Real Term Evaluation of Cordaid’s Earthquake Response programme in North West Syria under the Giro 555 “Help slachtoffers aardbeving” campaign

Cordaid

Cordaid is a dual mandated organisation, and member of Caritas and ACT Alliance networks. Within its humanitarian mandate, Cordaid’s objective is to relief suffering and provide life-saving assistance, in acute and protracted humanitarian crisis, anywhere in the world. Our primary response modality is to work in partnership with local partners.

Cordaid’s Earthquake Response in North West Syria

On 6 February 2023, two earthquakes with magnitude 7.8 and 7.5 heavily affected provinces in Southern and Southeastern Türkiye and Northern Syria. This assignment focusses on the response in North West Syria.

As Cordaid has no presence itself in the overall earthquake affected area, Cordaid set up a strategy to provide support through its network and with local partners. In North West Syria, Cordaid has provided support through its partner Christian Aid soon after the earthquake hit in February 2023; in June 2023, this was complemented with support to the White Helmets. As currently planned, the support will continue until latest the third quarter of 2024. Our total planned budget for the response in NW Syria is just over EUR 3M.

The response focus is around two lines:

1) providing basic assistance to the earthquake affected people: with a focus on vulnerable children and their families, the assistance includes provision of protection/winterisation kits for children, case management services for children, including family tracing services, PSS support to children (setting up CFS, (MH)PSS services, training of frontline workers), access to education (provision of education services, including materials, establishment of temporary learning spaces), and lastly, provision of multi-purpose cash. This part is implemented in Northern Aleppo and Idlib – more details will be shared with selected candidates.

2) improve access to basic services by restoration and rehabilitation of infrastructure: rehabilitation of roads, rehabilitation of health clinics, restoration of water and sewage networks. This part is implemented as well in Northern Aleppo and Idlib – more details will be shared with selected candidates.

Backdonor: Giro 555 / SHO

Giro 555 or Stichting Samenwerkende Hulporganisaties (SHO) is the cooperation of 11 relief organisations that join forces in the event of exceptional disasters. Giro555 cooperates with Dutch broadcasters and other media, to gather support from the Dutch public through donations. Giro555 keeps action costs low and avoids unnecessary competition so that as many people as possible can be assisted[1]. In February 2023, a fundraising campaign was organised for the people affected by the earthquake in Türkiye and Syria. The deadline for the use of the funds is 31st January 2025.

1. PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF REAL TIME EVALUATION

The purpose of the real time evaluation is to review the Earthquake Response activities in Northwest Syria supported by Cordaid, implemented by partners Christian Aid and The White Helmets, and to assess the implementation against CHS quality and accountability standard (see annex 1). The evaluation should provide actionable recommendations and lessons learned, both positive and negative impacts of the programmes, to improve quality and design and implementation of future programmes of Cordaid’s partners and the organisational aspects partners may need to strengthen to support improved performance. Results/Changes resulting from the programme activities should also be documented, including as well more general recommendations for Cordaid’s emergency response programming are requested.

1. METHODOLOGY

The methodology as well as all relevant tools will be developed by the consultant and presented in the inception report, and should be proposed in the EoI. The evaluation should be using mixed methodology approach, based on combined quantitative and qualitative research methods with triangulation of results, where possible. We encourage partipatory methodologies in data-collection to be used. The methodology should include the use of several tools to gain a deeper understanding of the outcomes of the project (to be discussed as well with partners which methodologies are feasible in the project areas):

• Desk review of background documents, such as project proposals and reports, and internal reports of the individual organisations where available;
• Field visits to project sites;
• Key informant interviews with key (program/support) staff from partner organisations (in NWS), and with Cordaid program staff (in NL); as well as with other key actors, like community leaders, local government, and other organisations;
• Household (HH) surveys, where possible, with representative and preferably statistically calculated sample sizes;
• Focus group discussions, with representatives from targeted population (including different age and gender representatives), community representatives;

Evaluators are expected to share findings with Cordaid and partners face to face or online for validation before finalising the report.

By undertaking the real time evaluation, consultant is expected to abide by the humanitarian principles and to ensure the confidentiality of the data collected; consultant is also required to abide by Cordaid’s Code of Conduct.

