- About the RANGE Programme
The Resilient Approaches in Natural Rangeland Ecosystems (RANGE) Programme is a five-year resilience and livelihoods initiative implemented by Mercy Corps in northern Kenya, with programming in Marsabit (Maikona, Laisamis, Sagante/Jaldesa, and Golbo Wards), Isiolo (Burat, Chari, Kinna, and Ngaremara Wards), and Samburu (Baawa, Lodokejek, Waso, and Wamba West Wards). The programme is funded by the Embassy of the Kingdom of the Netherlands (EKN) and operates in arid and semi-arid lands (ASALs) characterized by high climate variability, recurrent drought, natural resource-based conflict, fragile governance systems, and underdeveloped livestock market systems. Pastoralist and agro-pastoralist livelihoods in these counties are highly dependent on rangeland ecosystems and livestock production, making communities particularly vulnerable to climate shocks, environmental degradation, insecurity, and weak service delivery. Degraded rangelands, limited access to water and animal health services, constrained market opportunities, and weak coordination among communities, government institutions, and private sector actors have historically undermined resilience and sustainable development across these landscapes. RANGE was designed to respond to these interconnected challenges through a systems-oriented and landscape-based approach that recognizes the interdependence between ecosystem health, livelihoods, governance, markets, and evidence-based decision-making. Rather than focusing solely on direct service delivery, the programme emphasizes strengthening institutions, improving market systems, enhancing coordination among market actors, and catalyzing sustainable practices that can endure beyond the life of the project. Through this approach, RANGE seeks to strengthen household and systems resilience, improve the productivity and sustainability of rangeland-based livelihoods, support more effective and inclusive governance of natural resources, and contribute to more resilient market systems in northern Kenya.
1.1 Programme Goal and Outcomes
The overall goal of the RANGE Programme is to strengthen the resilience of ASAL communities, contributing to sustainable economic and social development within a well-managed landscape.
To achieve this goal, RANGE is structured around four interrelated outcomes:
- Outcome 1: Improved rangeland management repairs ecosystem health and increases food, nutrition, and water security.
This outcome focuses on strengthening formal and informal rangeland governance systems, promoting inclusive and sustainable rangeland management, scaling integrated water resource management interventions, and expanding access to green technologies that support livestock systems and climate adaptation. - Outcome 2: Sustainable livestock and alternative livelihood production and competitiveness of markets are strengthened within an improved policy environment.This outcome seeks to enhance livestock productivity and herd management, expand access to animal health services and inputs, support alternative livelihoods and financial inclusion, and strengthen market systems through engagement with private sector actors and facilitation of domestic and international market linkages.
- Outcome 3: Improved linkages among and between communities and government structures support collaboration on economic, environmental, and social issues that promote stability and sustained development.
This outcome emphasizes participatory governance, peacebuilding and conflict prevention, inter-county and cross-border coordination, public–private partnerships, and the use of community-generated evidence to influence policies, legislation, and public investment decisions. - Outcome 4: Strengthened research and evidence-based programming contribute to impactful implementation, effective coordination, early warning and early action, innovation, and learning for resilient ASAL communities.
This outcome focuses on building robust research and learning systems, improving awareness and use of geospatial and planning tools, implementing longitudinal data collection protocols, and strengthening the capacity of government, research institutions, and local partners to generate, use, and disseminate evidence.
1.2 Implementation Approach
RANGE applies an integrated implementation approach that combines Integrated Participatory Land and Rangeland Management (IPLRM), Market Systems Development (MSD) principles, participatory governance, and adaptive management. Programme activities are implemented through collaboration with county governments, community institutions, local implementing partners, private sector actors, and research institutions. Cross-cutting themes, including gender equity, youth inclusion, conflict sensitivity, climate resilience, and safeguarding, are embedded across programme outcomes and activities to ensure that implementation is inclusive, context-responsive, and sustainable.
