Project Final Evaluation At Adventist Development and Relief Agency International

Leave a Comment / Sudan / By

Multi-Sector Response to Conflict-Affected Communities in Darfur, Blue Nile and Khartoum (MURAD), Sudan

Scope of Work (SOW) for Final Project Evaluation

  1. Purpose of the documentThere is a total of seven sectors under the MURAD activity, funded by BHA, namely Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene (WASH), Agriculture, Protection, Multipurpose Cash A (MPCA), Food Assistance (Food Voucher), and Health and Nutrition.A team of evaluators or consulting firm(s) is invited to submit an expression of interest to carry out the final project evaluation as per the scope of work stipulated below.

2. Background of the Context and Project

2.1 Summary

Project Title

Implementer

ADRA Sudan, sub: Medair

Award Number:

# 720BHA24GR00314

Budget

9 million USD

Period of Performance

September 2024 – November 2025

Active Geographic Region

  • WASH: Blue Nile Region & West Darfur
  • Agriculture: Blue Nile Region & West Darfur
  • Food Voucher: Blue Nile Region & West Darfur
  • MPCA: Khartoum, BNR
  • Protection: Blue Nile Region & West Darfur
  • Health: Blue Nile Region, West Darfur & Khartoum
  • Nutrition: Blue Nile Region, West Darfur & Khartoum

Timeframe of evaluation

November 2025

Language of the report

English

Language(s) of the project area

Arabic, Phalata, Hamaj and Barta

In-country contact person

Program Director (ADRA Sudan) for the WASH, Food Voucher, Agriculture, MPCA, and Protection Sectors

Project Coordinator, Medair for the Health and Nutrition Sectors

2.2 Background of the Context

Sudan continues to face a complex humanitarian crisis, with millions of people struggling to meet their basic needs. The country’s prolonged conflicts, economic instability, and environmental challenges have left large numbers of households vulnerable to food insecurity, displacement, and protection risks. The aftermath of the 2023 conflict between the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), along with ongoing localized inter-communal violence, has worsened pre-existing vulnerabilities, including limited access to healthcare, education, clean water, and adequate shelter.

In the Blue Nile Region, the situation remains particularly critical. Decades of conflict, compounded by recent flare-ups between ethnic groups and armed factions, have displaced tens of thousands of people and put immense pressure on local resources. Today, over 60% of the population still requires humanitarian support, including internally displaced persons, returnees, and host communities. Vulnerable groups, especially women, children, and persons with disabilities, face heightened protection risks, such as early marriage, limited access to health services, and exposure to food insecurity and malnutrition.

The arrival of returnees from neighbouring South Sudan and Ethiopia has added to the pressure on already limited services. Many of these households have arrived after the planting season, increasing their vulnerability to hunger and malnutrition. Environmental challenges, including flooding, drought, and broader climate change impacts, continue to exacerbate these risks.

Sudan in 2025 faces a prolonged crisis, with communities struggling with displacement, limited access to basic services, and heightened vulnerability to food insecurity and malnutrition.

2.3 Introduction of the Project

The MURAD project ran from September 1, 2024, to August 31, 2025, targeting vulnerable populations in Khartoum, West Darfur, and Blue Nile states. Following a three-month extension, the project is set to conclude in November 2025. The primary goal of the project is to provide life-saving and integrated interventions in West Darfur, Blue Nile and Khartoum states to address the dire WASH, agriculture, food security, protection, health and nutrition needs and contribute to reducing food insecurity among vulnerable conflict-affected households. To achieve this, the project was structured around four interconnected purposes, including:

Purpose 1: To improve access to safe water sources and supply and hygiene practices at the household level, along with ensuring proper sanitation structures are in place, thus improving the overall health conditions of the affected population.

Purpose 2: To improve access to food supplies through increased access to agricultural inputs and resilient practices while also increasing household income from new and restored livelihoods. To improve access to safe water sources and supply and hygiene practices at the household level, along with ensuring proper sanitation structures are in place, thus improving the overall health conditions of the affected population.

Purpose 3: At risk individuals in Damazine, Kurmuk, Eg Genina and Kerenik, with special focus on children and people at risk of SGBV, have access to specialized protection services.

Purpose 4: To increase access to quality essential services and reduce excess morbidity through integrated health and nutrition services.

The project reached households across urban and rural areas, with interventions in Agriculture, WASH, MPCA, Protection, and Health and Nutrition. ADRA implemented all sectors except Health and Nutrition, which were delivered in partnership with Medair, while line ministries and SUDO supported coordination and sector-specific guidance.

