Appel d’offre: Evaluation Externe Programme Humanitaire au Rwanda et au Burundi. At Belgian Red Cross

1. Résumé

1.1 But

This call for tenders concerns the final external evaluation of the humanitarian program “Local and sustainable response in Burundi and Rwanda to the needs of displaced, refugee and host populations affected by the humanitarian crises affecting the Great Lakes region”, financed by the Directorate General for Development Cooperation and Humanitarian Aid (DGD) for the period May 2020 – 2022.

This is a summary evaluation (of accountability) which aims on the one hand to assess the quality of the intervention at the end of its implementation on the basis of the following criteria: Relevance, Effectiveness, Efficiency, Coherence, Impact and Sustainability and on the other hand provide recommendations to the various partners

Target public(s): The Belgian Red Cross (CRB), the Burundi Red Cross (CRBu), the Rwanda Red Cross (CRR), the General Directorate for Development Cooperation and Humanitarian Aid (DGD )

Agent(s): Belgian Red Cross asbl Francophone Community – International Activities (CRB)

A key player in the field of humanitarian action, the CRB leads a constant fight to relieve human suffering and prevent humanitarian crises.

More specifically, the priority areas of activity are:

1. Humanitarian awareness: promoting respect for humanitarian rules and principles, promoting non-discrimination and tolerance;
2. Solidarity actions: supporting the most isolated people, supporting people in precarious situations, providing humanitarian assistance to migrants regardless of their status, acting in favor of vulnerable children;
3. Interventions in the event of disasters: strengthening our intervention capacities, strengthening the capacities of the population to react adequately in the event of disasters, strengthening the capacities of other Red Cross Societies to prepare for and manage disasters;
4. Health protection: supplying sufficient quality blood products, strengthening the capacity of the population to provide first aid, improving our offers of medical and health services, supporting the health programs of other Red Cross Societies.

Philosophy :

The actions of the Red Cross are in all circumstances guided by the seven Fundamental Principles: humanity, impartiality, neutrality, independence, voluntary service, unity and universality.

At the Red Cross, all active members, whether voluntary or permanent, are also motivated by different values ​​that underpin these Fundamental Principles:

Commitment : In my daily action, at my level and in my function, I invest myself in contributing to the mission of the Red Cross. I act in all circumstances according to the Principles and Values ​​of the Red Cross. We pay attention to the meaning of our actions and their impact.

Benevolence : In my daily action, I take care to consider each person with respect, dignity and tolerance. Together, we listen to everyone and do everything we can to offer a quality welcome.

Diversity : In my daily action, I welcome and value differences as a wealth on which to base my actions. Our Movement is a reflection of society. It brings together members of different ages, cultures, genders, origins, skills and nationalities.

Together we are building an organization open to the world and gathering energies to fulfill our mission with the most vulnerable.

Cooperation : In my daily work, I remain open to any collaboration, both internal and external. We encourage synergies, because it is together that we act for a more humane world.

The International Department of the Red Cross is constituted as an asbl. Made up of around thirty people, it coordinates emergency and development operations abroad.

1.2 Focal Points:

Contact person in Belgium:

Bruno Bernier (Partnerships and Programs Manager)

Email : evaluation.sai@croix-rouge.be

1.3 Indicative timetable:

• Deadline for receipt of tenders: April 05, 2022
• Opening of offers and selection of the offer: April 12, 2022
• Signing of the contract: April 15, 2022 (indicative date)
• Scoping meeting: April 22, 2022 (indicative date)
• Reading of documents and submission of the methodological note: May 02, 2022
• Field mission: May 9 to 31, 2022
• Submission of provisional country reports and restitution: end of June 2022 (dates to be agreed upon signature of the contract)
• Submission of final reports and annexes: end of July 2022 (dates to be agreed upon signature of the contract)

1.4 Locations:

• Burundi: Province of Cankuzo, Commune de Mishiha
• Rwanda: Kirehe District (Mahama Camp and Munini Host Community; Gatore Reception Centre); Gatsibo District (Nyabiheke Camp and host community); Bugesera District (Bugesera Reception Centre); Nyanza District (Nyanza Reception Centre); Kigali (transit center at the Rwandan Red Cross).

