Terms of Reference (ToR) Programme final evaluation “Integrated Market Development Programme across the oPt (IMDP)” At Oxfam

“Integrated Market Development Programme across the oPt (IMDP)”

1. Programme Background

1.1. Programme Summary

TITLE: Integrated Market Development Programme across the oPt (IMDP or the Programme)

DURATION: 4 years, from 1 December 2017 to 30 November 2021

COUNTRY: Occupied Palestinian Territory

Contract Holder: Oxfam OGB

Oxfam Country EA: Oxfam Novib (ONL) in Palestine.

Donors: The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark/ International Development Cooperation (DANIDA) and the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC).

1.2. Intervention logic / Theory of Change

The programme design draws upon Oxfam’s global and country-level experience in market development. The programme’s Theory of Change (ToC) is rooted in our commitment to a rights-based and gender sensitive approach, to agency, to empowering and raising the voice of poor and vulnerable communities, and to putting women’s rights at the centre of our work. Through lessons learnt, results achieved, and partnerships developed through the implementation of SDC/DANIDA programmes, this programme intends to be strategic, fostering local ownership, innovation, experimentation, and scale up to stimulate agricultural market systems development.

The overall goal of the IMDP is to contribute to resilient, sustainable and equitable agricultural growth in the oPt. Its successful implementation will lead to improved agricultural production, processing, and marketing systems in the West Bank and Gaza, with a specific focus on high-value fruits (especially palm dates, stone fruits and grapes) and vegetables (especially baby and wild vegetables) and dairy (cow) value chains. These changes will result in increased employment and income of small-scale farmers, processors, and agribusinesses engaged in the selected value chains, with opportunities for women and youth to enhance their influencing power. The programme’s ToC envisages that these changes will only happen if policy impediments and production, processing, and marketing bottlenecks holding back small-scale agriculture and agribusiness development (described in the contextual analysis above) are strategically addressed.

Three strategic domains are proposed to address underlying market failures and create market opportunities, including for youth and women:

(1) upgrading selected value chains through market-based interventions and facilitation. This will result in market actors, including agricultural start-ups, being able to effectively upgrade and add value to their products and services to match market demand and to increase their market share.

(2) fostering youth and women’s economic engagement in agriculture and key agricultural sub-sectors. The introduction and strengthening of inclusive policies and practices at critical stages across agricultural markets will result in attracting and creating more income opportunities and empowerment for women and youth.

(3) promoting more conducive internal and external operating environment for agricultural sector, reducing barriers and creating opportunities.

1.3. Results Chain

The programme’s results chain draws from the ToC described above. In line with the strategic domains enumerated above, three outcomes are proposed to enable the achievement of the programme goal.

*Outcome 1:** Market-based interventions and facilitation result in improved quality and increased market share.

This programme will focus both on supply and demand sides to improve the productivity of small-scale agriculture and the competitiveness and profitability of agribusinesses, including agricultural start-ups. Through market systems approach, small-scale farmers, producers, and small business owners engaged in the selected value chains will be able to respond to ‘market pull’ (i.e., demand) by being better able to supply consistent, quality products and services, according to market standards and consumer preferences – with flexibility to include product diversification and to upgrade their overall business performance. To achieve the targeting outcome of improving quality and market share, Oxfam will support strategic partners to design and implement market systems intervention strategies together with key market actors. These strategies will address critical production, processing, and marketing bottlenecks that hinder value chain performance, including for example input supply, technical know-how, and market failures related to agro-processing potential, and gender-specific barriers. Oxfam will also engage with strategic partners and business incubators/accelerators to support agricultural start-ups with promising investment plans and high growth prospects with unmet investment needs. The programme will support through tailored financing modalities and business mentoring services, agricultural start-ups and producer organizations intending to initiate agricultural and agribusiness ventures. Domestic demand will be stimulated through enhancing consumer awareness, protection and closer relationship with producers and processors. Finally, to lead to the achievement of this outcome, the programme will strengthen the competence of local organizations and key relevant stakeholders in market-based approaches.

*Outcome 2:* Agriculture sector and its key sub-sectors attract and create more income opportunities and empowerment for women and youth.

