Consultant for Final Evaluation of 3-Year Resilience and Recovery Project in Honduran Dry Corridor At Global Communities

Terms of Reference

Final Evaluation Project Strengthening the Agricultural System of Honduras (HASS)

Purpose of the Assessment

The final evaluation will review all the components implemented by the HASS project in the selected communities within the prioritized municipalities. The objectives of the evaluation include:

1. Evaluate the effectiveness, relevance, sustainability and efficiency of the HASS project in assisting vulnerable households to meet their immediate needs, improve their food security and generally increase their resilience to future shocks and stressors.
2. Identify best practices and lessons learned to inform future food security, early recovery and resilience programs.
3. Demonstrate to what extent the program met its objectives, results, and expected activities as described in the proposal, including verification and / or generation of final values of key indicators to compare with baseline values.

Background

1. Project Information

Project name

HASS (Strengthening the Honduran Agricultural System)

Implementer: Global Communities

Award number: 720BHA22GR00076

Project budget: $8,000,000.00

Execution period: From March 1, 2022 to February 28, 2025

Active geographic region: Honduras:

• Western region (12 municipalities): departments of Copán (7) and Ocotepeque (5)
• South Region (9 municipalities): Choluteca departments (2), El Paraíso (2), La Paz (3) and Valle (2)

Background and context

Global Communities (GC) has designed the three-year Honduras Agricultural System Support (HASS) program and $8,000,000 to support the mission of the Agency’s Humanitarian Assistance Office (BHA) of the United States for International Development (USAID), which seeks to save lives, alleviate human suffering and reduce the physical, social and economic impact of fast and slow onset disasters. HASS supports populations at risk in Honduras to build stable foundations for resilience and recovery.

Four years after the tropical storms Eta and Iota, which devastated the region in 2020, Hondurans continue to suffer the impacts of storms, the cumulative effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, increasing displacement and migration, and persistent insecurity . Furthermore, severe inflation rates were observed throughout 2022 due to these accumulated crises and the indirect effects of the global food crisis caused by the war in Ukraine. According to the Humanitarian Response Plan (HRP) 2021-2022, it is estimated that 2.8 million people in Honduras, approximately a third of the country’s population, need humanitarian assistance. The number of people in need of assistance has doubled since early 2020.

The Humanitria Response Plan (HRP) notes that response efforts must prioritize populations in remote and hard-to-reach areas for assistance. The Honduran Dry Corridor is one of the poorest and most difficult to access areas in the country; Most Hondurans living there depend on agriculture as their only means of subsistence, making them particularly vulnerable to shocks, especially those related to the climate, such as storms, floods and droughts. Recent droughts in 2014, 2015 and 2019, combined with the devastation of tropical storms, led to widespread landslides and floods, damaged water supply systems and productive land and crops. Further,the economic impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic have caused further loss of agricultural livelihoods, putting vulnerable families and communities at greater risk of food insecurity, poor health and malnutrition. In November 2021, FEWS NET (Early Famine Warning Systems Network) projected an Integrated Food Security Classification in Phase 3 (Crisis) until May 2022 in parts of the Dry Corridor due to crop losses during the first season, reductions in food reserves and higher basic food prices. This was expected to be exacerbated by additional crop losses from the last season in the southern part of the Dry Corridor. In the second year of the project,FEWS NET projected phases of food insecurity in continuous stress (Level 2) throughout Honduras from October 2022 to January 2023. The picture was corroborated by an evaluation carried out by Global Communities in August 2022, which confirmed that the ongoing crises were contributing to the increase in the prices of basic products and the decrease in the production of basic grains.

These accumulated disasters have created a humanitarian crisis and have highlighted the links between the proper management and conservation of river basins and the level of damage caused by severe climatic events induced by climate change, particularly in the lower part of the Ulúa river basins. and Chamelecón in the Sula Valley. There is a critical need to continue supporting community efforts to rehabilitate water supply systems, restore agricultural livelihoods to support the food security of vulnerable households and their income-generating capacities, while supporting long-term preparedness. , adaptation and resilience to variability and climate change.

Activity description

Global Communities (GC) is implementing the 36-month HASS project to support USAID / BHA’s mission to save lives, alleviate human suffering, and reduce the physical, social, and economic impact of rapid and slow-onset disasters, supporting populations at risk in Honduras to build stable bases for resilience and recovery.

Theory of Change: If vulnerable households in remote and hard-to-reach areas are supported with assistance to meet their immediate needs for food, water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) and livelihoods, and to use climate-smart means to improve their security food while reducing their exposure to environmental risks, They will then increase their community and home-level resilience to future shocks and stressors, including natural disasters and climate change.