1.5 Maximum indicative budget:

Bids cannot exceed €30,000 excluding VAT. 2. Description of the program and context of the evaluation**

2.1 Program intervention contexts

*The humanitarian context:

In both countries, the needs of populations displaced or refugees from the Great Lakes crisis were glaring. The Burundian refugee crisis is among the largest forgotten crises in the world (8/10 on the 2019 Forgotten Crisis Assessment Index). Primary needs are not all covered and the desire of all humanitarian partners and beneficiaries to move towards a sustainable approach and the need to include the host community in the responses provided were reaffirmed.

In both Rwanda and Burundi, women and girls are particularly at increased risk of sexual and gender-based violence ( SGBV ) due to overcrowding, discriminatory attitudes towards women, and family separation. In addition, faced with demographic pressure on natural resources and infrastructure, cohesion between refugees or displaced persons and host populations remains fragile .

In Burundi, the program intervenes at the level of Cankuzo and more precisely of the Mishiha commune. The province is indeed the second host province in Burundi with 14,202 IDPs distributed in 3,075 households. Natural disasters are the main cause of displacement for almost all IDPs in Mishiha commune. The main need cited by these people and to which the program proposes to respond is logically the need for decent housing and means of subsistence to resettle.

In Rwanda, the refugee crisis is chronic. The interventions of the RC adapt to the needs of the refugees and the host populations as well as to the orientations of the Rwandan government and the UNHCR. Significant emphasis is placed on the integration of social cohesion activities between refugees and host communities as well as the strengthening of the livelihoods of refugees and their host communities, the economic inclusion of young girls and boys and environmental protection. .

The CRB and the Host National Societies (CRR and CRBu): **

The Belgian Red Cross maintains a strategic and very solid partnership relationship with the RCs of Rwanda: it has been working in Burundi since 2006 and in Rwanda since 1994, over the very long term, regardless of the funding available.

The CRBu is the main local humanitarian organization in Burundi. It is considered by the CR movement as one of the strong national societies in Africa. Through its large network of more than 500,000 volunteers, it has managed to develop its presence in all the hills of the country and to carry out recurring concrete actions in favor of the vulnerable, such as support for the reconstruction of destroyed dwellings and support for the resettlement of displaced persons or refugees.

As part of this appeal, the CRBu relies on teams of Red Cross volunteers who themselves come from the communities as well as on a project team based in Cankuzo and Mishiha and which is under the supervision of officials at its headquarters, in namely: the Program Coordinator, the Head of the Disaster Management Department, and the Head of the Planning Monitoring and Reporting Department. The CRBu also relies on the CRB’s delegates on site, namely the Country Representative, the Project Management Technical Assistant and the Administrative and Financial Technical Assistant.

The CRR is the main local humanitarian organization in Rwanda. Since its inception in 1964, the CRR has grown as a highly respected humanitarian and community organization. The CRR operates through a network of 30 branches, covering the whole country. The CRR has more than 95,000 members and motivated volunteers (52,500 adults and 42,589 young people) who are based at headquarters, in the regions and branches and are driven by a common desire to prevent and alleviate the suffering of the most vulnerable people.

As part of this call, the CRR is counting on the support of the CRB and the Rode Kruis-Vlaanderen (RKV). The CRB mainly intervenes in the refugee camps of Mahama and Nyabiheke and the surrounding communities in connection with the mandate of the CRR, in particular the “Disaster Management and Recovery” component, to consolidate the achievements of previous projects.

2.2 Intervention strategy

The main objective of the intervention is to help improve the living conditions of populations affected by the humanitarian crises affecting the Great Lakes. More specifically it is:

• in Burundi: to improve the socio-economic conditions of the displaced and disaster-stricken populations of the host communities of the commune of Mishiha in the province of Cankuzo;
• in Rwanda: to improve the health and socio-economic conditions of Burundian and Congolese refugees and host communities.

