RACIDA DKH K-AFM-2022-0375-007 Consultancy for Endline Evaluation of RACIDA’s Building Resilience of Agro-Pastoralist Communities (BRAP) At Rural Agency for Community Development and Assistance

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL

Reference No: RACIDA DKH K-AFM-2022-0375-007

Consultancy for Endline Evaluation of RACIDA’s Building Resilience of Agro-Pastoralist Communities (BRAP) project in Mandera and Wajir Counties in Kenya and Liban Zone in Ethiopia Project

Rural Agency for Community Development and Assistance (RACIDA) in Partnership Diakonie Emergency Aid

Document Release Date: 15th November,2024

Deadline for Submission of Bids: 30th November,2024 Time: 5:00 PM EAT

Submission Method: Email

Disclaimer: RACIDA reserves the right to determine the structure of the process, the number of short-listed participants, the right to withdraw from the proposal process, the right to change this timetable at any time without notice, and reserves the right to withdraw this tender at any time, without prior notice and without liability to compensate and/or reimburse any party

Synopsis of the Request for Proposal (Individual Consultant / Registered firm)

Solicitation Reference No.

RACIDA DKHK-AFM-2022-0375-007

Title of Solicitation

Consultancy for Endline Evaluation of RACIDA’s Building Resilience of Agro-Pastoralist Communities(BRAP) project in Mandera and Wajir Counties in Kenya and Liban Zone in Ethiopia

Issuing Office& Address

Rural Agency for Community Development Assistance Website: www.racida.org

Point of contact for clarifications, questions, and amendments: RACIDA Procurement,

Procurement@racida.org

Email Address for submission of Proposals/ Quotes: RACIDA Procurement,

Procurement@racida.org

Solicitation Issue Date:15th November 2024

Initial Deadline for Submission of Proposals: 30th November 2024

Endline Locations: Kenya(Mandera &Wajir), and Ethiopia(Liban Zone)

Target Beneficiaries: 44,209 individuals

Anticipated Award Type: Consultancy Agreement

Submission and Evaluation Criteria

Bidder must provide the below-listed information:Mandatory Eligibility Requirement

• Must be an Individual Consultant/Registered Consultancy Firm
• Must submit CV (s)of Key Personnel
• Must submit a certificate of Incorporation/ Business Registration
• Must submit a certificate of Tax Compliance
• Must Submit Business KRA PIN
• The firm should not have been sanctioned or blacklisted by any government or institution

Technical Evaluation Criteria

1. Consultant Academic and Professional Qualification-20%
2. Consultant’s Prior Work Experience- 35%
3. Methodology/Approach- 35%
4. Language and analytical skills -10%

NB. The minimum technical score shall be 75%. Only the best candidate shall be engaged in financial negotiations.

1. Background

RACIDA in partnership with Protestant Agency for Diakonie and Development for Bread for the World (BfdW) and Diakonie Emergency Aid (DKH) is implementing an integrated humanitarian and resilience response in Mandera(Kukub,Tarbey,Guba,Choroqo,Tarama, Khalalio, Bur abor,Bella,Fikow,Darika,Bulla Haji, Rhamu Dimtu,Khalicha,Yabicho, and Mado) and Wajir( Dalsan, Makaror,Bangal, Eldas,Masalale, Qotqot, Khumbi, Basir,Bulla Hagar) Counties in Kenya and Liban Zone in Ethiopia(Quran Gubana, Dheka, Garbab 1, Jaygadud and Kulan- Helaboon,Sora and Adey) from December,2022 to December,2024). The project contributes to strengthening the resilience of (agro)pastoralist communities in dryland areas of the Mandera Triangle, which encompasses the Somali Region of Ethiopia (Liban zone), Mandera and Wajir Counties in Kenya, to address and decrease disaster and conflict risks (risks being aggravated by climate change).

