Coordinator

o National Program Development Advisor

o Family Strengthening Coordinators in Fort Portal

o Project Team in Rwamwanja Field Office

Ø SOS Children’s Villages Ethiopia:

o National Director

o National Family Strengthening Coordinator:

o National Programme Director

o Project Team in Gode Field Office

• Interviews, workshops, case studies and/or focus group discussions with relevant key stakeholders in Uganda and Ethiopia such as:

Ø Community Based Organizations

Ø Other Partners: Representatives of Local, Regional and Central Governments, Youth Leaders, NGOs, etc.

Ø Beneficiaries: children and their care givers, and youth

Ø Interview with the relevant coordination office of the Austrian Development Agency in Uganda and Ethiopia

8. Process

a. Timeline

A maximum of 30 working days is currently estimated for this assignment.


· Submission of bid (electronically) - 26 Aug 2019

· Contract signed and documents provided30 - Aug 2019

· Kick-Off meeting - 2 Sep 2019

· Desk Study - 2-6 Sep 2019

· Submission of draft inception report - 9 Sep 2019

· Comments on the inception report - 10-12 Sep 2019

· Inclusion of comments in inception report and Submission of final inception report - 16 Sep 2019

· Field Visit, interviews etc. and feedback workshop – 16-25 Sep 2019

· Submission of final draft report – 4 Oct 2019

· Collection and inclusion of feedback in final draft report – until 14 Oct 2019

· Submission of final evaluation report (hard and electronic copy) to contractor - 18 Oct 2019

b. Budget / Payment

The consultant shall elaborate a working plan with the number of estimated working days to fulfil the contract of services and daily fee. Upon preliminary selection of one bid the price will be negotiated between the consultant and SOS-Kinderdorf Österreich.

c. Support services

SOS Children’s Village and the Austrian Development Agency will provide support (information/interviews; providing relevant documents, feedback to draft of the draft review, participation at presentation of draft findings). The interviews will be arranged and supported after agreeing on the action & time plan.

9. The Evaluation Team

The ideal evaluation team will consist of

· One international consultant (team leader), ideally originating from either Uganda or Ethiopia

· Plus, one national consultant per country (in case the international consultant is from neither of those two countries, one from Ethiopia and one from Uganda). The aim is to have good knowledge of the national context within the team of consultants.

· In addition, the consultants will be supported by the national M&E advisors in order to facilitate their orientation and way through the organization of SOS CV.

Key qualifications in the team should be:

o Relevant academic degree (master level) in one or more of the following fields: Development Studies, Monitoring & Evaluation or a relevant, directly related discipline.

o A minimum of five years of experience and expertise in geographically and thematically closely-related projects .
Geographically: Ethiopia, Uganda, Eastern African Countries;
Thematically: Community development, gender programming, LRRD, socio-economic strengthening, etc.) (written testimonials of such need to be submitted with the application; one of the most sought after requirements for shortlisting)

o Team leader and member(s) have conducted at least three evaluations in the last five years, ideally in a relevant field (written testimonials of such need to be submitted with the application, this is also one of the most sought after requirements for shortlisting) and ideally as team leader in at least 1 evaluation of closely related projects implemented by INGOs (applicable to the team leader)

o Knowledge of Ethiopia and Uganda with focus on topics such as community development, gender programming, LRRD, socio-economic strengthening, etc.

o Working experience in Ethiopia and Uganda

o Experience in project cycle management

o Experience and expertise in evaluating cross-cutting issues

o Experience in social science methods

o Excellent oral and written English skills

o Sound MS Office and IT skills

o Experience in analyzing a theory of change is an asset

The consultants must not have been involved in the design, implementation or monitoring of this project.

10. Reports

The consultants will submit the following reports:

· An inception report (about 10 pages without annexes)

· A draft evaluation report (25-30 pages without annexes), including an executive summary, and

· The final evaluation report (25-30 pages without annexes), with an executive summary**.**

All reports need to be written in English.

The executive summary should summarize key findings and recommendations (two-to-three pages)..

The findings and recommendations of the draft final report and final report have to be structured according to the evaluation questions. The recommendations need to be given in a way that allows for practical implementation in the second phase of the project, starting in 2020. An outline of the report’s structure needs to be agreed upon during the inception phase.

The quality of the reports will be judged according to the following criteria:

· Completeness of title page and opening pages

· Assessment of executive summary

· Clear description of logic of Project design

· Clear description of role of SOS and contributors in evaluation

· Use of OECD/DAC evaluation standards

· Clearly defined scope of for the evaluation

· Inclusion of human rights–based approach

· Assessment of results-based management in Project evaluated

· Transparent description of methodology of evaluation

· Clear and appropriate choice of evaluation methodology

· Description of stakeholder participation in the evaluation

· Use of information from beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries

· Use of ethical safeguards where appropriate

· Inclusion of measurement of inputs, outputs, outcomes, and were possible impacts

· Inclusion of cost-benefit analysis were possible

· Clear discussion of relative contribution of stakeholders to the results of the Project

· Clear discussion of accomplishments, difficulties, and constraints for the Project included

· Evaluation conclusions that are based on data findings and that offer insights and solutions to identified challenges

· Evaluation conclusions that are based on data findings and that offer

· Recommendations that are based on evidence

· Lessons learned that pertain not only to the Project evaluated but have wider relevance to other interventions

· Completeness of annexes of the evaluation report

11. Co-Ordination/Responsibility

Valerie Neuhold-Maurer (valerie.neuhold-maurer@sos-kinderdorf.at) and Zerihun Endale (Zerihun.Endale@sos-kd.org) will be the contact persons for this evaluation.

12. Available documents

The following documents will be availed to the review team upon request:

· Project Proposal Documents / Contract including logframe

· Annual Reports

· SOS Internal documents & manuals

· SOS Children´s Villages International Strategic Plan 2030

· Child Rights Situation Analysis of Uganda and Ethiopia

· Strategic Plans of SOS Children’s Village Uganda and Ethiopia

· ADA Evaluation Guidelines

This vacancy is archived.

Recommended for you