To address limited access to safe water, MURAD supplied solar panels to power existing water pumps, constructed male and female latrines at health facilities, and rehabilitated communal sanitation facilities in IDP settlements. Hygiene NFIs were provided to households unable to afford the basic minimum WASH kit, while hygiene promotion was delivered through water user committees, printed materials, and radio jingles, reinforced at the household level. Messages emphasized safe water transport and storage, handwashing at five critical times, vector control, and safe disposal of faeces. Special attention was given to multi-use water for human and agricultural purposes to prevent cross-contamination.

Selected farmers in targeted areas adopted improved agricultural methods through hands-on Farmer Field and Market Schools. The project distributed early-maturing and drought-resistant seeds via seed vouchers and provided modern tools to increase productivity. Training sessions focused on sustainable practices, minimum tillage, weeding techniques, and post-harvest management to ensure both food security and income generation for households.

Vulnerable households received three rounds of sectoral cash distributions to cover essential needs, while food vouchers supported access to local markets. These interventions enabled families to meet immediate nutritional needs, reduce economic pressure, and invest in small-scale livelihood activities.

MURAD strengthened community protection mechanisms through Child Protection, GBV prevention and response, and psychosocial counseling. Community-Based Protection Networks (CBPNs) were established in all target states, ensuring that assistance reached those most at risk. Individual Protection Assistance (IPA) beneficiaries were carefully selected in consultation with CBPNs and caseworkers to address specific vulnerabilities.

Medair implemented integrated health and nutrition services tailored to the needs of vulnerable populations in Khartoum, West Darfur, and Blue Nile. The project strengthened primary healthcare services by recruiting and training healthcare personnel, supervising clinics, supporting referral pathways, and ensuring the availability of essential medicines. Communities benefited from reproductive health services, emergency and minor injury care, support for non-communicable diseases, and SGBV case referrals. Nutrition interventions focused on Maternal, Infant, and Young Child Nutrition (MIYCN-E) and targeted feeding programs, providing screening, referrals, treatment, and follow-up for children under five and pregnant and lactating women. Severe acute malnutrition cases were referred to stabilization centers, while nutrition messaging was reinforced through community support groups and integrated with hygiene promotion.

Community-based approaches were central to all sectors. Water User Committees, Farmer Field School trainers, Hygiene Promoters, and CBPNs ensured local ownership and sustainability. Messages were adapted to local languages and cultures, while radio programs reached secondary audiences across the Blue Nile. The MURAD project enhanced access to essential services and strengthened livelihoods for vulnerable communities in Khartoum, West Darfur, and Blue Nile. By combining multi-sector interventions with community engagement, MURAD contributed to stronger resilience, better health and hygiene practices, and expanded access to protection and essential services, leaving lasting benefits for the communities served.

3. Purpose of Evaluation

The purpose of the final evaluation is two-fold: i) to assess the project’s efficiency, relevance, and potential impact (changes) on households concerning sectoral activities, specifically on goals, purposes, results, and targets, and ii) to identify the good practices and document lessons learned during the project implementation.

  1. Specific objectives of the evaluation are:
  2. Evaluate the project’s relevancy, efficiency, coherence, and coverage of its interventions across all sectors (WASH, Agriculture, Food Voucher, Health, Nutrition, MPCA, and Protection).
  3. Assess to what extent the project’s purposes and goals at all result levels have been achieved and compare the indicators’ level results with baseline values.
  4. Identify the good practices and lessons learned from the project and provide recommendations for future programming in similar or emergency contexts.

4. Type of Evaluation and Design:

The evaluation will be a summative performance evaluation. The design of the evaluation will employ a mixed-methods approach, combining quantitative and qualitative approaches.

5. Evaluation Questions:

The final evaluation aims to address the following key evaluation questions, which are directly linked to the purpose of the evaluation. Also, these evaluation questions will guide the evaluation design, methodology, tools, and techniques.

  1. To what extent was the project’s design suitable for meeting the needs of beneficiaries and key stakeholders in WASH, Agriculture, Food Voucher, MPCA, Health, Nutrition, and Protection sectors? To what extent did the project design meet the target groups’ and beneficiaries’ needs?
  2. What expected, unexpected, direct, and indirect results were produced by the project activities to improve the food security and livelihood, health and nutrition, and protection of the target population? To what extent did the program achieve its intended changes?
  3. What are the good practices initiated by MURAD in WASH, food security and livelihood, health, nutrition, and protection fields in the project areas, and what lessons were learned from those initiatives?

We anticipate specific lines of inquiry in line with the above evaluation questions and under different sectors from the applicants as part of the technical proposal. The lines of inquiry, tools, and methodology will be mutually agreed upon between the evaluation team and ADRA before the actual evaluation is carried out.

6. Evaluation Methodology:

6.1 Evaluation Methods

The final project evaluation should include a mixed method and use both qualitative and quantitative tools and techniques to evaluate the project as per the purpose and objectives stated above. In addition, the evaluation design should involve participatory methods to gather an in-depth understanding of the project results in a transparent manner.