Mandera and Wajir counties in Kenya and the neighboring Liban Zone in Ethiopia are vulnerable to natural hazard-related disasters such as droughts and floods which are further aggravated by human-induced hazards like conflicts both localized and cross-border in nature. Due to recurrent droughts, pastoralists and agro-pastoralists have lost a significant number of livestock assets accumulated over many years which is their main livelihood source thus reducing their coping capacity and resilience. Since 2020, communities living in southern and southeastern Ethiopia and Northern Kenya have been facing drought situations worsened by successive failed seasons. The situation has caused loss of life ,crops ,migration and has forced pastoralists to walk longer distances in search of water and pasture, often crossing zonal, regional/county, and country borders.

In both Kenya and Ethiopia, the household purchasing power among (agro) pastoralists is rapidly declining due to the reduction of key income sources (farm produce and livestock) coupled with sharp increases in domestic and imported cereal and other commodity prices due to global supply chain constraints. The current crisis is not solely due to the poor rain seasons over the past two years, but also as a result of the gradual erosion of community resilience and traditional coping mechanisms by successive shocks and limited development investments. It is anticipated that climate change will increase both the frequency and intensity of droughts in the region; therefore, recognizing and addressing the underlying causes of vulnerability is key to improving communities’ resilience and capacity to cope with shocks. It is important to meet the immediate food security, water and health/nutrition needs of drought-affected communities in the Mandera Triangle if a worsening of the situation is to be prevented. However, meeting these immediate needs must be done in a way that builds on and is strongly linked to ongoing efforts by community, government and other stakeholders to improve the long-term resilience and coping capacity of affected communities and households.

RACIDA is implementing an integrated lifesaving and resilience intervention to address the immediate humanitarian needs of drought-affected communities in the Mandera, Wajir, and Liban zone as well as support them in building their resilience capacities to respond and mitigate shocks of future disasters. The project was designed to complement ongoing interventions in the three regions. In Wajir County, RACIDA has supported the ministry of health (MOH) to provide health and nutrition services in hard-to-reach areas through outreaches, on job training of community health volunteers (CHVs) on nutrition and hygiene promotion in communities; water trucking services to most needy villages; rehabilitation of strategic water points; support beekeeping and fodder production; and disaster risk reduction (DRR) activities in the target villages. In Mandera, activities include fodder production, provision of agricultural inputs (drought-resistant seeds, training, and assorted tools), rehabilitation of underground tanks, beekeeping, and DRR activities. In Liban Zone in Ethiopia, activities include; behavior change communication (BCC) on maternal, infant, and young child nutrition (MIYCN) and hygiene, cash transfers, water trucking, beekeeping, fodder production and provision of agricultural inputs (drought-resistant seeds, training and assorted tools), and DRR activities. The various activities implemented under this project are looked at from thematic integrated approach with the ultimate goal being to improve the nutritional status of children, women, and households in general.

1. Purpose

The overall purpose of the evaluation is to assess the degree to which the project met the objectives as outlined in the project proposal/log frame, with particular emphasis on appropriateness/relevance, timeliness, efficiency, effectiveness, impact and sustainability of the interventions carried out. The evaluation is also aimed to assess qualitatively as well as quantitatively, the project’s achievements.

Endline Survey Objectives

1. Establish Endline information against which the project log frame indicators will be used as a threshold for this project to assess progress, outcomes, and impact.

Project Indicators

The following table shows the project indicators whose achievement will be evaluated.

Objective 1: The most urgent priority needs of the most vulnerable households in the drought- affected communities in Kenya (Mandera, Wajir) and

Ethiopia (Liban zone) are met

Indicator 1:Reduced Coping strategy Index (rCSI)

Indicator 2: % of beneficiaries (disaggregated by sex, age, and disability) report that humanitarian assistance is delivered in a safe,accessible, accountable, and participatory manner

throughout all phases of the project

Objective 2: Sustainable access to traditional livelihoods and water for targeted agro-pastoralist farmers and groups is strengthened

Indicator 1:% of the targeted agro-pastoral farmers that report an increase in the production of fodder and drought-resistant cereals by end of the project

Indicator 2: At least 50% of target beneficiaries supported with access to water have access to clean and safe water throughout the project period

Objective 3: The resilience of targeted local pastoralists communities to cope with conflicts and natural disasters is enhanced

Indicator 1: At least 60% of the 800 households targeted through CMDRR sensitization and EWI apply Community Managed Disaster Risk Reduction (CMDRR)knowledge and EWIto

mitigate the impact of disasters and enhance the recovery process by end of project