To enhance women’s economic empowerment and youth inclusion in agricultural and agricultural-related service value chains, the programme will enable women and new entrants (youth) to the labour market to gain skills, assets and competence to establish their own enterprises or increase their employability. The programme will also engage in developing pilots on gender equity and agriculture and in influencing producer organizations, SMEs, business associations, financial institutions, and government agencies, to adopt policies and practices (business models, products, services, and perceptions) that will improve the way markets work for women and youth, which in turn would improve their access to skills, resources and market opportunities. The programme will also engage in or support national level policy, advocacy, campaigning and community level influencing on gender equity and agriculture.

*Outcome 3:** The internal and external operating environment become more conducive for agricultural sector, reducing barriers and creating opportunities.

This outcome focuses on fostering an enabling environment that will allow for sustainable growth within the agricultural sector to challenge impediments that remain in place due to a weak and unfavourable regulatory and policy environment and the capture of resources from Palestinian farming communities as a result of the Israeli occupation. This outcome will seek to address challenges related to both the Palestinian policy and regulatory environment as well as impediments related to the GoI policies and practices. It will build upon policy gains achieved through the SDC and DANIDA-funded programmes, including LED processes. Oxfam will work with a wide range of organizations, including the FAO, and with existing networks and clusters in order to engage in policy work, direct influencing activities and technical engagement.

1.4. Organizational structure

A Programme Implementation Team (PIT) is ensuring effective implementation of this programme and transfer technical expertise to local implementing partners, who based on our assessments have strong existing capacities and structures. This programme falls under Oxfam’s overall Economic Justice programme in OPTI and its management structure falls under the overall country programme structure. This programme is aligned to Oxfam’s overall country strategy for OPTI and as per Oxfam standard practice it reports up the Oxfam programme management line to the Oxfam country management team based in Jerusalem and is governed by Oxfam policies and procedures including, but not limited to, staff performance management guidelines and the Oxfam code of conduct.

Oxfam GB grant management

Following the reorganization of Oxfam during 2017 the system of grant and programme management has been reformed into the Oxfam 2020 ways of working. Oxfam Great Britain (OGB), as contract owner, is responsible for all aspects of the delivery of the SDC/Danida contract. As OPTI country office has Oxfam Novib as it’s executing affiliate, an Oxfam Programme Agreement (OPA) was signed between OGB, and Oxfam Novib based on the programme proposal and contractual agreement with SDC/ DANIDA to authorize the OPTI country office to implement the programme. Technical backstopping has been provided to the programme by the programme strategy impact team based in Oxford, which addresses the capacity gaps identified with staff and partners under previous phases of the programme, and in addition ensures the latest learning and best practices on how to implement such kinds of market facilitation programmes is available to the team. Process quality control (reporting on time and to format, programme compliance & financial oversight) is being held in OGB by a grant manager, based in Oxfam House, within the Programme Portfolio Development & Oversight department (PPDO), based in Oxford. The grant manager made one visit to the programme and provided guidance and training on compliance issues to both staff and partners.

Financial management

Oxfam’s standard financial procedures ensures that there are robust internal controls, strong financial management, and accurate financial reporting. Oxfam stores risk management and financial documentation in both hard and soft copies, mainly in Jerusalem but also in Gaza and Ramallah, oPt. Oxfam in oPt uses an electronic contract and financial management system, which can be accessed only by authorized staff. This system includes a number of modules to report expenditure and balances against budgets, to support programme implementation, and to be held accountable to contract management. A General Ledger of Transactions for each month (or shorter period if required) are entered into a cashbook template and ‘imported’ into the online software.

Appropriate supporting documentation (payment vouchers, receipt vouchers, invoices, receipts etc.) must be obtained and securely held for all transactions. These are readily accessible with reference to the entry in the cashbook. Cash counts and Bank Reconciliations are performed each month. Reconciliation is done to compare bank balances in Oxfam’s records and balances in the bank statements, in order to provide confirmation and independent evidence of the correctness of Oxfam’s records and prevent fraud or errors. All expenditure must be authorized at the appropriate level, taking into consideration segregation of duties. This will normally be the relevant budget holder unless the amount of expenditure exceeds their authorization limit.