1.3 Rationale for a Mid-Term Review
The RANGE Programme commenced on 1 January 2024 and is scheduled to conclude on 31 December 2028. At this midpoint, the programme has moved beyond start-up and systems establishment into a more mature phase of implementation, creating an important opportunity to assess progress, examine how well programme strategies and assumptions are holding in practice, and identify adjustments needed for the remaining implementation period. The Mid-Term Review will provide an independent and structured assessment of the programme’s relevance, coherence, progress, effectiveness, and emerging results, while also examining the continued suitability of the results framework, implementation approaches, and partnership arrangements. As both a learning and accountability milestone, the review will help Mercy Corps, partners, county stakeholders, and EKN identify what is working, what requires adjustment, and where programme efforts and resources should be prioritized to strengthen performance, adaptive management, and sustainability during the remainder of the programme period.
2. Purpose of the MTR
The purpose of the Mid-Term Review (MTR) is to assess the progress, relevance, strategic performance, and emerging results of the Resilient Approaches in Natural Rangeland Ecosystems (RANGE) Programme at the midpoint of implementation, and to generate actionable evidence and learning to strengthen programme implementation, effectiveness, coherence, and contribution during the remaining implementation period. Consistent with Mercy Corps and donor evaluation standards, the exercise will serve both learning and accountability functions, with primary emphasis on formative learning, adaptive management, and strategic decision-making rather than summative judgement or full attribution of long-term impact. The review is not intended to function as a MEL audit. Rather, it will provide an independent and structured assessment of how the programme is evolving, how well its strategies and assumptions are holding in practice, what early results and signals of change are emerging, and what adjustments are needed to strengthen performance during the remaining implementation period.
Specifically, the MTR will:
- assess the extent to which RANGE’s strategies, approaches, and Theory of Change assumptions remain valid and appropriate in a dynamic ASAL context characterized by climate shocks, conflict, market volatility, and changing governance conditions;
- assess the maturity, trajectory, and strategic relevance of interventions, recognizing that some programme components may still be in early or intermediate stages of implementation;
- identify and analyse early signs of change and emerging outcome patterns at community, market system, institutional, and governance levels;
- explore how external shocks and crises encountered during implementation, including climate events, conflict dynamics, and policy shifts, have influenced programme delivery, sequencing, performance, and emerging results;
- draw on existing monitoring data, programme documentation, and stakeholder perspectives to identify what is working, where performance is uneven, and which knowledge gaps require further inquiry;
- assess the extent to which Mercy Corps, implementing partners, and relevant local institutions have the technical, operational, and MEL-related capacities required to support quality implementation, adaptive management, and sustainability of programme interventions; make recommendations on capacity needed to deliver the programme scope.
- generate practical recommendations to refine programme design, implementation modalities, partnerships, sequencing, targeting, and measurement approaches for the remainder of the programme period; and
- provide evidence to inform FY4 work planning, budgeting, donor engagement, and future endline preparation.
Given the programme’s stage of implementation, the MTR will not attempt to assess final impact or make definitive causal claims about long-term behaviour change. Instead, it will focus on plausible contribution pathways, early outcome signals, and enabling conditions that indicate whether the programme is on track to achieve its intended outcomes over time.
2.1. Intended Audience: Who wants the information?
The primary intended users of the Mid-Term Review (MTR) findings are:
- The Embassy of the Kingdom of the Netherlands (EKN), as the programme donor, for accountability, strategic oversight, and ongoing engagement on programme performance and adaptation;
- Mercy Corps Kenya Country Leadership and RANGE senior management, for strategic decision-making, FY4 planning and budgeting, implementation adaptation, and resource prioritization;
- Mercy Corps regional and global technical, resilience, and MEL teams, for technical support, quality assurance, organizational learning, and alignment with broader resilience and MEL standards; and
- Relevant county and national government counterparts engaged in rangeland governance, livestock development, natural resource management, and resilience planning, to inform collaboration, policy dialogue, and institutional strengthening;
- RANGE programme and MEL staff at national and county levels, for day-to-day programme improvement, implementation refinement, and strengthening of monitoring, learning, and measurement systems.