Indicator 2: At least 75% percent of Community Disaster Risk Management Committees (CDRMCs) collaborate effectively with the Woreda Disaster Risk Management Committee (DRM) and the NDMA to implement one priority action plan during the

project period

Evaluation criteria

Relevance

• To what extent are our objectives, planned activities and planned outputs consistent with the intended outcome and impact? Are there differences between the time when the project was planned and designed and today?
  • The extent to which humanitarian activities met and are tailored to local needs, increasing ownership, accountability and cost-effectiveness accordingly.
    • To what extent the project was coherent with the particular risks / vulnerabilities / needs, expectations and priorities of the target communities, local authorities, and other actors?
    • To what extent was the project aligned with the National, Provincial, District and Local Disaster Risk Reduction, Climate Change Adaptation and Resilience priorities (aligned to existing systems, policies, structures)?

Effectiveness (achieving the purpose)

• Did the activities achieve satisfactory results in relation to stated project objectives (outcomes) / results (outputs)? How did the project perform against the log frame indicators? Were there any unintended outcomes?
  • What were the major factors influencing the achievement or non-achievement of the objectives?
    • To what extent have the activities contributed to enhancing local capacities (of communities, specific community groups, and local agencies)?
    • To what extent have the activities contributed to enhancing local coordination and planning processes?
    • What is the effectiveness of a) prevention, mitigation and adaptation measures and b) System and mechanisms (i.e., risk monitoring, early warning, and forecasting systems)? Efficiency
    • Were there any delays?
    • Could the same or better results have been achieved with same or lower inputs or by doing things differently?
    • Were the effects being achieved at an acceptable cost compared to alternative approaches of accomplishing the same objectives?

Impact

• What has happened as a result of the project? (Intended and unintended impacts on individuals, communities, institutions, improvement of social and economic indicators, health, poverty reduction, resilience, capacities, assets, cross-sectoral impact, impact on Gender and equal opportunities for women and men, age-groups, or other relevant cross-cutting issues)
• What real difference/changes has the activity brought about for the beneficiaries? (What would have happened without the activity?)
  • How many people have been affected? Planned target group vis à vis really addressed? Coherence
    • How coherent are the interventions with regards to humanitarian standards?
    • Are the approaches applied in the different components of the interventions coherent?
    • Are these approaches coherent with environmental standards, protection principles, and humanitarian principles as well as human rights considerations?

Sustainability

• To what extent will the positive impacts or changes of the project (are likely to) continue?
  • Which measures are implemented in order to support sustainability?
    • What were the major factors influencing the achievement or non-achievement of sustainability of the project?
    • Are the project approaches (state these, i.e., sclr, local contingency planning, etc.), and interventions (states these, i.e., risk reduction measures / adaptation practices) likely to continue after the end of the external funding?
    • Are there sufficient forums /structures capabilities to maintain the changes produced over time?
    • Are the decision-making processes by communities likely to be continued into the future, and how/why?
    • How was the exit strategy defined, and how was this managed at the end of the funding period?

Replicability:

• What aspects of the project are replicable in similar areas in the country and elsewhere?
  • Under what circumstances and/or in what contexts would the project be replicable? Lessons learned, information sharing and dissemination:
    • Were there any significant changes in the project design or the project context? What were the reasons for these, and can any useful lessons be learned from this for application elsewhere?
    • For whom could these lessons have relevance?
    • What key lessons were learned throughout the project lifecycle, and how were these incorporated?
    • Are there recommendations for similar future projects based on successes and challenges encountered?

Recommendations: Targeted recommendations for:

(a. Targeted populations / Communities,

b. Implementing partner(s), c. local or national government agencies, and d. Diakonie Katastrophenhilfe & any back donor) for improvements based on findings during the evaluation process (e.g., for sustainability, future project design).