Oxfam has procedures, allocated resources, and competence to ensure rigorous financial management measures. These include the following: bank and cash reconciliation on a monthly basis, expenditure authorization levels and segregation of duties, as well as regional centre support in monitoring and compliance. The outcomes of these audits are submitted to the Ministry of Interior. In accordance with Palestinian law, external audits are conducted by suitable local Accountancy Firms engaged specifically for that purpose.

1.5. Beneficiaries

The programme is expected to have a direct impact on the lives of 9,250 Small Scale Producers (SSPs), including 1,850 women, engaged in the selected value chains across Gaza (Grapes, Dairy, Date Palms, and Vegetables (Carrots and onions) and stone fruits “pilots”, and the West Bank (Stone Fruits and Vegetables (wild cucumber, pepper and zucchini)).

The interventions are directly benefitting other target groups: Consumers in the West Bank and Gaza, who will benefit from more direct relations with producers and processors, the latter allowing for increased control over production practices and quality requirements. Medium to large companies, market service providers, and institutional and government stakeholders as well as representative bodies will directly benefit through business mentoring support and/or through upgrading their policies and practices to become more gender and youth inclusive.

Building blocks: The programme draws upon complementarities and synergies with Oxfam’s high-quality market development programmes, funded by the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (SIDA) and the Australia Middle East NGO Cooperation Agreement Programme Phase 3 (AMENCA 3). In addition, this intervention has been developed to complement the upcoming action by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) ‘Market Access Programme’, co-funded by the SDC, DANIDA, and other donors. The two programmes are complementary in their aims to capitalize upon the agricultural sector’s untapped potential to promote agricultural and agribusiness growth that benefits small-scale farmers.

1.6. Partners

The programme is being delivered in partnership with the following implementing partners: Economic and Social Development Center (ESDC), Union of Agricultural Work Committees (UAWC), the Agricultural Development Association (PARC), the Palestinian Farmers’ Union (PFU) and GISHA. In addition, the programme also envisages the involvement of ‘Level-of-Effort’ partners that have highly specialized expertise needed to implement certain programme interventions and strategies, not possible to be provided by the main implementing partners (UCAS technology incubator “UCASIT” and PALTRADE for example).

2. The Final Evaluation

2.1. Purpose

The IMDP is now in its final year of implementation. Therefore, to assess whether the programme is successful in achieving its targets and results, there is a need to undertake a comprehensive evaluation exercise to evaluate the programme’s performance by looking at practices and ways of working. The final evaluation intends to make an assessment, as systematic and objective as possible of IMDP, its design, implementation and results. The aim is to determine the relevance, coherence, developmental efficiency, effectiveness, impact and sustainability. As well, the study is intended to assess programme challenges and best practices to inform future similar programming. It will also review the recommendations of the programme Mid Term Review (MTR) and assess the extent to which these were implemented. The evaluation should also identify key lessons learned, and the flexibility of the programme to adapt and respond to the changes in the working environment across the selected value chains. For this purpose, Oxfam is looking for a Consultancy Firm with solid experience in conducting assessment exercises of similar Agricultural / Market Systems Development programmes in the oPt and preferably at a regional level.

2.2. Objectives

The IMDP’s final evaluation aims at assessing the a) Relevance, b) Coherence, c) Effectiveness, d) Efficiency e) Sustainability and f) Impact of the programme. Furthermore, the final Evaluation has the objective to assess programme response to COVID-19 and latest war on Gaza. The final evaluation should highlight key learnings, lessons, good practices, and provide recommendations for future similar programming. Economic empowerment of women and youth is a crosscutting issue and should be considered when assessing each of the criteria. Therefore, the consultant (firm or consulting team) should apply a strong gender inclusive analysis throughout the evaluation. The evaluation should identify external environment challenges and opportunities that had impacted the programme’s progress. The evaluation focus on both accountability and learning. Therefore, the main objectives and evaluation questions are as follow:

2.2.1 Relevance: To what extent did the programme objectives and design respond to beneficiaries’ and partner institution’s needs, donor priorities and policies; and its adaptability to the change in context and circumstances.