6.2 Sampling framework and Sampling:

The sampling frame for WASH, Agriculture, Food Voucher, MPCA, and Protection Sector will be the project participants who benefited from the MURAD interventions in the localities stated above in the Summary Section. The sampling should consider a method that will allow representation of different localities. Two-stage cluster sampling is recommended. However, the evaluation team can suggest other appropriate sampling techniques.

The list of participants who benefited from these interventions will be made available for sampling purposes. The list of all registered beneficiary households at the state, locality, and village levels will be helpful to identify all clusters. In the first stage, the probability proportional to size (PPS) approach can be applied to ensure that clusters with more households have a higher probability of selection. In the second stage, an equal number of sample units can be selected from each cluster. Then, finally, the households within selected clusters can be randomly selected for the household survey.

For the Health and Nutrition sector, population-based surveys will be used, assuming that most beneficiaries or beneficiary households have experienced changes in the indicator(s) in question; the population living in the areas where MURAD has implemented its interventions will be included in the sampling frame. Two-stage cluster sampling is suggested for the sampling where the villages in all the locations where MURAD is implemented will be treated as clusters. The first stage will involve selecting clusters using probability proportional to size (PPS); the PPS method ensures villages with more households have a greater chance of being selected compared to villages with fewer households, thus giving each household an equal likelihood of being selected at the second stage. The second stage will involve randomly selecting households from the sampled clusters, where interviews will be conducted in line with a set of respondent criteria. Selecting more sampling clusters and collecting data from smaller samples from each cluster is recommended to minimize intra-cluster correlation.

The direct beneficiaries, government office staff, political leaders, health workers, community leaders, local partners, and project staff will be the key informants and sources of qualitative data for FGD or KII. The participants for qualitative data can be selected purposively, based on the need and rationale.

6.3 Sample Size

To ensure methodological rigor and representativeness, the consultant is expected to estimate an appropriate sample size of project beneficiaries using the following minimum parameters: a 95% confidence level, a 5% margin of error, and a 10% adjustment for anticipated non-response. The sample size calculation formula taken from the feed in the future guide is given below for reference.

The consultant is expected to propose a sampling methodology that aligns with these minimum standards while considering the specific context and operational realities of the project.

However, for the Health and Nutrition sector indicators, the sample size was 482, calculated considering factors as per the BHA Emergency M&E Guidance:

  • Estimated proportion or mean: This is the survey estimate of the true (but unknown) population proportion or mean at the time of the survey.
  • Standard deviation**.** The standard deviation is a measure of dispersion in the sample distribution for an indicator and is expressed in the same units as the indicator.
  • Critical value of normal probability distribution (z-value). The point on the normal probability distribution curve corresponds to a specific confidence level in the sample estimate. A 95 per cent confidence level is the most commonly used. The z-value for a 95 per cent confidence level is 1.96 for a two-sided test and 1.64 for a one-sided test.
  • Effect Size. The effect size is the targeted amount of change to be measured when comparing two data points, e.g., from baseline to endpoint. The smaller the amount of change to be measured, the larger the sample size.
  • Margin of Error**.** The margin of error is the amount of error considered to be acceptable in estimating the proportion or mean. This value is typically set between 5 and 10 per cent. The larger the acceptable margin of error, the smaller the sample size.
  • Design Effect. The design effect measures the sampling error associated with the survey design. In two-stage cluster designs where households are selected after communities are selected, we use a design effect of 2 as a rule of thumb unless a more accurate estimate of the design effect can be made based on previous or similar survey data. The design effect of 2 indicates that the sampling error is twice that compared to using a single-stage SRS design.
  • Non-response. In surveys, some people who are selected to participate will not be available or willing to complete the survey. This is called non-response and must be considered when calculating sample size. We can use a non-response rate of 10 per cent as a rule of thumb until a more accurate estimate is available (e.g., based on previous survey data).

It is suggested that a similar sample size be adhered to be able to compare the results against baseline values. It is highly recommended that the applicants come up with the most appropriate sampling startegy to cover all the sectors comprehensively.

6.4 Data Collection Tools and Techniques

The suggested list of data collection tools and techniques is given below; however, the evaluation team is expected to develop specific tools to meet the requirements of the evaluation objectives. By nature of the final evaluation, a key task is to assess the achievements of the project’s indicators and compare them against the baseline values. Thus, it is important to use the same data collection tools used in the baseline survey. Therefore,

  • The quantitative survey should be a household-level survey, conducted among the project’s beneficiaries for WASH, Agriculture, Food Voucher, MPCA, and Protection sectors. However, the survey should be population level for the Health and Nutrition Sector interventions.
  • For qualitative approaches, focus group discussions (FGD), Key Informant Interviews (KII), and direct observations should be conducted with appropriate stakeholders, project participants, and community leaders in the project area. The participants would be direct beneficiaries, key government department staff, political leaders, health workers, community leaders, local partners, and project staff.
  • A desk review of the project documents and reports, and other relevant literature should also be considered.