1. To document the perception of RACIDA and the project from relevant stakeholders, including the following: Community members, project beneficiaries, government authorities, and coordination mechanisms.
   1. Produce an Endline Report that will be used to evaluate the impact of the project and to guide future project development, implementation and monitoring strategies
   2. To capture main lessons learned and best practices for future similar projects.
   3. To suggest practical recommendations for improvements based on findings during the evaluation process (recommendations need to be specific, practical/feasible and achievable).

2.1. Endline Target Groups

The populations of interest for this endline study are people living within the areas targeted under this project, with a special focus on caregivers of children under 5 years, women of reproductive age, livestock owners and farmers, youth, IDPs, and persons with disabilities.

1. Methodology

   1. Methods Overview

Methodology: The consultant is expected to utilize a mixed-methods approach using literature reviews of existing secondary data, quantitative data from the targeted villages, and qualitative data from relevant stakeholders in the 3 target areas. The methods are summarized below:

1. Desk Review of key documents and secondary data from the target areas.
   1. Households Surveys
      1. Focus Group Discussions
      2. Key Informant Interviews
      3. Direct observation Literature Review

The consultant will be required to conduct a thorough and robust review of existing literature relating to WASH, nutrition, agriculture, and livelihoods. The literature review will be presented as a stand-alone section of the final report and will inform the interpretation of the survey findings as well as the development of recommendations. Quantitative Data Collection

The core of the assessment will consist of a randomized quantitative survey. The survey will collect disaggregated data on food security, nutrition, WASH (Water Supply, Hygiene Promotion, and Sanitation), agriculture, food security, and livelihoods. The consultant will be required to clearly outline how people with disabilities will be involved in the survey and to include in their recommendation how they can most effectively participate meaningfully in the project.

All data will be disaggregated by sex, age, and disability where appropriate. The endline study will sample community members and other stakeholders from the project locations. The consultant is expected to propose a methodology that is scientific, culturally appropriate, and will leverage both qualitative and quantitative data. The consultant is expected to develop a quantitative survey tool that captures all the indicators and survey questions outlined in the TOR as well as the project documents. The final tool will be approved by RACIDA.

1. Sampling Framework

A sample of respondents will be randomly selected from target areas for the quantitative survey. The sample will be statistically representative of the populations living in each target area based on acceptable statistical sampling techniques. This should be in line with various contextual factors and proposed project site.

1. Sampling Approach

RACIDA expects the consultant to employ a sampling framework that utilizes a two-stage cluster sampling with probability proportionate to size (PPS) design.

1. Survey Administration

The survey will be administered using ODK/Kobo Tool Box. A number of checks will be put in place to ensure the quality and accuracy of the data collected. These will include but are not limited to:

• A thorough testing process for the data collection tool in line with standard operating procedures for tool development and testing, involving multiple layers of testing to ensure that the tool functions properly.
  • A pilot phase in the field during which the tool is thoroughly checked and tested prior to final use.
    • Daily checks of data collected to ensure that it is comprehensive and does not contain any mistakes.
      • Daily debriefs with the data collection team to ensure that any problems encountered during data collection are identified and resolved.
      • Regular spot checks on the field during data collection to ensure data collectors are properly administering survey questionnaires.
      • A final, thorough, data cleaning process which will include verification of any potentially inaccurate data and revisits to the field if necessary.
  1. Qualitative Data Collection

Qualitative data collection methods will include Focus Group Discussions (FGDs), Observation ,Key Informant Interviews (KIIs) with community members, leaders, RACIDA staff, ministry officials, community health workers, and other relevant partners deemed appropriate In addition data will be collected through observation checklists. The consultant team is expected to propose KII and FGD participants on the basis of their knowledge and on guidance from RACIDA.

Qualitative data collection tools will be determined by RACIDA project priorities and guidance from the consultant knowledge and expertise.

1. Focus Group Discussions

The FGDs will have the following goals:

• Gather qualitative data to triangulate, explain, and expand upon the quantitative data gathered.
• Explore in more detail the challenges facing community members and the perceived gaps in food security, livelihood, health/nutrition, WASH, and Livestock.
  • Identify specific barriers faced by different groups in each target area in terms of accessing services, participating in the development of the local community, and how to overcome these barriers.
    • Explore the community’s understanding of CMDRR and how they can be involved in CMDRR.
      • Other themes as determined by RACIDA and the Consultant.