Questions to consider are:

· Did the programme align with the Palestinian Authority’s (PA), donors & Implementing partners objectives and plans?

· Have the value chains and locations actioned during IMDP been the most relevant interventions, and based on solid evidence?

· Has anything changed to affect the relevance of this investment? Are the assumptions underpinning the IMDP Investment Design Framework and M&E Framework still relevant?

· How has the programme adjusted and responded to the MTR recommendations?

· To what extent did the programme design respond to beneficiaries’ needs?

· To what extent have the integration of key cross-cutting issues including gender equality, conflict sensitivity and social inclusion been reflected in programme design and implementation.

2.2.2 Coherence: The compatibility of the programme with other interventions, sector or institution.

Questions to consider are:

· To what extent were other interventions supporting or undermining of the programme’s own interventions, and vice versa?

· Which synergies and interlinkages between the programme and other interventions are carried out by other institutions?

· How consistent is the programme with the relevant international norms and standards?

· How consistent is the programme with other actors’ interventions in the same context?

· To what extent do the interventions of the programme represent a stand-stone for future complementary interventions?

2.2.3 Effectiveness: To what extent did the programme achieve its objectives and results, including any differential results across groups.

Questions to consider are:

· To what extent has the programme achieved its objectives and results in both output and outcome levels?

· What have been the achievements and challenges of the IMDP, both in Gaza and the West Bank? What enabled the achievements?

· What kind of measures has the programme adopted in strategizing within the different contexts in both geographical areas? What were the major factors influencing the achievement (or non-achievement) of objectives?

· How did Oxfam and IMDP partners respond to challenges? What has been the effect and value of the activities to support partners to promote market development?

· What did Oxfam and partners learn from the programme’s implementation?

· How has the programme influenced the appropriate stakeholder community, and what capacities has it built?

· What has been done to address the structural barriers that hinder women enterprises in both geographical locations and how effective those addressed have been?

· What has been done to address the structural barriers that hinder youth and start-up enterprises in both geographical locations and how effective those addressed have been?

· To what degree has the gender equity plan developed in the inception and including both specific women-targeted initiatives and gender mainstreaming approach across all program components have been implemented? What gender-based constraints have been tackled?

· To what extent are the investments supported in the programme market-viable, innovative, feasible and profitable? How much do they directly contribute to creation of sustainable jobs?

· Are the original and revised outcomes for the IMDP realistic and achievable?

· How did the implementation approach and management (including selection criteria and processes), influence the achievement of results? What could be changed for better achievements, if any?

· Is results measurement being effectively used to inform program learning, continuous improvement and adaptation of the program?

2.2.4 Efficiency: To what extent has the programme delivered results in an economic and timely way. The focus of this assessment should be less on cost-efficiency (in comparison to alternative approaches to achieving the same outputs) and more on process-efficiency.

Questions to consider are:

· Were activities cost-efficient?

· Were objectives achieved on time? Could a different approach have produced better results?

· Does IMDP represent Value-for-Money? Is the programme making the best use of donors’ and Oxfam’s time and resources to achieve outcomes?

· Has the programme been managed efficiently and have management and implementation arrangements been sufficiently flexible to cope with changes, challenges and opportunities as they arose? Have the donors resourced the management of the programme appropriately? Have governance mechanisms been appropriate?

· What has been effective in engaging/influencing communities, government at different levels & other stakeholders to achieve programme objectives?

· How would you assess the return on the economic investment done by donors across the various programme components?

2.2.5 Sustainability: To what extent are the benefits of the programme likely to continue after donors funding has been withdrawn?

Questions to consider are:

· To what extent the scalability and replicability are feasible/achievable? Are there any signs in this direction?

· To what extent the benefits of a programme will likely continue after donor funding ceased?

· What are the major factors that are influencing the achievement or non-achievement of sustainability of the programme?

· How have partners’ capacities for influencing market systems development changed?

· How have the stakeholders’ capacities and plans towards further market system development (especially among the targeted value-chains) changed and developed?

· How are the perspectives and priorities of women and young people addressed across all the programme activities? Is there evidence that the programme is likely to grow – scaling up and out – beyond the programme life?

· Are there risks to the sustainability of changes? What has the programme been able to do to address the challenges and risks to the sustainability of changes?