Secondary users of the findings include:
- Local implementing partners and other consortium or delivery stakeholders, to support shared learning, implementation improvement, and coordination;
- Key private sector and market system actors engaged by the programme, to better understand emerging changes, constraints, incentives, and opportunities within the systems being supported
- Programme participants, including pastoralist and agro-pastoralist households, community representatives, and local institutions, who should be able to access and use key findings in appropriate formats to understand programme progress, relevance, and emerging outcomes affecting their livelihoods and governance systems.
2.2 Information Needs: What do they want to know?
The intended users seek to understand: (see LINK)
2.3 Use of Findings: How will the evaluation be used?
The findings and recommendations of the MTR will be used to guide programme improvement, decision-making, accountability, and learning during the remainder of implementation; (see LINK)
2.4 Timing and Outputs: When is it needed and in what form?
The Mid-Term Review is expected to be conducted in mid-2026, with findings available in time to inform programme planning, budgeting, and strategic decision-making for the subsequent implementation period. (see LINK)
3. Evaluation Design
3.1 Evaluation Questions
The Mid-Term Review (MTR) will assess the overall design, implementation progress, adaptive performance, learning systems, and emerging results of the RANGE Programme at the midpoint of implementation. Existing programme monitoring, research, and learning data will be made available to support the review. Given the breadth and complexity of the programme, not all questions below are expected to be addressed in equal depth. The consultant is expected to refine and prioritize the final evaluation questions and sub-questions during the inception phase, based on learning value, feasibility, available evidence, and decision-making needs, while ensuring that the final scope remains focused and realistic for the review period.
The proposed evaluation questions will cover the following thematic areas: (see LINK)
3.2 Evaluation Methodology
The consultant is expected to propose a fit-for-purpose methodology for the Mid-Term Review during the application and inception phase. The methodology should be aligned with the review questions, programme context, timeline, and available resources, and should set out the proposed design, methods, sampling approach, data sources, and analytical framework. The approach should be sufficiently robust to generate credible and useful findings for programme learning, adaptive management, and decision-making, while clearly stating any limitations.
4. Evaluation Scope
The Mid-Term Review will focus on assessing programme-level progress, performance, and learning of the RANGE Programme at the midpoint of implementation. The review will examine progress toward intended outcomes, the relevance and effectiveness of strategies and approaches, and emerging findings that can inform adaptive management during the remaining implementation period. See LINK with in depth details of the scope.
5. Team Composition, Roles & Responsibilities
5.1 External Consultant(s)
The Mid-Term Review will be led by an independent external consultant. Bidders should propose a team composition that they consider fit for purpose for the assignment, provided it offers the technical and analytical capacity required to deliver a credible Mid-Term Review in a complex ASAL programme context. Given the nature of the assignment, proposals are expected to demonstrate relevant expertise across key technical areas of the programme, including livestock and alternative livelihoods market systems, institutional governance, and natural resource management, including ecosystem health systems. The consulting team will be responsible for the overall design, implementation, analysis, and reporting of the assignment.
The external consultant or evaluation team will be expected to:
- refine and justify the review design, methodology, workplan, and analysis approach
- develop and submit an inception report, including the proposed evaluation questions, methods, sampling approach, data sources, and analysis plan;
- conduct or oversee data collection and analysis in accordance with the approved design, ethical standards, and quality requirements;
- ensure methodological rigor, objectivity, and independence throughout the assignment;
- prepare and submit all agreed deliverables, including the inception report, planning brief, draft report, final report, and presentations;
- incorporate feedback from Mercy Corps and relevant stakeholders into final deliverables; and
- facilitate validation, learning, and reflection sessions, as appropriate.