A trained enumerator and field team should be mobilised for the fieldwork and data collection, adhering to the evaluation and research ethics, the do-no-harm principle, and other safety measures.

Selection of respondents for the quantitative survey: Within households, the household head and/or an adult female and male should be selected as respondents, and in some cases, respondents should include all members >18 years of age, depending on the data type. If no adult is willing to participate in the survey or no adult is present in a selected household when an enumerator arrives, unless it is determined that the household head is not an adult (i.e., it is a child-headed household), efforts will be made to return at least twice in hopes of finding an adult respondent. After three failed attempts to encounter an adult or head of household, the enumerator should move to the next closest house as a substitute. If there is no successful contact there, then the enumerator should move to the house that is the second closest to the originally selected house, and so on, until a replacement is found. Children who head households should be interviewed as their households’ representatives.

6.5 Data Analysis:

The data must be cleaned and error-free by removing inconsistencies and any possible outliers. Then, the data analysis should be performed to calculate the results of the respective indicators included in the ITT and Annexe I. Also, the outcome level indicators data should be disaggregated by sex (female and male), gendered household type (F&M, FNM, MNF, CNA), and age, depending on the type of outcome indicator (refer to ITT for disaggregation). These comparisons should be made using statistical methods in statistical software (e.g., SPSS, STATA, R), and where appropriate, standard statistical tests should be performed to assess the significant difference between baseline and final evaluation.

Similarly, qualitative data should be examined for themes and patterns in content, paying attention to what was said, by whom, where, and with what attitude. Likewise, good practices and lessons learned should be drawn from qualitative information collected from the direct beneficiaries and relevant stakeholders.

7. Evaluation Timeline

Although the MURAD project is expected to be completed in August 2025 the final evaluation is proposed to be undertaken in November 2025, considering the weather and accessibility issues in the project areas. The final evaluation will be conducted in the Blue Nile, West Darfur and Khartoum States. A total of 40 working days is allocated for the final evaluation, spread over 1 month (November 2025).

Based on the nature of indicators under different sectors, data sources, and accessibility to field areas, the data collection plan must be adjusted. Thus, it is expected to have a flexible field team for the duration of the evaluation.

The key tasks consist of the inception report, tools, evaluation methodology design, fieldwork and report writing, and results dissemination. A tentative timeline for the evaluation is illustrated in the graph below.

Activity Details

W1

Introductory meeting with the Consultant and the MURAD team, signing of the contract

W2

Desk Review and Inception Report, including methodology, tools and instruments, and dummy tables

W3

Desk Review and Inception Report, including methodology, tools and instruments, and dummy tables

Training of enumerators

Survey instruments tested

W4

Quantitative Data Collection

Qualitative Data Collection (KII and FGDs)

W5

Draft evaluation report

Feedback and incorporation of feedback

Presentation of the evaluation findings

W6

Final evaluation report

  1. Dissemination of Evaluation Findings

The final evaluation results will be shared with local leaders and stakeholders at the project’s closure or community forum.

Debriefing and Discussion of Preliminary Draft Evaluation Report: The evaluation consultant will present the major findings of the evaluation to ADRA and Medair through a PowerPoint presentation after submission of the draft report. The debriefing will include a discussion of achievements and challenges as well as any recommendations for possible modifications to project approaches, results, or activities.

Draft Evaluation Report: A draft report of the findings and recommendations will be shared with ADRA and the Medair office for review and feedback. The written report should clearly describe the findings, conclusions, and recommendations.

***Final Report:***The final report should incorporate all the comments and feedback from ADRA and Medair, which will later be disseminated to donors, BHA, and similar like-minded international and national organizations.

The structure should include an executive summary, introduction, methodology, findings, conclusion, and recommendations.

Refer to section “18. Report Structure” for details about the report’s structure. The report should be written in English and submitted electronically to ADRA. The length of the main body of the report should be within 20 – 25 pages, excluding annexes.