· To what extent the program ensured buy-in or political will for the uptake and use of program results?

· Are program stakeholders and beneficiaries taking ownership of the program results?

2.2.6 Response to COVID-19 and War-on-Gaza: Measuring the efficiency and effectiveness in dealing with the new realities on the ground due to the outbreak of the COVD-19 pandemic and the economic un-rest resulted during and after the May-2021 Israeli war on Gaza.

Questions to consider are:

· Are the measures that Oxfam took consistent with the COVID situation?

· What were the measures taken? What were the effects?

· Have Oxfam and its partners been able to assess the direct and indirect impacts of the May-2021 Israeli war on Gaza on the beneficiaries from one side and the overall programme objectives?

· What were the measures Oxfam taking? What are the effects/expected effects?

2.2.7 Impact: What have been the positive and the negative changes produced by the programme directly or indirectly, intended or unintended.

Questions to consider are:

· To what extent are small-scale farmers, producers, and small business owners engaged in the selected value chains able to respond to ‘market pull’ (i.e., demand) by being better able to supply consistent, quality products and services, according to market standards and consumer preferences?

· To what extent are small-scale farmers, producers, and small business owners engaged in the selected value chains able to upgrade their overall business with the flexibility to include product diversification?

· To what extent are small-scale farmers, producers, and small business owners able to increase their market share?

· What are the sustainable changes in the functions or rules of market systems that is attributable to IMDP interventions? What changes that were demonstrated at scale? What changes that were transformational and long-lasting?

· To what extent were the benefits of the programme equally enjoyed by small scale farmers/producers as compared with larger ones?

· To what extent were the benefits of the programme equally enjoyed by female and youth entrepreneurs as compared to male and older entrepreneurs.

· To what extent do men (in the targeted locations) now accept and support women as breadwinners and to what extent are they able to better-equitable sharing of farm and household decision making with women?

· To what extent was the programme able to bring systemic market system change that benefits a wide cross-section of beneficiaries, in other words to be inclusive of women, youth and disadvantaged groups?

· What is the evidence that inclusivity of opportunities is resulted from the programme?

· To what extent have the advocacy interventions by the programme led to/generated a more conducive operating environment for agricultural sector, reducing barriers and creating opportunities?

· What unintended, whether positive or negative impacts can be identified also negative and positive impact on target groups?

2.3. Geographical Area

The programme is implemented both in Gaza and the West Bank. The final evaluation will be conducted by combining work on remote and field missions in the target areas. The field-visits will have the purpose of collecting field data from partners, stakeholders and beneficiaries.

2.4. Indicative Approach

It is expected that the evaluation will include primary research with focus on qualitative and quantitative data collection approaches, methods, and tools, as well as secondary research. The detailed approach to data collection, including the evaluation plan, will need to be developed by the consultant based on the main programme documents and should be approved by Oxfam.

The consultant is expected to employ mix methods for data collection (both qualitative and quantitative methods) supported by an extensive review of secondary information. The data collected on the ground should show segregation of beneficiaries by gender and age, and it has to be carried out where the programme is implemented (see section 2.3 above). Accordingly, it’s expected by the consultant to use sound sampling methods to obtain a representative sample out of the 9,250 anticipated beneficiaries. The data collection methods should include:

· Focus Group Discussions with targeted beneficiaries.

· Key Informant Interviews with main stakeholders.

· Semi-structured questionnaires.

· Secondary data collection, analysis and programme relevant documents.

Per each data-collection methodology, the consultant must develop specific questionnaire/guidelines that will be made available as annexes in the final report. The information so gathered will be triangulated to obtain a more accurate picture.

Moreover, one of the main objectives of this study is to measure the impact of the programme on women and youth. Therefore, it’s expected by the consultant to use gender sensitive tools. In line with Oxfam’s values and organizational ambition, the evaluation should seek to prioritize a focus on gender and inclusion and trying to understand the extent to which the programme applied gender-sensitive and inclusive approaches and explicitly aimed for results that improve the rights of all groups and that contribute to gender justice.

Oxfam expects the consultant to engage with Oxfam staff, partners, stakeholders, small-scale producers (SSP) women and men, and business owners to address the evaluation questions.

