CFA 2025 01-Consultancy service for Project Final Evaluation At International Organization for Migration

Evaluation context

The International Organization for Migration (IOM) manages the Rapid Response Fund (RRF) with support from the Bureau for Humanitarian Assistance (BHA) of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). The RRF serves as a flexible funding mechanism to provide sub-grants to international and national non-governmental organizations in response to critical humanitarian needs resulting from natural or human-made disasters in Sudan. Since 2014, RRF has awarded approximately 128 sub-grants, totaling nearly USD 26 million, benefiting more than 2,329,640 individuals across the country in various sectors.

IOM has maintained a longstanding partnership with BHA, and the current RRF aims to provide lifesaving assistance to newly displaced individuals, returnees, and host communities affected by both natural and human-made disasters, particularly those impacted by the conflict on April 15, 2023, in hard-to-reach areas. RRF prioritizes interventions following emergencies in Sudan in alignment with response plans developed by the relevant sectors to save lives and support crisis-affected populations. RRF program receives applications from potential implementing partners (IPs), including National Non-Government organizations (NNGOs) and International Non-Government Organizations (INGOs) with the capacity and intent to respond or approach relevant sectors to recommend suitable IPs with the required expertise, presence, and operational capacity for rapid intervention. The RRF grants address multisectoral needs, including emergency health, water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH), food security, emergency shelter and non-food items (ESNFI), and protection and logistics. Given the complex operational environment in Sudan and the increased displacement, RRF is working closely with its IPs to aid displaced individuals and those in need. Despite significant challenges in accessing affected areas, the support from BHA through RRF has been instrumental in meeting urgent humanitarian needs across the country.

The main objective of the RRF is:

Objective: To enable sub-grantees to address critical emergency humanitarian needs and save the lives of the most vulnerable populations affected by natural or man-made disasters.

Outcome: Implementing Partners will be able to provide life-saving humanitarian assistance to people affected by natural and/or man-made disasters in Sudan in an effective and timely manner through the creation of a flexible, efficient, and need-based funds disbursement mechanism for humanitarian actors operating in multiple sectors of the emergency response.

Evaluation purpose and objective

The purpose of this evaluation is to assess the effectiveness of the RRF in responding to humanitarian emergencies in Sudan. The evaluation aims to enhance accountability, facilitate learning within the RRF, and identify successful strategies and areas requiring improvement. It will provide actionable recommendations to improve program outcomes and assess the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of RRF interventions, focusing on how resources are allocated and utilized. Additionally, the evaluation seeks to capture lessons learned, highlight best practices, and offer insights to support improved program sustainability and inform future planning in similar contexts.

The evaluation’s specific objectives are:

• Assess the program’s contribution to its objectives and intended results.
  • Assess how effectively RRF contributed to providing timely, coordinated, and humanitarian assistance aimed at saving lives, reducing suffering, and preserving human dignity.
  • Analyze the program’s adaptation capacity in response to the new context, needs, and challenges based on the new crisis of the 15 April 2023 conflict.
• Analyze the efficiency of the use of resources/inputs (funds, expertise, time) towards achieving results.
• Analyze sustainability and impact of interventions with the main purpose of saving lives.
• Analyze the project’s contribution to capacity strengthening of organizations receiving funds, particularly as it relates to meeting localization commitments under global frameworks such as the Grand Bargain.

This evaluation is designed for two primary user groups. First, the IOM Sudan Program Management Team will benefit directly from the recommendations, lessons learned, and best practices identified. This information will be instrumental in shaping future programs, promoting transparency and accountability, and ensuring more effective and impactful humanitarian interventions.

Secondly, the evaluation aims to provide valuable insights and feedback to the donor, contributing to their strategic decision-making and guiding future investments in similar initiatives. Additionally, the findings from this evaluation will be shared with other relevant stakeholders, including humanitarian partners, local communities and sub-grantees, to facilitate cross-learning and inform the design of future programs.