9. Evaluation Team

To undertake this final evaluation, the evaluation team or consulting firm should have at least a team of 3 – 5 experts comprised of a team leader/evaluation expert, a WASH expert, a Health expert, a Nutrition expert, a Protection expert, and an Agriculture and livelihood expert with significant knowledge and experiences of evaluating emergency programs in a complex setting. Having experience in evaluating BHA-funded projects in Sudan will be an asset. Specific requirements and requisites of evaluation team members are given below:

9.1 Team Leader:

  • Post-graduate degree in Development Studies, Monitoring and Evaluation, WASH, Agriculture, Health and Nutrition, or any applicable social sciences field.
  • S/he should have at least five years of senior-level experience in evaluating similar programs in a developing country context.
  • S/he should have at least three years of experience conducting endline surveys for NGOs in the WASH, food security, nutrition, and livelihood sectors.
  • Experience in leading and organising evaluation teams.
  • S/he should have extensive experience conducting qualitative and quantitative evaluations/assessments and be familiar with the non-profit sector.
  • Experience in analysing survey data.
  • Excellent oral and written communication skills are essential. The consultant should also have prior expertise in directing evaluation teams and producing high-quality documentation.
  • Language Skills: English (must), Arabic (asset)

9.2 WASH Specialist

  • Post-graduate degree in WASH or Public Health.
  • S/he should have at least three years of experience conducting surveys and evaluations for NGOs in the WASH, health, food security, nutrition, and livelihood sectors.
  • Capacity to work in a team and lead quantitative and qualitative evaluations.
  • Experience in analysing mixed methods survey data.
  • Sound understanding of WASH in emergency and conflict situations.
  • Ability to work with the community and stakeholders.
  • Excellent oral and written communication skills are essential.
  • Language Skills: English (must), Arabic (asset)

9.3 Health and Nutrition Specialist

  • Post-graduate degree in WASH or Public Health.
  • S/he should have at least three years of experience conducting surveys and evaluations for NGOs in the WASH, health, food security, nutrition, and livelihood sectors.
  • Capacity to work in a team and lead quantitative and qualitative evaluations.
  • Experience in analysing mixed methods survey data.
  • Sound understanding of Health and Nutrition in emergency and conflict situations.
  • Ability to work with the community and stakeholders.
  • Excellent oral and written communication skills are essential.
  • Language Skills: English (must), Arabic (asset)

9.4 Protection and GESI Specialist

  • Post-graduate degree in Social Science, GESI, or Development Studies with a focus on Gender or Protection.
  • S/he should have at least three years of experience conducting surveys and evaluations for NGOs in the WASH, health, food security, nutrition, and livelihood sectors.
  • Capacity to work in a team and lead quantitative and qualitative evaluations.
  • Experience in analysing mixed methods survey data.
  • Sound understanding of WASH in emergency and conflict situations.
  • Ability to work with the community and stakeholders.
  • Excellent oral and written communication skills are essential.
  • Language Skills: English (must), Arabic (asset)

9.5 Agriculture and Livelihood Specialist

  • Post-graduate degree in Agriculture or Food Security, or Development Studies.
  • S/he should have at least three years of experience conducting surveys and evaluations for NGOs in the WASH, health, food security, nutrition, and livelihood sectors.
  • Capacity to work in a team and lead quantitative and qualitative evaluations.
  • Experience in analysing survey data of mixed methods.
  • Sound understanding of food security and livelihood in emergency and conflict situations.
  • Ability to work with the community and stakeholders.
  • Excellent oral and written communication skills are essential.
  • Language Skills: English (must), Arabic (asset)

The applicant can also include experienced field researchers and enumerators in the team.

10. Role of ADRA:

  • Organize an inception meeting with the consulting firm/evaluation team for introduction and orientation on the evaluation objectives and expectations.
  • As highlighted below, ADRA will provide relevant program documents for review.
  1. List of Program Indicators
  2. Program MEAL Plan
  3. Implementation Area Map
  4. Program Proposal
  5. Baseline Survey questionnaire
  • Review the Questionnaire submitted by evaluation and provide feedback and endorsement.
  • Review the FDGs guide and KII checklist and provide feedback and endorsement.
  • Payment to the consulting firm/evaluation team as per the agreement.
  • Responsible for all logistical elements, including hiring enumerators and managing their payments and transportation
  • Facilitate online training for enumerators led by the consultant via online platforms such as Microsoft Teams, Zoom, Google Meet, etc.
  • Provide intelligence on project locations that will be helpful for planning methodology and for the fieldwork.

11. Role of the Evaluation team/Consulting firm

  • Design and translate the survey questionnaires in English and Arabic.
  • Creating the questionnaire in the Kobo toolbox.
  • Design and Translation of the FDGs guide and KII interview checklist in English and Arabic.
  • Provide online training to enumerators on data collection tools.
  • Remote Facilitation of fieldwork, i.e., Household survey, KII, and FGD facilitation.
  • Remote supervision of fieldwork and quality assurance of data collected.
  • Management of field data (cleaning and analysis).
  • Present preliminary findings to the ADRA team.
  • Report writing – draft and finalize the evaluation report.