2.5. Indicative Process and Steps

To realize the evaluation the consultant will use the following process:

1) Desk phase (phase 1): Undertake a desk review of the programme’s key documents including but not limited to: programme proposal and results chain; mid-term review report; and annual progress reports.

2) Carry out preliminary interviews with the relevant staff from Oxfam and partners’ teams to ensure common understanding of the ToR and the expected results of the evaluation.

3) Develop detailed Evaluation Proposal and Inception Report. The inception report should include:

• Detailed evaluation methodology.
• Data collection methods, tool and sampling strategy ensuring strong gender analysis for each indicator in the programme.
• Comprehensive implementation and work plan for the evaluation with protocols for the enumerators and supervisors.
• Data entry and analysis plan.

4) Field phase (phase 2): upon approval of the evaluation proposal / inception report, collect data at field level using gendered quantitative and qualitative data collection tools.

5) Using the evaluation methodology to answer/address study objectives.

6) Render first draft report to Oxfam and partners for comments.

7) Finalize the report within less than a week of receiving comments.

2.6. Indicative Timetable

The period for the assignment is 4 months starting from the date of signing the contract until the submission of final report**.**

Publication of Term of Reference**

November 07, 2021

Deadline for submission of the proposal**

November 23, 2021

Notification of award**

December 2, 2021

Contract signature **

December 2, 2021

Evaluation implementation**

Dec 2, 2021 – March 31, 2022

Conclusion of evaluation and final delivery**

March 31, 2022

3. Deliverables

The consultant is liable for the following deliverables:

1. An inception report, including details such as methodology, work plan, tools, and questionnaires, FGDs guidelines and KIIs checklist and a field survey plan. (These need to be agreed with Oxfam prior to the start of field survey).
2. Final evaluation report with executive summary, learning section, and recommendation section. This needs to be submitted according to the following procedures:

ü The consultant will prepare a draft report and share with Oxfam followed by a PPT presentation of findings on a prior agreed date.

ü Oxfam and key partners will feedback on draft report and the consultant then have to finalize the report based on this. Report should be comprehensive with benchmarks of all indicators set in log frame and other crosscutting issues and case studies. The consultant needs to submit the electronic version (i.e., Word, Power Point, SPSS, and Excel).

1. The working language for the elaboration of all deliverables is English.
2. The period for the assignment is 3 months starting from the date of signing the contract until the submission of final report. (as the programme will end close to the timeline indicted above, no extension of the consultancy assignment is expected or is possible)

4. Responsibilities of the consulting team

The consultant is required to:

A. Take the responsibility for the Evaluation and appoint a person as the contact point with Oxfam for all the liaison and coordination.

B. Compose the Evaluation team -considering project geographical locations- that is capable to deliver the output of required quality in time and mention the team composition in his / her proposal.

C. With the support from Oxfam, make necessary appointments for the key informant interviews, mobilize participants, including direct beneficiaries (mainly social entrepreneurs, social enterprises support organizations, policy makers), for focus group discussions and visit the partners for data collection. The programme staff in the country (i.e., PMUs) would support and participate in FGDs except for those intended for the programme beneficiaries. Oxfam will provide necessary authorizations through letters to use the organization names by the consultant. All communication and coordination in the country for collecting data should be the consultant’s responsibility.

D. Manage all the logistics of field survey in coordination with Oxfam.

E. Train an adequate number of enumerators that will be recruited in cooperation with the Oxfam country team for the field survey and supervise their work (both progress and the quality).

F. Ensure that all the Consultant’s personnel are following the Code of Conduct and the policies of Oxfam and a declaration to this effect is signed by them.

G. Submit the deliverables (mentioned under item 3 above) on time, and,

H. Maintain the confidentiality of all information gathered. (Prior to undertaking, the consultant will have to declare that the information gathered would not be used for a purpose other than for those stipulated in the ToR).

5. Responsibilities of Oxfam

As the organization commissioning the Evaluation, Oxfam will:

A. Provide all the relevant documentation and programme reports for the Evaluation’s purpose

B. Hold the responsibility for the provision of feedback / comments for inception report, tools, questionnaires, draft report, and presentations as per the agreed time frame. Consultant can suggest the time frame.