HASS has operationalized this theory of change through the following project purposes:

Purpose 1: Support the resilience and reduce disaster risks of 15,076 vulnerable households in 50 communities by improving their food security and access to water through integrated climate smart agriculture and WASH programming.

Purpose 2: Support 2,460 of the most vulnerable households in target communities by providing multipurpose money transfers (MPCAs), which can also be implemented to address needs during future emergencies.

Purpose 3: Improve the general livelihoods and living conditions of 590 vulnerable households by supporting Economic and Market Recovery Systems (ERMS) to restart their livelihoods and financial conditions.

Type of evaluation

The final evaluation will be a performance evaluation using a mixed methods approach.

Assessment questions

The following table illustrates the main research questions that will be answered through the final evaluation. The questions are listed in relative order of importance according to the BHA Monitoring and Evaluation Guidelines.

CAD criteria

Final evaluation questions

Effectiveness

1. To what extent was the project’s multi-sectoral approach beneficial for community overlap and participant selection in its overall performance and impact on participants?
2. To what extent did the project achieve its key objectives and achieve the expected goals of the indicators as defined in the project indicator monitoring table?

Relevance

1. How effective has the Field Schools for Farmers (ECA) methodology been in adapting to the contextual needs of farmers in different regions and departments?

Sustainability

1. To what extent are project activities and impacts in WASH and agriculture, both in participants and in local systems, likely to be sustained after project completion?

Efficiency

1. To what extent has the program generated a high return on investment and what has been the cost per beneficiary in the main activities of the project?

Evaluation Methods and Limitations

General description

The final evaluation will use a mixed methods approach and will be based on primary and secondary data. It is expected to include a systematic review of all key project documents, including project proposal, baseline survey, work plans, project reports, budget, etc. The final evaluation will employ a household survey, described below, as well as semi-structured interviews with key informants, both with staff and with project participants. When appropriate, the consultant may triangulate additional data through focus group discussions.

The final evaluation methodology will be refined with the external consultant during the evaluation start phase with the close support and approval of the M&E advisor at Global Communities headquarters. Before the start of any data collection, the startup report, tools, and data protocols must be reviewed and approved to ensure that they follow Global Communities and BHA policies, and follow best practices in sensitive data protection. of project participants.

Required Indicators

As part of the final evaluation, the external consultant will have to collect, analyze and report the values of the key indicators to compare them with the baseline. The consultant will also review the project data to verify other indicators and values reported by the project; however, these indicators will be the main responsibility of the consultant to derive them from the household survey.

In addition, the consultant will be responsible for analyzing the data and results available for the first cohort of households that received cash transfers to suggest ways to present the aggregate values of the indicators for the program, as well as to report separately the line values of base and end line for the two respective cohorts.

The required indicators are listed below and will be compiled according to the BHA Performance Indicator Reference Sheets for each indicator, including reporting any required or appropriate disaggregation:

• A02. Number of hectares under management practices or improved technologies with the assistance of BHA
• A03. Number of individuals who have applied improved management practices or technologies with the assistance of BHA
• A04. Number of beneficiary households using improved post-harvest storage practices
• A10. Number and percentage of hectares protected against diseases or pest attacks
• W29. Number of individuals directly using improved water services provided with BHA funds
• W08. Percentage of beneficiary households with soap and water in a hand washing station on the premises
• W10. Percentage of target individuals in the hygiene promotion activity who know at least three of the five critical moments to wash their hands
• W30. Number of individuals gaining access to basic drinking water services as a result of BHA assistance
• E02. Percentage of beneficiaries reporting net livelihood income
• C01. (Customized) – Average yield per cycle per hectare

Quantitative Methods and Sampling

The consultant can propose any suggested adjustments and justification to the quantitative or qualitative sampling methodology at the application stage. Any changes or refinements to sampling will be completed in the startup report phase in conjunction with the consultant and with the approval of Global Communities.

The sampling methodology should consider the requirements for the aforementioned standard BHA indicators and should use household surveys using both a population-based sample (PBS) and a beneficiary-based sample (BBS). PBS should be used for the WASH W29 and W30 indicators, while the values for the remaining indicators will be completed using BBS. Both surveys should employ a two-stage cluster sampling methodology.