12. Final Evaluation Cost and Payment

  1. Interested applicants are requested to submit a cost proposal to undertake the final project evaluation, including applicable taxes, accommodation, fieldwork, and travel. ADRA will not be responsible for any financial obligation unless agreed upon in writing and in advance. However, ADRA will assist in terms of coordination with relevant stakeholders and field-level mobility. In addition, ADRA will make payment in three (3) instalments. The payment will be made in phases as follows:
  2. 30% of the contract sum will be paid at the start of the consultancy.
  3. 30% of the contract sum will be paid upon completion and submission of the first draft report.
  4. 40% of the contract sum will be paid upon submission and acceptance of the final.

13. Application Procedure

Interested and eligible consulting firm(s) or a team of experts meeting the requirements should submit their application for this consultancy electronically to consultancy@adrasudan.org and copy programs@adrasudan.org no later than October 23, 2025. The application should include:

  1. Technical proposal: A detailed technical proposal consisting of methodology details per this SOW. The copy of the experts’ CVs should be a maximum of 3 pages. The proposal should also include references from their previous work and contact details.
  2. Financial Proposal: A financial proposal in USD with a breakdown per day or whole must be submitted along with the application. The budget must cover all consultant fees (e.g., travel to BN & West Darfur & Khartoum and accommodation fees).

14. Logistics and Reporting

14.1 Reporting relations

ADRA Sudan is responsible for the recruitment and briefing of the final project evaluation external evaluator(s) and will be the point of contact for the entire duration of the evaluation. The consultant will report to the Programs Director with technical guidance from the MEAL Manager.

14.2 Logistics and Administrative Support

The consultant should state what logistical and administrative support s/he will provide and what support s/he will require from the ADRA project team. The evaluation team should adhere to health protocols and safety measures as deemed necessary to prevent the spread of any hazards and respect the do no harm principle at all times.

15. Deliverables

The consultants must submit the following reports, all written in English:

  • Presentation slide of key findings (PPT).
  • Inception Report with draft/finalized data collection tools.
  • Indicator Tracking Table present the calculated values for each indicator included in the household survey
  • Final evaluation report (about 20-25 pages without annexes).
  • An electronic Dataset of the questionnaire, consent form, raw data, output tables, codebook, and syntax.

16. Communication and confidentiality

The consultant will report to the Program Director with technical guidance from the MEAL Manager and Program Manager. ADRA will also provide logistical and technical support to facilitate required meetings and interviews, as may be necessary. The evaluation team should emphasize transparent and open communication with key stakeholders to ensure a smooth and efficient process and enhance the learning from this evaluation.

ADRA considers it unethical for any evaluation team member to use information gathered from the final project evaluation for anything other than the program under review. If a viable reason exists for using the information obtained for other purposes, then ADRA must be consulted, and prior permission secured. This must be adhered to, especially when the material is controversial and exclusively involves the private lives of the target population. ADRA will provide clean data sets to USAID to comply with the recent FFPIB 02-11 requirements.

17. Distribution of Survey Report

The ultimate responsibility for gathering and disseminating information from all its USAID-funded programs worldwide lies with ADRA International. Therefore, ADRA International expects the survey team, particularly the hired consultant, to turn over all the data and other information used as the basis of the team’s final inferences to ADRA International. It is ADRA’s position that the assignment is not final until it is 1) presented to ADRA, 2) both the consultant and ADRA have openly discussed the contents, and 3) a clear understanding of all conclusions and any differing views are reached between the consultant and ADRA as reflected in the final document. ADRA does not edit or change the final report of the team in any form or fashion without the team’s consent. If the team and ADRA continue to have a difference of opinion regarding the final report of the final project evaluation, ADRA will distribute the document intact but will attach a letter to the report stating its position.

18. Report Structure

The final project evaluation report will be written in English and will adhere to the structure below. The necessary and relevant tables, figures, SOW, pictures, and graphs should be added as annexes.

Executive Summary

A succinct summary of the report contents

Introduction

  • Purpose of the final project evaluation.
  • Organization context.
  • Logic and assumptions of the final project evaluation.
  • Overview of USAID /BHA-funded activities.

Final Evaluation Methodology

  • Final project evaluation plan
  • Strengths and weaknesses of selected design and research methods
  • Limitations and assumptions related to the final evaluation.
  • Summary of problems and issues encountered.

Findings

  • Overall Results.
  • Assessment of the accuracy of reported results.
  • Indicators’ final values and comparison with baseline values with appropriate narratives of high achievement or underachievement, including any disaggregation.

Analysis:

  • Results showing outcomes and impact attributable to the project.

Conclusions

  • Summary of answers responding to the evaluation questions.
  • Overall recommendation

19. Annexures:

  1. Annex I – MURAD Project Indicators

Sector

Subsector

BHA Indicator

Indicators

Disaggregation

Purpose 1: To improve access to safe water sources and supply and hygiene practices at the household level, thus improving the overall health conditions of the affected population.