In Burundi:

Result 1: Households of internally displaced persons and other disaster victims in Mishiha commune are permanently resettled

Result 2: Social cohesion between IDPs and host communities in Mishiha commune is strengthened through an improvement in the physical and social environment.

In Rwanda:

Outcome 3 : Refugees and host communities have access to basic health care , essential domestic materials and equipment .**

Result 4 : Social cohesion between refugees and host communities is strengthened through an improvement in the physical, economic and social environment, with particular emphasis on the development of young people.

At the start of the intervention, the program targeted 1,875 displaced or disaster victims in Burundi, 77,199 refugees in Rwanda and 73,849 members of the community (Rwanda and Burundi). At the community level, it targeted the 65,349 people living in the commune of Mishiha in Burundi, including 7,159 internally displaced persons, and in Rwanda the 8,500 people of the host community where the camps are located.

3. Overall purpose and objectives of the evaluation

The general objective of this evaluation is, on the one hand, to ensure the CRB’s accountability obligations vis-à-vis the financial backer, and on the other hand, to draw up concrete and specific recommendations for the attention of each of the Host National Societies as well as as recommendations to the CRB in order to improve their support within the framework of similar programs.

The information and analyzes developed in the evaluation will therefore be used by the executives of the Host National Societies and the BRC teams to improve the strategy and quality of implementation of the next humanitarian program financed by the DGD.

4. Questions the Sponsor Asks

The evaluation will address the analysis of the program according to the standard evaluation criteria (relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, sustainability, impact and coherence) as well as on the common cross-cutting questions and certain specific questions by country as described below.

During the scoping phase , the standard (to be proposed), transversal and specific evaluation questions will be discussed with the representatives of the sponsors in order to guarantee an adequacy with the context and the expectations . Necessary adjustments should be made as needed.

4.1 Common evaluation questions in Burundi and Rwanda

Relevance:

This will assess the extent to which the objectives and the design of the interventions correspond to the needs, policies and priorities of the beneficiaries, of each country, of the international community and of the partners/institutions, take into account the conditions – economic , environmental, equity, social, political economy and capacity – in which the intervention is delivered and remain relevant even as the context changes. Assessing relevance involves examining the differences and trade-offs between different priorities or needs. It also requires analyzing any changes in the context to be able to determine to what extent the intervention can be (or has been) adapted in order to maintain its relevance.

Efficiency:

This will involve evaluating the achievement of specific objectives (outcomes) through the achievement and quality of the results achieved (outputs). Quality refers to the response to the needs of beneficiaries, in particular their access to and use of the services delivered.

Efficiency:

This will involve assessing the extent to which the interventions produce, or are likely to produce, results in an economical way (conversion of inputs into outputs in the most advantageous way possible, compared to the options envisaged in the context) and in time. **

Consistency/complementarity:

This will involve assessing to what extent the interventions are compatible with other interventions carried out within each country, sector or institution. The criterion seeks to examine how other interventions (especially policies) support or undermine the intervention being assessed, and vice versa. Both internal and external coherence are encompassed: internal coherence concerns the synergies and interdependencies between interventions carried out by the same institution/administration, as well as the coherence between the intervention and the relevant international standards and criteria to which the institution/administration adheres. External coherence concerns the coherence between the intervention considered and those carried out by other actors in the same context. It encompasses complementarity,

Impact :

This will involve assessing the extent to which interventions have produced, or are expected to produce, significant and far-reaching effects, positive or negative, intentional or unintended. The criterion addresses the ultimate importance and potentially transformative effects of interventions. It aims to determine what are its social, environmental and economic effects in the longer term or on a larger scale than those already assessed under the criterion of effectiveness. Beyond the immediate results, the impact criterion aims to assess the indirect, secondary and potential consequences of the intervention, through the examination of the global and lasting evolutions of the systems or standards, as well as the potential effects on the well-being, human rights, gender equality and the environment.