Evaluation Scope

The evaluation will cover program areas across various states in the country based on selecting different sub-grants in diverse sectors. The selected consultant will use an appropriate methodology to select grants and areas for evaluation. Although the goal is to cover selected locations/grants, the current security situation may require adjustments, in which case accessible areas will be prioritized in coordination with the IOM team. The evaluation will also assess how the program integrates cross-cutting themes, including rights-based approach, protection mainstreaming, gender mainstreaming and accountability to affected populations (AAP).

The evaluation will cover the entire program implementation period from September 2022 to March 2024.

Geographical coverage: The RRF has provided grants to organizations in Khartoum, South Kordofan, North Kordofan, South Darfur, North Darfu, West Darfur, East Darfur, White Nile, Blue Nile, Aljazirah, Sennar, Gedaref, Kassal, Northern, Red Sea. The consultant will identify various grants targeted at different geographical areas. However, the selection process may also depend on accessibility to these locations. If access is limited, the consultant may need to work remotely and use different methodologies to collect the necessary information. The evaluation should also cover the cross-cutting themes like rights-based approach (RBA), protection mainstreaming, disability inclusion, gender mainstreaming, environmental sensitivity, sustainability and accountability to affected populations (AAP).

Evaluation criteria

The evaluation will employ the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) – Development Assistance Committee (DAC) criteria of relevance, coherence, effectiveness, coverage efficiency, impact, and sustainability to assess the program’s overall performance. In addition to the traditional DAC criteria, the evaluation will also assess the program’s coverage. It will also examine the program’s integration of cross-cutting issues like gender, human rights, environment and Do No Harm.

Evaluation questions

More specifically, the evaluation will seek to provide informed answers to the following questions:

Relevance is the extent to which the program’s objective and intended outcomes remain valid and pertinent either as originally planned or as subsequently modified.

• To what extent was the intervention designed in ways that respond to the specific rights, needs and priorities of different rights-holders, including women and girls, and people of relevant marginalized groups, particularly in the context of the new crisis?

Coherence is the compatibility and complementarity of the project with other activities and interventions in the sector by IOM and/or other organizations.

• To what extent is the intervention and its effects aligned with human rights laws, gender equality policies and other interventions of the donor and partner institutions?

Effectiveness assesses the extent to which a program translated resources and activities into its intended short-, medium- and long-term results*.***

• To what extent did the project translate the resources (inputs) into tangible and quality outputs and outcomes in accordance with the stated plans?

Coverage refers to the degree to which humanitarian assistance reaches all populations in need, especially the most vulnerable, and avoids exclusion.

• Did the program prioritize the most affected and vulnerable geographic areas and sectors?
• To what extent were resources (time, funds, staffing, expertise) used wisely and adequately to address the most compelling priorities and achieve results?
• To what extent did RRF’s emergency response efforts align with and contribute to its long-term strategy and objective?
• To what extent did the program design and implementation strategies reflect sustainability, and what program activities and benefits are likely to continue after the end of the program?

Efficiency is how well human, physical and financial resources are wisely used to undertake activities and how well these resources are converted into outputs.

Impact assesses the long-term changes, and positive (or negative) effects brought about by the intervention.

Sustainability refers to the durability of the program’s results or the continuation of the program’s benefits once external support ceases.

The evaluation may identify additional questions during the process to better respond to the evaluation objectives and purpose.

The final report should include an appraisal of how well RRF has fared against each of the OECD DAC criteria using the different grading scales as agreed with IOM.