Key Informant Interview

KIIs will also be conducted as part of the qualitative data collection. Interviews in each target area will be expected to be inclusive of all relevant key community groups and will include PWDs.

The interviews will have the following goals:

• Understand the current trends for food security, nutrition, WASH, CMDRR, and livestock and in the capacity of the communities to respond to, plan for, and implement mitigation measures in response to these trends.
  • Understand Contribution of the project, gaps, what worked well, what did not work well, and lessons learnt
    • Understand the current management, planning, gaps, challenges and implementation of best practices of mitigation mechanisms for food security, livestock, WASH and nutrition/health.

1. Survey Quality and Ethical Standards

   1. Ethical Standards

The consultant shall take all reasonable steps to ensure that the survey is designed and conducted to respect and protect the rights and welfare of the people and communities involved and to ensure that the survey is technically accurate and reliable, is conducted in a transparent and impartial manner, and contributes to organizational learning and accountability. Therefore, the survey team shall be required to adhere to the survey standards and applicable practices as recommended by IFRC.

• Utility – Surveys must be realistic, diplomatic, and managed in a sensible, cost-effective manner.
• Ethics & Legality – Surveys must be conducted in an ethical and legal manner, with particular regard for the welfare of those involved in and affected by the survey.
• Transparency – Survey activities should reflect an attitude of openness and transparency.
• Accuracy – Survey should be technically accurate, providing sufficient information about the data collection, analysis, and interpretation methods so that its worth or merit can be determined.
• Participation – Stakeholders should be consulted and meaningfully involved in the survey process when feasible and appropriate.
• Collaboration – Collaboration between key operating partners in the survey process improves the legitimacy and utility of the survey.
• Feasibility – Evaluations must be realistic, diplomatic, and managed in a sensible, cost- effective manner.
• Impartiality & independence – Evaluations should be impartial, providing a comprehensive and unbiased assessment that takes into account the views of all stakeholders.
  1. Future Use of the Data

All data collected will be the sole property of RACIDA/DKH and other relevant stakeholders. The consultant must not use the data for their own research purposes, nor license the data to be used by others, without the written consent of RACIDA.

1. Obligations

   1. Obligations of the Consultant

• Give leadership to the technical team throughout the assessment
• Inform the Program Manager, and M&E Officer in a timely manner of the progress made and any challenges encountered.
• Conduct the consultancy as per agreements in TOR, and contract, and if modifications are necessary, bring them to the attention of the Program Manager before making any changes.
• Report on a timely basis as per the ToR and the contract agreement
• Declare any possible conflict of interest before signing the contract. Produce a draft report and discuss the feedback and general findings with RACIDA team before submitting the final report.
• Cater for his/her transport to the site or within his/her bid can indicate RACIDA to provide

  i.e. transport to the communities and exclude costing on the same within the bid.

• Organize for his/her own accommodation and cater for other expenses they may likely incur during the assignment.

1. Obligations of RACIDA

• Make sure the Consultant is provided with the necessary and required resources i.e. the project documents- proposal, reports and any other documents that the consultant may need.
• Give logistical information and attend to any concerns that may arise during the endline exercise.
• Facilitate the work of the consultant in accessing beneficiaries and other local stakeholders
• Monitor the daily work of the consultant and bring to the attention of the consultant

  /RACIDA any concerns that may arise

• Provide technical oversight in the review of all deliverables
• Provide timely comments on the draft report.

1. Qualifications and Experience of Consultant

The lead consultant must have a background and experience in Nutrition, DRR, WASH, Public Health, food security or a related field. The lead consultant must have a degree in public health, nutrition, disaster management, agriculture, WASH or related field and experience in Emergency Response and Recovery programming, with a broad understanding of WASH, Agriculture, Food Security, and Nutrition.