Intermediate Outcome 1.1: Increased access to improved water sources, improved hygiene, and sanitation practices.

WASH

Hygiene Promotion

W08

Percent of people targeted by the hygiene promotion programs who know at least three (3) of the five (5) critical times to wash hands

Male/Female

WASH

Hygiene Promotion

W10

Percent of people targeted by the hygiene promotion programs who know at least three (3) of the five (5) critical times to wash hands

Male/Female

WASH

Water Supply

W33

Percent of households targeted by the WASH activity that are collecting all water for drinking, cooking, and hygiene from improved water sources

N/A

WASH

Water Supply

W39

Percent of water user committees created and/or trained by the WASH activity that are active at least three (3) months after training

N/A

WASH

WASH Non-food Items

W26

Percent of households reporting satisfaction with the contents of WASH NFIs received through direct.

N/A

WASH

WASH Non-food Items

W27

Percent of households reporting satisfaction with the quantity of WASH NFIs received through direct distribution (i.e., kits), vouchers, or cash.

N/A

WASH

WASH Non-food Items

W28

Percent of households reporting satisfaction with the quality of WASH NFIs received through direct distribution (i.e., kits), vouchers, or cash.

N/A

WASH

Sanitation

W15

Percent of households in target areas practising open defecation

F&M, FNM, MNF, CNA

WASH

Sanitation

W19

Percent of latrines/defecation sites in the target population with handwashing facilities that are functional and in use

N/A

WASH

Sanitation

W13

Number of individuals directly utilizing improved sanitation services provided with BHA funding

N/A

WASH

Hygiene Promotion

W07

Number of individuals receiving direct hygiene promotion (excluding mass media campaigns and without double-counting)

N/A

WASH

WASH Non-food Items

W25

Total number of individuals receiving WASH NFIs assistance through all modalities (without double-counting)

Male/Female

WASH

Sanitation

W23

Percent of handwashing stations built or rehabilitated in functional health facilities

N/A

Purpose 2: To improve access to food supplies through increased access to agricultural inputs and resilient practices while also increasing household income from new and restored livelihoods. To improve access to safe water sources and supply and hygiene practices at the household level, along with ensuring proper sanitation structures are in place, thus improving the overall health conditions of the affected population.

Intermediate Outcome 2.1: The vulnerable households have increased access to food items and reduced prevalence of food insecurity

Agriculture

Improving Agricultural Production

A02

Number of hectares under improved management practices or technologies with BHA assistance

N/A

Agriculture

Improving Agricultural Production

A03

Number of individuals who have applied improved management practices or technologies with BHA assistance

Male/Female

Agriculture

Improving Agricultural Production

A04

Number of beneficiary households using improved post-harvest storage practices

Gendered Household Type: F&M, FNM, MNF, CNA

Food Assistance,

Unconditional Food Assistance

FS01

Percent of households with poor, borderline, and acceptable Food Consumption Score (FCS)

Mean, Median & number of beneficiary households.

Gendered Household Type (F&M, FNM, MNF, CNA)

Food Assistance

Unconditional Food Assistance

FS02

Percent of households with low, medium and high Reduced Coping Strategy Index (rCSI) score

Mean and median Reduced Coping Strategy Index (rCSI) score

Purpose 3: At risk individuals in Damazine, Kurmuk, Eg Genina and Kerenik, with special focus on children and people at risk of SGBV, have access to specialized protection services.

Protection

Protection Coordination, Advocacy, and Information

CP01

Percent of beneficiaries who are confident that residents of their community are protected from GBV

Male/Female

Protection

Prevention and Response to Gender Based Violence (GBV)

CP02

Percent of beneficiaries who know ways to respond to signs of GBV within their community

Male/Female

Protection

Prevention and Response to Gender Based Violence (GBV)

CP03

Percent of beneficiaries reporting the ability to cope effectively with life challenges.

Male/Female

Protection

Prevention and Response to Gender Based Violence (GBV)

CP04

Percent of Beneficiaries participating in Child Protection Services reports Improvement in Safety and Well-being (Case Management)

Male/Female

Purpose 4: To increase access to quality essential services and reduce excess morbidity through integrated health and nutrition services.