Evaluation methodology

The consultant is expected to propose a well-defined and robust evaluation methodology to meet the assessment objectives. This includes outlining a comprehensive data collection strategy that integrates qualitative, quantitative, and participatory techniques using diverse data collection tools. For quantitative data collection, the methodology must be robust, representative, and aligned with the BHA Emergency M&E Guidance.[1]

IOM will provide all relevant program documents, including sub-grantee proposals, technical assessments, monitoring data, and progress reports. The proposed methodology should also clearly explain the techniques used to analyze and interpret collected data based on sex, sectors and geography. In addition to collecting primary data, the evaluation will utilize data collected throughout the program period, including IP proposals, progress reports, and monitoring data. As part of the evaluation, the consultant will also conduct an in-depth analysis of selected sub-grants to assess the complete project cycle of RRF and its overall achievements. IOM will provide a list of sub-grants, which will represent different types of responses, including conflict, floods, and droughts, as well as various sectors such as Shelter, Non-Food Items, Water, Sanitation and Hygiene, Protection, Cash-Based Interventions, and Health, involving different types of implementing partners (international, national, and community-based organizations).

Given the ongoing security situation in Sudan, the consultant must consider potential access challenges and propose alternative solutions in the proposal if access to target areas becomes restricted. These challenges may include security restrictions hindering data collection in certain areas, potential bias in available data, and difficulties in verifying the accuracy and reliability of information at field level. The IOM M&E team, which has been continuously monitoring the response through a network of enumerators, can also be leveraged if primary data collection, particularly access to direct beneficiaries during the evaluation phase, is not feasible. Nonetheless, the consultant must demonstrate an in-depth understanding of the local context and propose a sound methodology to mitigate risks related to inaccessibility and insecurity.

Key stakeholders include the Sub-grantees, beneficiaries of the assistance, relevant government officials, program staff and donor representatives. The consultant may choose to revise and add more stakeholders in his/her bid with an appropriate justification.

Ethics, norms, and standards

The evaluation must comply with IOM Data Protection Principles, United Nations Evaluation Group (UNEG) Norms and Standards for evaluations and relevant ethical guidelines.4. IOM abides by the norms and standards of UNEG and expects all evaluation stakeholders, particularly evaluation consultants, to be familiar and adhere to the ethical conduct guidelines of UNEG and with the UNEG code of conduct4.

Evaluation deliverables

Expected evaluation deliverables to be produced by the consultant are:

1. **Inception report [**3] with a detailed description of the evaluation approach, detailed methodology, detailed work plan and data collection tools. The inception report should also include an evaluation matrix (using the IOM template) and should be written in a way that demonstrates a good understanding of the assignment as outlined in the ToRs.
2. First draft the evaluation report [2] supported by annexes of quantitative/qualitative analysis. The report should not be longer than 20 pages, including an executive summary, but without annexes.
3. Revised evaluation report, reflecting comments/feedback from IOM.
4. Final evaluation report and Management Response Matrix3 supported by annexes of quantitative/qualitative analysis. The final evaluation report will focus on an analytical comparison of the program’s implementation approaches and achievements and their complementarity.
5. Evaluation Brief3
6. PowerPoint slides and presentation to the IOM team on the overall findings of the evaluation.

All deliverables shall be provided in English and meet good language standards. The final evaluation report should meet the standards laid out in the UNEG Quality Checklist for Evaluation Reports.[3]

Specifications of roles:

Consultant:

• Lead data collection method development (tools, sample size, methodology) with support from the M&E Officer and Program Manager input.
• Revise and incorporate IOM team feedback on methodology and tools.
• Coordinate and lead data collection, promptly informing the Evaluation Manager of any issues.
• Conduct KIIs with IOM teams, donors, and (if possible) government stakeholders.
• Analyze and clean all collected data.
• Interact with the Evaluation Manager and update on progress and challenges.
• Submit deliverables according to the timeline.

IOM Sudan Team – Monitoring and Evaluation and Grant Management and Capacity Building:

• Provide all relevant information, documents, proposals, and reports to the consultant.
• Provide timely feedback on data collection tools, methodology, inception and evaluation reports.
• Facilitate and coordinate KIIs with the IOM team, sub-grantees, donors, and government officials (as needed).