1. DELIVERABLES

The consultant is expected to lead, accomplish and submit the following deliverables within the agreed timeframe and budget:

1. An inception report, which will serve as an agreement between parties on how the evaluation will be conducted. The report should outline:

• Research methodology, including suggested sample and size, and draft data collection tools;
• Data sources, to be used to assess topics/objectives outlined in the ToR;
• Timeline / planning, team composition and detailed budget;

1. A max 25-page draft and final report (in Word and PDF for final), excluding annexes; use of graphs, visuals, tables and a dashboard with results should be included. The report should consist of:
2. Executive Summary in bullets (max. 2 pages)
3. Introduction
4. Methodology, including sampling and limitations;
5. Analysis and findings of the evaluation. The analysis should address purpose and scope of evaluation;
6. Elaboration on concerns, lessons learned and comments from partners;
7. At least 5 cases of substantial anecdotal evidence (short descriptions of a few sentences are sufficient) of added value from respondents;
8. Several stories of change and quotes from respondents;
9. Conclusions and operational recommendations to Cordaid and partners linked to the different CHS commitments relevant to strengthen quality and accountability of future response programs.
10. Annexes (including relevant maps and photographs of the evaluation areas; bibliography of consulted secondary sources; finalized data collection tools; list of interviewees).
11. Learning and sharing workshop with each implementing partner.

All deliverables should be written in English, and be in Word compatible format. For all deliverables, the consultant is expected to underline factual statements using evidence.

5. INDICATIVE TIMELINE & BUDGET

Timeline
The evaluation should be done in July/August 2024. This period includes the preparation period, evaluation mission and report submission.

Maximum budget

Maximum Euro budget that the quotation can propose is EUR 30.000; this will cover all costs that consultant will make to fulfil this assignment, including any tax requirements.

Planning and data collection timeline to be set up in collaboration with Cordaid’s partners.

1. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

Lead consultant

Cordaid evaluation committee

1. Develop an inception report, detailing the methodology-stakeholders to be interviewed, tools to be developed, time frame for the evaluation, budget should also be included.
Holds the overall management responsibility of the evaluation, including designing and carrying out the evaluation, drafting the final report and debriefing the project team and key stakeholders.

1. Provide all required background materials to the consultant in a timely manner.
Oversee the service provider by managing the consultancy contract; monitor adherence to specified deadlines; facilitating access to required information.

2. Liaise with (local) partner staff, but in charge of own logistics and planning of the field research.
Liaise with Cordaid staff throughout the process, provide regular updates and seek input and advice where necessary. Request approval in case of deviation from budget, and for miscellaneous costs.

2. Read and provide comments on the inception report including the proposed research methodology, the information gathering techniques and the suggested target sites.
Provide guidance throughout the assignment, facilitate field work, approve deliverables. Manage the evaluation budget and communication around costs and requests from consultant for miscellaneous expenditure.

3. Timely submission of evaluation draft and final report. Organize validation session, online or face to face, of findings with partners implementing the program. Sign Cordaid code of conduct Policy and abide by the terms and conditions thereof.

3. Review and comment on analysis and draft report submitted by the consultant i.e. preliminary reports and the final report, providing feedback to draft data collection tools and reports.

1. QUALIFICATION AND EXPERIENCE

The following skills are required for the consultant or consulting firm:

• Academic degree in Development/Humanitarian Studies, or a related field;
• Demonstrated experience in humanitarian response and knowledge of Core Humanitarian Standards;
• Demonstrated experience in project Monitoring and Evaluation in Syria;
• Demonstrated experience and strong knowledge in designing and conducting similar monitoring and evaluation activities;
• Strong knowledge of the context of the area of intervention, including security and cultural understanding;
• Proven analytical skills to analysis data, and ability to present findings;
• Demonstrated access to the intervention areas of Cordaid’s partners;
• Written en spoken fluency in English and Arabic;
• Experience in working (in MEAL or otherwise) with national/local organisations and with INGO- NNGO partnerships/ cooperation in Syria.
• Experience and understanding of responsible data management.

1. APPLICATION PROCESS

This procurement procedure is organised to contract a consultancy firm or an individual lead consultant who composes the evaluation team for this assignment. The consultancy firm or lead consultant is requested to include the following in its Expression of interest:

1. Technical Proposal:
   - CVs of all the proposed team members (including the team leader and at least 1 experience evaluator), proving relevant experience and/or diplomas;
   - two relevant reference assignments previously performed by the consultancy firm/lead consultant that are comparable in content, time and budget;
   - technical proposal, of max. 4 pages; including work/time plan, draft evaluation matrix, detailed methodology, and time planning based on this ToR, composition of the team, that proves comprehension of the proposed assignment;
2. Financial Proposal:
   Budget should include all costs to be incurred for the assignment (including accommodation, transportation, etcetera); if relevant costs for translators should be included, as well as relevant insurance coverage (professional liability, medical/repatriation insurance). Cost break down in days or hours spend and the related fee, travel costs etcetera should be included.