Durability:

It is a question of evaluating on this criterion the potential for survival of the intervention on the basis of 3 aspects: financial sustainability, social sustainability and the transfer of knowledge/capacity building.

4.2 Additional cross-cutting issues common to both countries:

1. To what extent has the program taken into account and contributed to reducing:
2. Social inequalities , unequal access to resources and opportunities for refugees, IDPs, and other affected people?
3. Gender-based violence?
4. To what extent has the program had positive or negative effects, intended or unintended, for beneficiaries according to gender and various diversity factors ?
5. To what extent and at what levels does the program integrate DAPS protection principles throughout the project cycle (Dignity, Access, Participation, Security)
6. To what extent did the communities feel listened to and involved in the programme, and to what extent will the feedback mechanisms put in place be able to continue after the end of the programme?
7. To what extent has the program had positive and/or negative effects, intended or unintended, on the environment ?
8. To what extent has the multi-country program been able to develop a coordination mechanism promoting the exchange of experiences and good practices?

4.3 Specific issues to explore by country

Burundi :

• To what extent has community mobilization and in particular that of volunteers contributed to promoting and offering suitable solutions for the self-construction of houses?

Rwanda :

• To what extent do the achievements of the previous phases (cooperatives) and the IGA initiatives taken during this phase make it possible to sustainably improve the living conditions of the beneficiaries?
• What are the prospects and issues related to vocational training activities for young people: behavior, confidence, sense of responsibility, integration, integration…?
• Are the mechanisms put in place to reduce the risks linked to violence or discrimination inside the camps operational and sufficient?
• To what extent has social cohesion between refugees and host populations been sustainably strengthened and preserved thanks to the project?
• To what extent have the complementarities and synergies between actors of the CRCR movement (CRR, RKV, CRB) been valued according to needs?
• Implementation plan and methodology

5.1 Framing Phase:

The scoping phase will start with the holding of a meeting (by videoconference) with the ‘central’ evaluation committee in order, if necessary, to redefine the expectations and provide feedback on the offer presented.

The scoping phase aims to allow the evaluators to deepen their knowledge of the issues of the evaluation, to adjust the choice, formulation and structuring of the evaluative questions (judgment criteria, indicators), and to specify the methods of collection and analysis of the data that will be proposed. It will give rise to the presentation of a methodological note by the tenderer to the members of the ‘central’ evaluation committee.

This meeting will be followed by a desk study phase which will examine:

• The project proposal
• Partner reports and surveys
• The interim report sent to the funder
• Any other useful documentation

Output of this phase:

A methodological note including in particular:

• The evaluation questions, reformulated and supplemented from section 4;
• Judgment criteria for each evaluation question;
• Indicators by judgment criterion;
• Collection methods and information collection tools for the field phase with particular attention to the collection of information from beneficiaries and communities;
• An indicative timetable for carrying out field missions.

5.2 Assessment phase:

During this phase, the consultants will go to the field with the 2 partners (CRBu, CRR) other stakeholders (members of the CR Movement in particular, but also local authorities and partners outside the Movement) and beneficiaries

The proposed methodology should ensure the collection of necessary and sufficient information, verified both with the various bodies of the partners and with other stakeholders and beneficiaries. With this in mind, the evaluators must master the specific survey and interview techniques within the target groups according to the methodology adopted, and in particular techniques for taking into account the opinions of women and children (if relevant).

The members of the ‘field’ evaluation committees based in Burundi and Rwanda will support the evaluators in the preparation and smooth running of the evaluation in each of the countries. They will also organize pre-mission briefings to the assessment team to ensure common understanding of expectations and organize logistical aspects.

At the end of each mission, a restitution meeting/workshop will be organized with the members of the evaluation committees based in Burundi and Rwanda. This meeting will be open to other representatives of national societies and to other members of the Red Cross Movement active in each of the countries. This will involve presenting and validating the lessons and provisional recommendations. An evaluation grid and tools will be proposed by the evaluator team and validated by the CRB team.