5.2 Mercy Corps (Internal Team)
Mercy Corps will provide oversight, coordination, and technical support to the Mid-Term Review process, while safeguarding the independence of the external consultant or evaluation team. Its role will include providing access to relevant programme documentation, data, and contextual information; facilitating introductions to key stakeholders, partners, institutions, and communities; supporting logistical coordination where required; reviewing and providing timely feedback on draft deliverables; and supporting internal learning, reflection, and uptake of findings, including development of a management response and action plan.
5.3 Programme Partners and Stakeholders
Programme partners, government stakeholders, and other relevant actors will support the review by participating in interviews, discussions, and validation processes; providing relevant information, documentation, and perspectives on programme implementation, partnerships, and emerging outcomes; and contributing to reflection and learning on findings to inform future action.
While Mercy Corps and other stakeholders will support the review process, the external consultant or evaluation team will maintain full independence in the design, conduct, analysis, and interpretation of findings. Collaboration between the consultant and internal teams will be managed in a manner that promotes transparency, objectivity, and credibility.
6. Qualifications of the Evaluation Team
The Mid-Term Review will be conducted by an independent external consultant or evaluation team with demonstrated experience in evaluating complex resilience, livelihoods, natural resource management, governance, and Market Systems Development (MSD) programmes. The proposed consultant or team should collectively demonstrate the technical, analytical, and contextual capacity required to deliver a credible and useful Mid-Term Review in a complex ASAL programme context.:
Required Qualifications
- Advanced degree (Master’s or higher) in monitoring and evaluation, social sciences, development studies, economics, statistics, environmental studies, natural resource management, peace and conflict studies, governance, or a related field.
- At least 7–10 years of relevant professional experience in programme evaluation, research, or learning, including demonstrated experience conducting mid-term reviews and/or evaluations of multi-component development or humanitarian programmes.
- Proven experience applying theory-based and mixed-methods evaluation designs.
- Demonstrated experience (among the team) evaluating resilience, ecosystem health, natural resource management, rangeland governance, peacebuilding or governance approaches, and market systems development, preferably in ASAL or similar fragile and climate-vulnerable contexts.
- Strong analytical, synthesis, and report-writing skills, with evidence of producing high-quality evaluation or research reports for donors and international NGOs.
- Experience working with or for international NGOs, donors, consortium programmes, or multi-stakeholder initiatives.
Desirable Qualifications and Experience
- Experience applying contribution analysis, outcome harvesting, or similar utilization-focused evaluation approaches.
- Familiarity with OECD-DAC evaluation criteria and donor evaluation standards.
- Experience engaging with government institutions, private sector actors, community stakeholders, and local partners.
- Knowledge of pastoralist and agro-pastoralist livelihood systems, rangeland ecosystems, and resilience programming in ASAL contexts.
- Experience working in Kenya or the Horn of Africa, particularly in ASAL counties.
- Demonstrated capacity to integrate gender, conflict sensitivity, safeguarding, and inclusion considerations into evaluation design and analysis.
Team Composition and Roles
For team-based proposals, bidders should clearly outline the proposed team composition, the role and responsibility of each team member, the relevant expertise contributed by each member, and the proposed level of effort across major tasks. The proposed team should demonstrate a combination of skills and experience appropriate to the scope and complexity of the assignment
7. Timelines, Deliverables and Stakeholders
The table below provides an indicative schedule for the Mid-Term Review. Bidders may propose refinements to the sequencing, level of effort, and workplan during the proposal and inception phases, provided the overall timeline remains aligned with Mercy Corps’ planning and decision-making needs. See breakdown on this LINK.
Mercy Corps will compensate the External Consultant only for days worked, based on the agreed level of effort and approved budget. Payments will be made based on satisfactory completion and approval of key deliverables, in accordance with the agreed contract. See Payment Plan.
Invoicing Terms
- Invoices must be submitted upon completion and approval of each deliverable.
- The final invoice must be submitted within seven (7) working days after submission and approval of the final deliverables.