C. Provide the templates for reporting and financial settlements.

D. Keep the relevant stakeholders (who are to be interviewed by the consultant) informed about the evaluation.

E. Make necessary arrangements for meetings and presentation whenever required.

F. Review the timeline of evaluation and make necessary amendments in consultation with the consultant, and

G. Provide payments to the consultant as per the agreed schedule upon completion of minimum requirements.

6. Desired Qualifications, Specialized Knowledge and Expertise

The consultant should possess extensive experience (minimum 10 years) in undertaking evaluations of complex agricultural market systems development programmes (special attention will be given to the experience in assessing initiatives with focus on gender, entrepreneurship, and private sector support as well as in assessing European donors’ funded projects) and in-depth knowledge on relevant sectors and conducting evaluations, surveys research etc. The proposed team shall comprise personnel with extensive experience (at least seven years) in the related field and should be formed from experienced consultants from both Gaza and WB.

The consultant should also have:

ü Excellent knowledge of European donors’ practices and procedures for project implementation.

ü Expertise in project cycle management, gender, and extensive knowledge of Monitoring Evaluation Accountability and Learning systems and data collection methods.

ü Deep knowledge of the Palestinian agricultural sector and market system dynamics.

ü Previous experience in working with INGOs’ and familiarity with procedures, approaches, and operations.

ü Acknowledged similar consultancies with recognized organizations.

ü Demonstrated analytical and writing skills.

ü Excellent knowledge of English (Arabic would be the field working language).

ü Computer skills (advanced user of Microsoft Excel or similar software; statistical software is an asset).

ü Desirable: previous experience and knowledge of the area.

7. Evaluation of proposals and selection process

Potential and interested firms / individuals are required to submit a comprehensive proposal describing / articulating the work requirements outlined in this ToR. Professional and language proficiency of the proposed personnel, including the field enumerators, are important to indicate in the proposal. All proposals will be evaluated based on internally agreed criteria as follows:

(Weight for each criterion given in percentages)

1. Specific and extensive expertise in evaluation of agricultural market system development programmes (at least the Team Leader) (15%).
2. Proposed team / personnel which includes composition of the team and their educational qualification and experiences. With equal competences, gender-balanced teams will be favourable (30%).
3. Methodology and work plan which includes approach / evaluation design, sampling methodology, data collection methodology, data analysis, work plan etc. (30%).
4. Quality of presentation of proposal (5%).

80% of weight will be given to technical proposal and 20% of weight will be given to financial proposal. The applicant should score minimum of 70% in the technical evaluation to be eligible for financial evaluation.

The proposal should be prepared using the format provided. (Refer Annex 1: Proposal format, for details).

8. Terms and Conditions

Payment will be on submission of tax-exempt Invoice on delivery against milestones. All incidentals, equipment and materials, accommodation and travel required for the assignment are the responsibility of the consultant and need to be included in the financial proposal. The consultant should follow the Oxfam’s Branding policies and ensure Oxfam and donor logos are presented as per the guidelines. The consultant and his / her team in the assignment must abide by Oxfam child protection policy, code of conduct, sexual harassment policy and Oxfam’s other relevant policies. All requirements in respect of insurance including professional indemnity, worker’s compensation, public liability, superannuation and taxation, where applicable will remain, at all times, the responsibility of the consultant.

The financial offer should be in USD excluding VAT tax. The tendered should be able to issue an official vat exemption invoice and valid deduction at source certificate. The financial offer prices should be valid for 120 days.

Annex 1: Proposal format

1. Cover letter
2. Introduction
3. Background and understanding of the assignment
4. Proposed approach and methodology (including internal coordination process)

i. Literature review

ii. Survey

iii. Focus group discussions

iv. Key informant interviews

v. Data entry and analysis

vi. Deriving and presenting conclusions & recommendations

1. Work plan
2. Team composition
3. Evidence of past experience
4. CVs of professional members of the proposed team
5. Profile of the team of consultants / consultancy firm

Above sections are compulsory to be presented in the proposal and any other information relevant to the ToR also can be included.