Multipurpose Cash Assistance

Multipurpose Cash

M02

Percent of (beneficiary) households who report being able to meet their basic needs as they define and prioritize them

Basic Needs Met: all, most, half, some, none

Intermediate Outcome 4.1: Vulnerable host, returnees and IDP populations have access to lifesaving preventive and curative integrated health care services at supported health facilities

Health

Health Systems Support

H02

Percent of total weekly surveillance reports submitted on time by health facilities

N/A

Health

Essential Health Services

H08

Percent of pregnant women who have attended at least two comprehensive antenatal clinics

N/A

Health

Essential Health Services

H15

Number and percent of community members who can recall target health education messages

Male/Female

Health

Pharmaceuticals and Other Medical Commodities

H24

Number of health facilities out of stock of any of the medical commodity tracer products, for longer than one week, seven consecutive days

N/A

Intermediate Outcome 5.1: Increased access for children under 59 months of age and PLWs to essential preventive and curative nutrition services

Nutrition

Maternal Infant and Young Child Nutrition in Emergencies

N08

Percent of infants 0-5 months of age who are fed exclusively with breast milk

Female/Male

Nutrition

Maternal Infant and Young Child Nutrition in Emergencies

N09

Percent of children 6-23 months of age who receive foods from 5 or more food groups (MDD)

Female/Male

Nutrition

Maternal Infant and Young Child Nutrition in Emergencies

N10

Percent of women of reproductive age consuming a diet of minimum diversity (MDD-W)

Age: 15-19, 20+ years

  1. Annexe II – Project’s Hypothesis and Theory of Change

The Multi-Sector Response to Conflict-Affected Communities in Darfur, Blue Nile, and Khartoum (MURAD) program operates on the following hypothesis: To provide life-saving integrated interventions in WD, BNS, and Khartoum to address the protracted WASH, food insecurity, protection, health, and nutrition conditions faced by the population and alleviate the underlying food security issues by restoring livelihoods and agriculture cultivation.

MURAD’s activities are grounded in this development hypothesis and are focused on the following nine parallel “If” statements:

• IF MURAD rehabilitates critical water infrastructure such as hand pumps and water systems and enhances access to drinking water in IDP collective settlements and shelters, THEN there will be increased safe access to clean and safe water to people within the target communities and reduced the prevalence of acute watery diarrhoea (AWD)/cholera.

• IF MURAD provides WASH NFIs kits to extremely vulnerable households and hygiene promotion activities, education, and communication materials to the targeted communities, THEN the risks of transmission of vector-borne diseases/water-related diseases will be mitigated and there will be improved know-how to use water infrastructure.

• IF MURAD rehabilitates latrines; THEN, the prevalence of diseases, especially AWD, will be decreased, and there will be improved protection of women and children and access to safe sanitation facilities**.**

TECHNICAL APPLICATION Multi-Sector Response to Conflict-Affected Communities in Darfur, Blue Nile, and Khartoum (MURAD)

ADRA International Sudan Revised Submission Date: July 12, 2024 6 Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the restriction on the title page of this proposal.

• IF MURAD provides food vouchers and multipurpose cash assistance to food-insecure households in target areas, THEN the vulnerable households will have increased access to food items and reduced prevalence of food insecurity.

• IF MURAD trains smallholder farmers on improved agricultural practices, provides agricultural inputs, and strengthens farmers’ production capacity through farmer field schools; THEN, the target communities/households will harvest increased crop yield, reduce crop losses, and enhance household food security and income.

• IF MURAD builds the capacity/understanding of the community in identifying and resolving protection risks and rights violations; THEN there will be improved social structures for the protection of women and children, contributing towards human rights being upheld by the community.

• IF the vulnerable individuals receive proper referral and case management and a dedicated protection team is created; THEN there will be higher care and assistance provided to Sexual and Gender-Based Violence (SGBV) and separated children, as well as vulnerable and at-risk population (women, children, and people with disabilities) will be safer and secure from harassment and abuse**.**

• IF access to essential PHC services, medicines and medical supplies is increased through fixed facilities and mobile outreaches, staffed by trained, skilled personnel AND IF the communities are informed and practice improved health behaviors THEN the vulnerability to diseases will be reduced, and morbidity and mortality related to communicable and non-communicable diseases and reproductive health complications will decrease among IDPs and vulnerable communities.

• IF access to timely, quality integrated nutrition services is increased through fixed facilities and mobile outreaches, AND IF mothers’ knowledge and practice of improved MIYCN behaviours increases, THEN malnutrition-associated morbidity and mortality in vulnerable communities will be reduced.

How to apply

Interested and eligible consulting firm(s) or a team of experts meeting the requirements should submit their application for this consultancy electronically to consultancy@adrasudan.org and copy programs@adrasudan.org no later than October 23, 2025. The application should include:

  1. Technical proposal: A detailed technical proposal consisting of methodology details per this SOW. The copy of the experts’ CVs should be a maximum of 3 pages. The proposal should also include references from their previous work and contact details.
  2. Financial Proposal: A financial proposal in USD with a breakdown per day or whole must be submitted along with the application. The budget must cover all consultant fees (e.g., travel to BN & West Darfur & Khartoum and accommodation fees).