Outputs of this phase:

• A presentation with a PowerPoint presentation of findings and recommendations for each of the local partners (CRBu, CRR);
• A report of the discussions and the initial positioning of the partner on the recommendations made.

5.3 Reporting and consolidation phase:

After each field mission and within 20 calendar days of the end of the mission, a written preliminary country report will be sent to the CRB. The Central Evaluation Committee will review the report and send consolidated comments to the evaluators within 20 calendar days. The evaluators will have 10 days to integrate the comments and send a final report in French on the country concerned.

Once all the field missions have been completed, the evaluators will also produce a global and transversal report in French. This report will contain the findings of the evaluation as well as the conclusions and recommendations.

All reports (by country and global) should look like this:

1. Introduction
2. Contents
3. Synthesis
4. Methodology
5. Findings, analyzes and explanatory factors
6. Conclusions and lessons
7. Recommendations, structured according to their recipients
8. Illustration of the best practices identified, specifying the country concerned
9. The appendices (to be attached to the final version of the report) will contain in particular

9.1 Terms of reference

9.2 the methodological note

9.3 the list of documents consulted

9.4 Data collection tools (qualitative and quantitative)

The summary should include, in a maximum of 6 pages, the essential elements of the evaluation report and the main improvements proposed.

The findings and analyzes will be based on reliable, verifiable and triangulated sources.

The conclusions must indicate on which findings/analysis they are based. Any recommendation must correspond to a conclusion (must clearly indicate whether it is addressed to the CRB, CRR, CRBu or to another actor). The final report will be evaluated on the basis of its content, its probative value, its coherence and its readability. The recommendations will be classified according to the OECD criteria (relevance, coherence, effectiveness, efficiency, sustainability, impact).

The overall transversal report will not include the details of the methodological note (no copy-paste). Any important material will be appended.

As with the country reports, a draft final report will be sent to the CRB, which will take care of compiling its comments and forwarding them to the evaluators. The final draft report will be discussed with the evaluators during an ad hoc (virtual) meeting with the central evaluation committee.

Outputs of this phase:

• A pre-report and a final written report on each country (max. 30 appendix pages excluded)
• A transversal final report and a transversal final report (15 pages max annexes excluded)
• A presentation with a powerpoint presentation of the main analyzes and recommendations for the BRC
• A table of the main comments made to the draft report(s) and their follow-up for the drafting of the final report
• Publication of the evaluation report
• The final report will be published on the CRB website. To this end, assessors must ensure that the reports and their annexes comply with the rules of the GDPR.

6. Safety, budget, management

6.1 Security

The tenderer is responsible for managing the security of the consultants who will be sent to the field to carry out this assessment. At the beginning of the assessment, the Country Representative of the CRB of each country of intervention will carry out with the consultants a security briefing which will aim to give useful advice for security in the country.

In Burundi, the employees of the CRB as well as the visitors welcomed by the CRB are subject to the security rules enacted by the ICRC, with which an SMA (Security Management Agreement) has been signed. The consultants will be briefed on these security rules and the document “Security rules for SNPs” will be given to the consultants who will have to acknowledge receipt and commit to respecting them by signing the last page of the document. The CRB and the CRBu/CRR will be able to help the tenderer in managing any accidents/security incidents that may occur. Nevertheless, the CRB and the CRBu/CRR will not be held responsible for these possible incidents/accidents, nor for their management.

6.2 Budget

The amount of the budget available for this evaluation may not exceed €30,000 including tax (the CRB is not exempt from VAT and cannot recover it). Any offer greater than or equal to this amount will be automatically rejected.

The budget includes the fees of the entire evaluation team, insurance, per diem, accommodation, national and international transport costs, communication costs, administration, secretariat.

If the evaluator so wishes and as far as possible, a vehicle and a driver could be made available to the evaluator in each of the countries concerned. The associated costs (fuel, driver’s per diem, etc.) will in this case be invoiced to the evaluator and must then be included in the financial offer.

The CRB will not accept offers for which the daily amount of fees exceeds €600 including tax.