Time Schedule

The consultant is expected to start the assignment by January 2025 and submit the final evaluation report and relevant annexes no later than March 15, 2025. The consultant will complete the scope of the work in about 38 working days. The table below offers an indicative timeline for the tasks involved. The consultant is requested to propose a realistic timeline to deliver the final products within the timeframe.

Activity 1- Desk review Timeline 5 days

Activity 2- Preparation and Submission of an inception report, including all data collection tools as annex Timeline 3 days

Activity 3- Data collection and Field Work (remote and non-remote, depending on the security situation) Timeline 15 days

Activity 4- Presentation of the preliminary findings and recommendations Timeline 2 days

Activity 5- Preparation and submission of a first draft of the evaluation report Timeline 7 days

Activity 6- Submission of a revised draft evaluation report Timeline 3 days

Activity 7- Submission of a final draft of the evaluation report evaluation brief and management response matrix Timeline 3 days

Evaluation budget and payment

IOM is seeking a qualified and independent evaluator to carry out this final evaluation. The evaluator must provide a detailed budget, covering costs associated with data collection, logistics, translation services, and any other expenses related to completing the evaluation. The proposed methodology should account for the ongoing security challenges in Sudan and consider potential limitations on access to target areas. If access to these areas becomes impossible, the consultant should outline alternative strategies to ensure the evaluation’s successful completion. Disbursement of the evaluation consultancy fees will be made upon satisfactory submission and approval of the following deliverables by IOM:

• Inception report – (Twenty per cent (20%) will be paid upon submission and approval of the Inception Report.)
• First draft of the evaluation report – (Fifty per cent (50%) will be paid upon submission of the first draft of the evaluation report based on the provided template)
• PowerPoint presentation on overall findings
• Final evaluation report, Evaluation brief and Management Response Matrix – (Thirty per cent (30%) will be paid upon approval of all deliverables)

The consultant will closely collaborate with the Grant Manager, Capacity Building Coordinator, and M&E officer, IOM Sudan, to prepare a detailed management response matrix.

Evaluation Requirements

The consultant should meet the following minimum qualifications and experience:

Individual Consultant Qualifications

• A minimum of a master’s degree or equivalent in Humanitarian Studies, Social Sciences, Monitoring and Evaluation, Development Studies, or a related field
• At least 10 years of experience in evaluating similar projects or programs.
• Demonstrated experience and familiarity with USAID/BHA-funded projects.
• Experience working in Sudan or similar contexts, with knowledge of the regional dynamics.
• A strong track record in conducting evaluations, as well as in technical and analytical report writing.
• Fluency in English is required; knowledge of Arabic is considered an advantage.

Submission Procedures

Interested individual consultants are expected to submit technical and financial proposals with an all-inclusive itemized budget, their CVs, a cover letter, and two recent relevant evaluation report examples. Late submissions will not be considered.

Competencies:

The incumbent is expected to demonstrate the following values and competencies:

Values

• Inclusion and respect for diversity: respects and promotes individual and cultural differences; encourages diversity and inclusion wherever possible.
• Integrity and transparency maintains high ethical standards and acts in a manner consistent with organizational principles/rules and standards of conduct.
• Professionalism: demonstrates ability to work in a composed, competent and committed manner and exercises careful judgment in meeting day-to-day challenges.

Core Competencies – behavioral indicators

• Teamwork: develops and promotes effective collaboration within and across units to achieve shared goals and optimize results.
• Delivering results: produces and delivers quality results in a service-oriented and timely manner; is action-oriented and committed to achieving agreed outcomes.
• Managing and sharing knowledge: continuously seeks to learn, share knowledge and innovate.
• Accountability: takes ownership of achieving the Organization’s priorities and assumes responsibility for own action and delegated work.
• Communication: encourages and contributes to clear and open communication; explains complex matters in an informative, inspiring, and motivational way.