The total population for the Population Based Survey (PBS) sample includes 7,237 households (33,039 individuals) in 26 communities between the departments of Copán (10) and Ocotepeque (16). Due to limitations in the project baseline, the final evaluation will be limited in the comparison of pre-post results for these indicators, but the sample size must be representative of the population. Using the Population-Based Sample Size Calculator of Feed the Future; For descriptions of proportions, the sample size is estimated at around 738 households, including a 5% margin of error, considering the design effect of the two-stage cluster approach and a 10% non-response rate. The exact number of clusters and communities must be determined in conjunction with Global Communities,based on available resources and overlap and distance between communities that are also receiving other interventions and can therefore be included simultaneously in BBS data collection.

EBP sample

The BBS sample will also employ a two-stage cluster approach, prioritizing communities with multi-sectoral stratification (more than one sector of community activities), but will be random in the second stage (household selection). Sample sizes were reviewed based on key agricultural indicators (A03 and A04) and a suggested sample size of 587 households calculated using a 5% margin of error and a 10% non-response rate: including a design effect of 2.

Qualitative sampling

The final evaluation will use qualitative methods, including interviews with key informants and focus group discussions, in line with the previously suggested methodology. Within the technical application and the proposed budget, the consultant should provide the suggested number of interviews with key informants as well as focus group discussions. Qualitative evaluation methods are suggested to primarily use key informant interviews, except when focus group discussions can provide more information on evaluation questions. Interviews with key informants should be semi-structured and use intentional sampling for key actors and non-participating informants,while encouraging the use of systematic random sampling methods to select interviews with key informants with project participants. The final sample size and methods for qualitative interviews will be determined and approved in the initial report phase of the consultancy.

Limitations

Since this is a final performance evaluation without any comparison group, it is recognized that the evaluation cannot demonstrate causality between project interventions and the impact measured by project indicators. Furthermore, the evaluation will depend mainly on the self-information of the beneficiaries and has implicit limitations as it is subject to omissions, social desirability bias or inaccurate memory. To mitigate these limitations, the evaluation will ensure that data is collected in a timely manner to improve participants’ memories, use qualitative methods to improve the triangulation between changes in key indicators with project beneficiaries’ perceptions of humanitarian assistance.

Assessment schedule and deliverables

The consulting / consulting company is responsible for carrying out the tasks outlined below and presenting the deliverables according to the agreed schedule. It should be noted that the following table is a suggestion of duration on weekdays. The evaluation period is expected to begin around November 15, with the collection of quantitative data and the delivery of the final report to Global Communities by January 15, 2025.

The external consultant will work under the general supervision of the project Monitoring and Evaluation specialist or his designee. The Technical Review Team will be responsible for reviewing and approving evaluation methodology, data collection tools, and reports.

Stages & Tasks

Key Deliverables

Estimated Days

Start report

Initial meeting with Global Communities headquarters and the project team.

Review of relevant project documentation.

Initial report of the final evaluation, including the evaluation methodology completed, the implementation plan and the tools.

Note: The final evaluation methodology will be agreed with Global Communities in conjunction with project staff and the Monitoring and Evaluation advisor.

6 days

Development of evaluation methodology, sampling frame and data collection tools.

Development of the data collection schedule (including the meeting / interview schedule).

Presentation of the initial report to the evaluation team.

Collection of information

Pilot test of quantitative and qualitative data collection tools.

Finished set of quantitative and qualitative data tools after adjustments made as a result of the pilot test.

4 days

Training of data collectors in consent management, data collection tools and participatory facilitation techniques.

Collection of quantitative and qualitative data.

raw data sets.

10 days

Data analysis and draft report

Analysis and interpretation of the data.

Draft report

7 days

Preparation and presentation of the draft of the report in English.

Validation and Dissemination of the Evaluation.

Departmental Broadcasting Events x2.

PowerPoint presentation and two-page summary.

4 days

Preparation and presentation of the final report.

Briefing for the technical review team and senior management team: i) to familiarize key actors with the evaluation results, and ii) to validate and prioritize evaluation recommendations.

Final report, Cleaned Quantitative and Qualitative Data Sets.

4 days

Integration of stakeholder comments (up to two rounds of comments) and presentation of the final report in English.

7 days

Expected deliverables from the consultant include:

1. Initial report (no more than 20 pages) detailing the proposed methodology.
2. Digital copies of all final quantitative and qualitative tools.
3. Report clean quantitative and qualitative data resulting from all household surveys, interviews with key informants and / or observations, and consent forms.
4. Final report (in English) following the outline of the report to be provided to the consultant, aligned with all the elements required by BHA.
5. Two-page summary: Summarizing the evaluation and highlighting the key findings, including data visualizations (in Spanish) for use in broadcast events.
6. PowerPoint presentation of the findings (of no more than 15 slides).