All costs incurred by the provider and relating to the establishment of its offer will be borne by the provider. This market is a global price market, which means that the global price is fixed, no price revision will be possible .

6.3 Pilotage

A “central” Evaluation Committee will monitor the work according to the indicative schedule proposed and will express an opinion on the quality of the work. Two contact persons will be designated to be the interlocutors of the evaluators.

The “central” Evaluation Committee will express an opinion on the content of the analyses, on the conclusions and recommendations of the transversal report.

For each country involved in this evaluation, a “field” evaluation committee will be organised. He will be in charge of facilitating the organization of the evaluation in the field, of organizing the restitutions, and will express an opinion on the content of the analyses, on the conclusions and the recommendations of the “country” report.

The evaluation team will take into account the remarks and comments made by the “field” evaluation committees.

7. Requirements

7.1 Evaluation team and qualifications

The skills expected of the evaluation team:

Required for the offer to be eligible :

1. A team of at least 3 people to guarantee a cross-referencing of the information collected (with at least one person from each country concerned); :
2. Between 10 and 20 years of experience in conducting and/or evaluating programs with different types of research methods related to themes related to humanitarian aid, such as Protection, Gender and Inclusion , Community Engagement and Accountability to communities, forced population displacements, work in areas of armed conflict or political instability, gender-based violence, intra-community violence, community participation, health, l water and sanitation, livelihoods and nutrition…especially in Africa.
3. Excellent command of spoken and written French , with mastery of Kirundi by at least one of the evaluators monitoring and collecting data in Burundi, and mastery of Kinyarwanda by at least one of the evaluators monitoring and collecting data in Rwanda;
4. Gender balance in team composition;
5. A CV of no more than 2 pages for each evaluator.

Additional benefits:

1. Knowledge and experience of the policies and administrative system in Burundi and/or Rwanda is an asset.
2. Knowledge of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement is an added advantage.
3. The head of mission of the team being a woman constitutes an additional advantage for the offers
4. Demonstrated expertise or solid experience in Protection is an additional asset

7.2 Quality and ethical standards

The assessor should take all reasonable steps to ensure that the assessment is designed and conducted in a way that respects and safeguards the rights and well-being of people and the communities to which they belong; that it is technically accurate, reliable and legitimate; that it is carried out in a transparent and impartial manner and that it contributes to promoting institutional learning and accountability. Therefore, he/she should adhere to the applicable evaluation standards and practices set out in the Evaluation Framework for the International Federation. Assessors will also be required to sign and abide by the Red Cross Red Crescent Code of Conduct.

The International Federation standards for assessment are as follows:

1. Usefulness: Evaluations should be useful and used.

2. Feasibility: Evaluations should be realistic, diplomatic, and managed in a cost-effective and sensible way.

3. Ethics and legality: evaluations must be carried out in compliance with ethics and the law, paying particular attention to the well-being of those who participate in them or who suffer their effects.

4. Impartiality and independence: Evaluations should be impartial and provide a detailed and objective assessment that takes into account the views of all stakeholders.

5. Transparency: Evaluations should be conducted in an open and transparent manner.

6. Accuracy: Assessments should be technically accurate and provide enough information about the methods of data collection, analysis and interpretation to demonstrate their validity or soundness.

7. Participation: Stakeholders should be consulted and meaningfully involved in the assessment process where possible and justified.

8. Collaboration: Collaboration between key operational partners in the evaluation process contributes to enhancing the legitimacy and usefulness of the evaluation.

It is also expected that the evaluation will be conducted in accordance with the seven Fundamental Principles of the Red Cross and Red Crescent , namely: 1) humanity, 2) impartiality, 3) neutrality, 4) independence, 5) voluntary service, 6) unity, and 7) universality. Further information on these Principles is available at: www.ifrc.org/what/values/principles/index.asp

Confidentiality:

Any information regarding the Red Cross included in this consultation document or provided separately should be

re treated strictly confidentially by the service provider. The latter agrees not to disclose or publish any information relating to this consultation.

Similarly, any document provided by the service provider will be considered confidential.