- Payments will be processed in line with Mercy Corps’ financial procedures and contractual terms.
8. Diversity, Equity & Inclusion (DEI)
Achieving Mercy Corps’ mission begins with how we build our teams and work together. Mercy Corps is committed to fostering a diverse, equitable, and inclusive culture that values people of different origins, beliefs, backgrounds, identities, and ways of thinking.
Through this commitment, Mercy Corps seeks to:
- Leverage the collective strengths and perspectives of diverse teams
- Promote a culture of trust, respect, and psychological safety
- Ensure that all individuals are able to contribute authentically, reach their potential, and collaborate effectively
Mercy Corps recognizes that diversity, equity, and inclusion is an ongoing journey and remains committed to learning, listening, and continuously improving its practices to become more inclusive and equitable over time.
9. Equal Employment Opportunity
Mercy Corps is an equal opportunity employer and is committed to providing an environment of respect and psychological safety where equal employment opportunities are available to all.
Mercy Corps does not engage in or tolerate discrimination on the basis of race, color, gender identity, gender expression, religion, age, sexual orientation, national or ethnic origin, disability (including HIV/AIDS status), marital status, military veteran status, or any other protected characteristic in the locations where we work.
10. Safeguarding & Ethical Conduct
The evaluation will be conducted in accordance with Mercy Corps’ safeguarding, accountability, and ethical standards, as well as internationally recognized principles guiding relief and development work.
All consultants and team members engaged in this assignment are expected to:
- Uphold the highest standards of professional conduct and integrity
- Respect local laws, customs, and Mercy Corps policies, procedures, and values
- Ensure informed consent, confidentiality, and voluntary participation of all respondents
- Apply do-no-harm and conflict-sensitive approaches, particularly when engaging vulnerable or marginalized populations
- Actively support accountability to affected communities as equal partners in the design, monitoring, and evaluation of programmes
Any safeguarding or ethical concerns arising during the evaluation must be promptly reported to Mercy Corps.
11. Assessment and Award of the Assignment
Mercy Corps will evaluate submitted technical and financial proposals to assess overall fit and award the assignment based on technical quality, methodological soundness, relevant experience, team strength, and financial feasibility. Mercy Corps reserves the right to accept or reject any or all proposals received without assigning any reason, is not bound to accept the lowest or highest financial proposal, and will contact only shortlisted applicants. Subcontracting is not permitted under this assignment, and proposals involving subcontracting to other entities will not be considered. The assignment will be awarded based on overall value for money, considering technical quality, methodological soundness, relevant experience, team composition, and financial feasibility in line with the requirements of this Scope of Work.
How to apply
Proposal Submission Requirements
Interested consultants, whether firms or individual consultants, are required to submit the following documents as part of their proposal:
Technical Proposal
- A clear description of the proposed review approach, methodology, and design;
- Demonstration of understanding of the RANGE Programme context and the objectives of the Mid-Term Review;
- A proposed workplan and timeline aligned with this Scope of Work; and
- The proposed consultant or team composition, including roles and level of effort.
Curriculum Vitae (CVs)
- CVs of all proposed team members, clearly indicating relevant qualifications, experience, and roles;
Sample Work
- two example evaluation or review reports from similar assignments. Preference will be given to work conducted in similar contexts or programmes.
Corporate Capacity Statement (maximum two pages, where applicable)
- overview of organizational experience and years of operation;
- types of relevant evaluations or reviews previously conducted
- geographic presence and office locations, where applicable.
Financial Proposal
- summary budget and detailed cost breakdown;
- proposed daily rates and level of effort;
- cost assumptions and currency used; and
Only complete proposals that include both technical and financial components will be considered.
NOTE: Kindly share all requested documents highlighted above to tenders.mck@mercycorps.org with Mid-Term Review (MTR) for the Resilient Approaches in Natural Rangeland Ecosystems (RANGE) Programme as your email subject