Awarding process

A final evaluation of the quotations is done by Cordaid based on its judgement of the best value for money criterion, including a quality assessment of the draft work plan, the CVs and reference assignments of the consultant. Cordaid withholds the right to conduct interviews with one or more candidates before an award decision is made. Purpose of the interview is to seek further clarification on the submitted quotations and learn more about the background and previous experiences of the candidates and their teams. Incomplete submissions will not be considered.

Please note:

• Any questions, remarks or requests for clarification can be send to jmn@cordaid.org;
• Quotations should be submitted to Cordaid by e-mail with the subject line; ‘Consultancy_Earthquake _Evaluation_#Name#’ to humanitair@cordaid.org
• Quotations should reach Cordaid no later than 17 May 2024;
• Final decision will be made by Cordaid, no later than the 4 June 2024;
• Only shortlisted submissions will be contacted.

Annex 1 – Evaluation questions

The evaluation should focus on the 9 Commitments of the Core Humanitarian Standard (version 2023), and will include the following questions:

I CHS commitment 1 & 2: Appropriate and Relevant, Effective and Timely

• To what extend have partners conducted a comprehensive and consultative assessment of capacities and needs of different groups of affected population and used results to inform the response?
• Does the response provide assistance in a way that is adapted to the needs and preferences of the different groups of affected population assisted (in-kind, cash, services)? Are there different types of assistance and protection for different gender and demographic groups?
• How do different groups of assisted populations think about the relevance and timeliness of the humanitarian assistance provided and how has this supported their lives and recovery.
• was the program effective in reaching groups that would not have been reached otherwise?

II CHS Commitment 3: Strengthening of Local Capacities and avoidance of Negative Effects

• Are risks and potential negative effects for affected population identified and considered in programming activities?
• In what ways (both formal and informal) are local communities consulted to ensure response strategies and targeting are in line with local and/or national priorities?
• Are activities including or supportive of local initiatives and capacities, including community-based self-help initiatives particularly for marginalised and minority groups, and first response capacities?
• To what extent has the project contributed to increasing national actors' capacities in management of programmes and resources? How do partners evaluate their decision taking power vis a vis Cordaid in design, implementation and adaption of the program. Did Cordaid acknowledge and make use of their knowledge and capacities?
• Which activities contributed to longer-term positive effects for affected people’s lives and livelihoods? Did the response have any unintended negative effects for people assisted (specifically related to social cohesion), other stakeholders, the market or the environment?

III CHS commitment 4 & 5: Communication, Participation and Feedback

• Is information about the organisation and response provided in accessible and appropriate ways to different affected groups and can they access the information provided, and do they understand it?
• In what ways is targeted population meaningfully engaged in different phases of the project? and how do people assisted evaluate the options to participate in the project?
• Are communities and people affected by crisis consulted about the design of complaints mechanisms (identification of barriers)? Are all groups within the affected community aware of how to give feedback on the response, and do they feel safe using those channels?
• Are there agreed and respected time frames for the investigating and resolving complaints? Is the time between when a complaint is filed, and its resolution recorded?
• Are there clear procedures to handle sensitive complaints (sexual exploitation, abuse and discrimination) Do staff know and have examples how sensitive complaints are handled?
• To what extent is the targeted population satisfied with the humanitarian assistance and services provided?

IV CHS commitment 6 & 7: Coordinated and complementary assistance, adjusted and improved during the response (learning).

• How did partners coordinate their response, which coordination mechanism (existing or new) are they part of? Is information about the competencies, resources, areas and sectors of work of the organisation exchanged with other organisations, including local and national authorities, and used for example for referral systems or collaboration?
• To what extent have the partners actively collaborated with other stakeholders (government and other actors) in the working area. Provide some examples of good practises.
• Are gaps and duplication in coverage (with other actors) identified and attempts made to resolve these together?
• (How) are learnings and good practises shared with relevant stakeholders?

V CHS commitment 8 & 9: Competent and well managed staff, effective and efficient use of resources.

• Do implementing organisations have sufficient competent staff to achieve project objectives and is their (under) performance managed?
• Do staff have clear job descriptions and understand their responsibility and tasks. What kind of formal and informal training and coaching did they receive to strengthen their competences to deliver project objectives?
• Are the organisation’s mandate and values communicated to new staff? Do staff sign a code of conduct or similarly binding document? If so, is their understanding supported by training on it and on other relevant policies?

[1] https://giro555.nl/over-sho/