Dissemination of evaluation findings

Upon completion of the report, the evaluation findings will be shared and disseminated by Global Communities, including through:

1. Share the final report with BHA and upload it in compliance with publication regulations.
2. Share the findings with the WASH, Cash and SAN working groups.
3. Internally share with other GC departments and implementation teams.
4. Share evaluation findings with participants and key actors in departmental level presentations.

Composition of the evaluation team

The following qualifications and skills of the principal consultant are expected:

• Minimum educational qualification of a master’s degree in emergency response, international development, social sciences, economics, evaluation or a relevant field of a recognized university.
• At least 7 years of experience in the areas of evaluations, including cash programming, food security and / or nutrition.
• Deep understanding of mixed data collection methods, including the design and collection of household surveys.
• Strong data analysis skills and familiarity with at least one data analysis software (SPSS, STATA).
• Ability to create engaging data visualizations to convey key evaluation findings.
• Experience in evaluating strongly preferred USAID / BHA programs.
• Excellent analytical skills, research and communication methods.
• Highly preferred fluency in English.
• Experience / knowledge in gender-sensitive programming and protection.
• Understanding child protection and child participation procedures.
• Experience working in Honduras is required.

Reference documents

Global Communities will provide the consultant with various reference documents, including those mentioned in the above method table, which will include, but will not be limited to:

• HASS project documents, including the Technical Proposal and all relevant annexes (Monitoring and Evaluation Plan, Implementation Plan).
• Indicator Tracking Table (ITT) presented with the baseline report.
• Monthly, quarterly, semi-annual and annual reports.
• Baseline report and dataset.
• Post-distribution monitoring data and relevant reports.

Evaluation of Proposals

Those interested should send in PDF format: a) Technical Proposal supported by copies of their academic training and references as detailed in subsection VIII- Composition of the Work Team; and b) Economic Proposal. The term is to no later than 4:00 (official country time) on September 14, 2024, to the following email address: acquisitions@globalcommunities.org, indicating in the matter of the mail **: Proposal “Consultancy Final Evaluation Project Strengthening the Agricultural System of Honduras (HASS) ”.**

1. Technical Proposal:
   1. Economic Proposal:

The Technical Proposal is summarized with the delivery by the Consultant of the final evaluation plan, defining sections and detailing for each one essential topics or issues that must be addressed; such as the strategy, methods, source of information, instruments to collect, process and analyze information, and product delivery processes in accordance with the provisions of sections V and VI.

The Economic Proposal will be presented in lempiras, detailing amounts for fees, expenses and Income Tax (12.5%) of the total proposal.

Evaluation criteria of the Technical Proposal:

Description

Percentage (%)

The offeror’s proposal must demonstrate a strategic technical approach, methodology and that describes the tools for the collection and analysis of information.

40%

Schedule according to the period of appropriate consulting and distribution between regions as well as the organization’s ability to quickly mobilize experts and technical assistance teams

10%

Knowledge, experience and proven availability of the personnel proposed to meet the requirements of the Declaration of Labor.

30%

GC feedback response methodology on reporting

10%

Approach to present findings to those involved.

10%

Total

100%

Note: The percentages indicated in this table add up to 100%, which represents 80% of the total selection criteria.

Weighting of the evaluation for technical and economic proposals:

– Technical Proposal: [80]%

– Economic Proposal: [20]%

Technical proposals that reach a minimum percentage of 70% will be subject to the evaluation of the economic proposal.

The Economic Proposal en **: 20% ** The Economic Proposal with the lowest amount will obtain the highest percentage established for the Economic Proposal, the remaining proposals will receive a percentage evaluation based on the amount of the lowest proposal.

The award of the process will be awarded to the proposal that obtains the highest combined score (sum of the evaluations of Technical and Economic Proposals).

1. Payment method

The payment of the consultancy will be made as follows:

1. First payment: for twenty percent (20%) of advance of the total amount of the contract to the presentation and approval of the work schedule
2. Second payment: for forty percent (40%) of the total amount of the contract against delivery and approval of product No.x. Report clean quantitative and qualitative data resulting from all household surveys, interviews with key informants and / or observations, and consent forms with their means of verification.
3. Third payment: forty percent (40%) of the total amount of the contract against delivery and approval of product No.x. Final report (in English) following the outline of the report that will be provided to the consultant that includes a two-page summary highlighting the key findings, including data visualizations (in Spanish) for use in broadcast events and PowerPoint presentation of the findings (of no more than 15 slides).

The consultant must have receipts for fees, duly authorized by the Revenue Administration System (SAR); Likewise, the retention of twelve and a half percent (12.5%) on the fees for Income Tax in accordance with the Law will be applied, except to be subject to Payments to Account, for which you must present the current proof.