1. Key Selection Criteria

The independent consultant/consultancy firm must demonstrate experience and expertise as follows:

• Degree in Public Health, Nutrition, Agriculture, Water, disaster management, or another related field.
• Demonstrated experience in conducting high-quality endlines or related projects in the past five years (sample reports are required during the bid analysis).
• Extensive hands-on experience in the sectors of Nutrition, Health, Food Security, WASH, DRR, Agriculture and Livelihoods.
• Experience working in ASAL areas.
• Fluency in English, Kiswahili . Knowledge of the local language is an added advantage. Knowledge and experience of developmental and humanitarian response in East Africa is preferred.
• Strong interpersonal and communication skills.
• The consultancy team must have a statistician to analyze quantitative and qualitative data.
  1. Application Evaluation Criteria

Evaluation Criteria

Sub criteria/Description

Consultant Academic and Professional Qualification

Degree in Public Health,Nutrition, Health Economics, Public Policy, or another related field-20%

Consultant Prior Work Experience

Detailed and specific experience in undertaking similar roles highlighting.

1. Proven consultancy experience with endline assessments for emergency and resilience response programming, with sectoral experience in nutrition, WASH, food security and livelihoods.
2. Demonstrated experience in conducting high-quality end lines for a related project in the past three years (sample reports are required during the bid analysis)-35%
3. Extensive hands-on experience in the sectors of Health, Nutrition, Livelihoods, WASH, and Food Security.
4. Experience working in a scarce resource environment.
5. Knowledge and experience in emergency response and resilience response in East Africa is an asset.
6. The consultancy team must have a statistician to analyses quantitative and qualitative data.It is preferred that this person has both a professional and academic background in publichealth/agricultural statistics and econometrics.

Bidder must attach detailed CVs

Methodology/Approach

Understanding of the terms of reference that includes:

1. Outline of methodology and approach of implementing this assignment.
2. Proposed assignment plan that includes clear timelines for the assignment that demonstrates the understanding of the assignment expectation.
3. Firm Experience Sample work done:Citation (web link) of at least 3 knowledge products developed and disseminated
4. Detailed budget breakdown based on expected daily rates and initial work plan- 35%

Language and analytical skills

Demonstrated capacity for high-level analysis and report writing, includes:

• Strong writing, analytical and information presentation skills.
• Capacity building, mentoring and coaching skills.
• Development of high-quality survey reports (share a sample)
• Developing concept notes and project proposals.
• Excellent interpersonal and communication skills, including the ability to communicate and work with a wide range of stakeholders in a participatory, respectful, collaborative manner, and to enhance effective work relationships.
• Commitment to teamwork and a consensus-led approach to work-10%

1. Application Requirements

Application materials should include the following:

• A Technical Proposal detailing the consultant’s understanding of the task, proposed methodologies, expected activities and deliverables, proposed workplan, and the composition of the consultancy team to be engaged. The outline of the Technical Proposal is outlined in 6.3.1 and the team composition requirements are outlined in 6.3.2.
• A Financial Proposal detailing the costs that the consultant expects to be required to complete the assignment. The consultant is expected to account for all logistics and travel costs associated with the assignment.
• Detailed CVs of all professional staff who will work on the consultancy team.
• Must submit a certificate of Incorporation/ Business Registration (Either for Kenya or Ethiopia)
• Must submit a certificate of Tax Compliance
• Must Submit Business KRA PIN
• At least three professional references from previous clients and full contact details of the referees.
• Sample report
  1. Technical Proposal Format

1. Introduction: description of the firm, the firm’s qualifications and statutory compliance. (1 page)
2. Background: Understanding of the project, context and requirements for services, Key questions (2 pages)
3. Proposed methodology – Indicate methods to be used for each indicator with sample questionnaires and highlight any areas where indicators may need adjustment. The targeted respondents should be indicated for each indicator. Proposed detailed questions should be indicated. Detailed sampling procedure needs to be indicated. (5 pages)
4. Firms experience in undertaking assignments of similar nature and experience from the geographical area for other major clients (Table with: Name of organization, name of assignment, duration of assignment (Dates)) reference person contacts. (2 pages)
5. Proposed team composition (As per 6.3.2). (1 page)
6. Work plan (Gantt chart of activity and week of implementation). (1 page)
   1. Proposed Team Composition Format
      • Name of Team Member
        • Qualifications
        • Years of Experience Related to Consultancy
        • # of Days to be Engaged and Costs
        • Roles(s) under this assignment