Strengthening the coping Strategies of Pastoralist and Agro-Pastoralist Communities in northern Kenya against Climatic and Economic Hazards

Terms of Reference for Final Evaluation

Country: Kenya

Location: North Horr (Marsabit)

Project to be evaluated: Strengthening the coping Strategies of Pastoralist and Agro-Pastoralist Communities in northern Kenya against Climatic and Economic Hazards
Starting date: 26th Sept 2011 (tentative)

Duration of the field mission: subject to proposed methodology: a total of approx 17-18 working-days (2 working-days desk review, 10 working-days field work, 5 working-days report writing)

Under responsibility of: Deputy Country Director for Kenya

Funding Sources for the evaluation: DFID

Presentation of Solidarités
Solidarités International is an international humanitarian organization which provides assistance to populations affected by natural disaster or man-made crisis.

For over 30 years, Solidarités International has concentrated its actions on meeting three vital needs: Water, Food and Shelter. In the Horn of Africa, Solidarités International is currently implementing Food Security, Water and Sanitation projects in Somalia and Kenya.

Solidarités International has 2 areas of intervention in Kenya (North Horr and Nairobi informal settlements) and 3 areas of intervention in Somalia (Gedo, Lover Juba and Adaado).

Presentation of the project/ program to be evaluated
Background

SI implemented a first WASH and Food Security intervention in North Horr in 2009. This intervention and was initially designed as a continuation of a DFID funded emergency project in Northern Marsabit which ended in October 2009.

However the funding decision was only taken in October 2010, resulting in a presence gap. SI agreed that the original project objectives, results and most activities were still relevant, DFID and SI agreed to proceed with the project on the provision that a detailed re-assessment of the activities would be done to check the relevance and propose adjustments as needed.

This final evaluation focuses exclusively on this funded phase which started in December 2010.

Project Title: Strengthening the coping Strategies of Pastoralist and Agro-Pastoralist Communities in northern Kenya against Climatic and Economic Hazards

Result 1: Improved quantity and quality of water for both human and animal consumption are available for over 27,000 direct beneficiaries and their livestock In Chalbi District

Activities under result 1:

A1.1 Mobilization, Training and monitoring of water user committees (WUC)

A1.2 Rehabilitation of existing hand pump water points and installation of new hand pumps on existing capped/protected wells.

A1.3 Rehabilitation of 20 traditional open wells

A1.4 Construction of roof rainwater collection systems at 2 schools

A1.5 Construction of one additional sand dam in El Hadi (Cancelled and reallocated Water Supply activities)

A1.6 Construction of 2 rock catchments (Cancelled and reallocated Water Supply activities)

A1.7 Construction of underground tanks fed by hill catchments.

A1.8 Chlorination of new/rehabilitated water points, followed by systematic bacteriological testing.

A1.9 Emergency response capacity in case of critical water supply crisis in the project zone during period of intervention.

Result 2: Sanitary conditions and hygiene practices are improved for more than 2,580 direct beneficiaries in Chalbi Districts

A2.1 Construction of 100 household VIP latrines

A2.2 Construction of 8 latrines blocks (3 latrines per block) at 1 school in Forolle and 1 school in Turbi

A2.3 Hygiene promotion for users of all new/rehabilitated water points and other specifically targeted communities (i.e. those communities with particular hygiene/sanitation problems, as identified by ongoing needs analysis throughout the project period

Result 3: Livelihood strategies to ensure food security is improved for more than 9,000 direct beneficiaries in Marsabit North, North Horr and Loiyengalani Districts

A3.1 Provision of Veterinary Services

A3.2 Destocking response mechanism for shoats (changed to Emergency fodder supply)

A3.3 Pilot activity: Introduction of Gallas goats (cancelled)

A3.4 Distribution of Drought tolerant seeds and farming tools distribution to 560 farmers in Hurri Hills and Mt. Kulal

A3.5 Construction of 1 water pan for rain-water harvesting for irrigation in Hurri Hills Farms

A3.6 Provision of 120 oxen and ploughs for Hurri Hills and Mt. Kulal to increase farming acreage

A3.7 Training on farming practices and soil conservation

A3.8 Irrigated fodder production in Kalacha

A3.9 Milk conservation in North Horr: refresher trainings and capacity building of the managing CBO (changed to Promotion of improved Household milk conservation and distribution of metal milk containers to 700 households)

A3.10 Poultry unit : refresher training and capacity building

A3.11 Impact assessment of the milk conservation and poultry rearing

A3.12 Food Security Promotion Activities

Result 4: Management of natural resources is improved for more than 5,000 direct beneficiaries in Marsabit North, North Horr and Loiyengalani Districts

A4.1 Promotion of Fuel Efficient Stoves

Complementary Activities not linked to a Result: Reorientation of the Solidarites International Marsabit Program to a DRR approach

Purposes of the evaluation

To meet donor requirements Solidarites International will commission an external final evaluation to assess results of the intervention.

This evaluation shall cover every activity as per the proposal, define and try to quantify impact of the activities on people’s livelihoods, assess sustainability of the activities and identify key lessons learnt so far, and best practices to achieve the desired goal that can be replicated in future projects.

The findings of the evaluation will not only be useful in evaluating how the project reached the target goal, but also assessing sustainability of the intervention and helping the organization in designing future interventions. The report of the evaluation will be shared with the project donors as required in the contract agreement.

Scope and focus

The evaluation will focus on the approach and strategies, on implementation process and performances of the activities/program.

The evaluation shall assess the relevance of the intervention and each of the activities individually, the coverage effectiveness, the efficiency, the sustainability, the impact and the coherence.

The evaluator will be required to respond to the various key questions:

• Are the established targets reasonable?
• Have the local government authorities supported and participated in the project?
• Does the project relate to the local developments plans and local authorities?
• Has the project ensured women’s participation at all levels? How do women evaluate their situation and what are their suggestions for improvements?
• How do clan issues influence cooperation and contact between villages? What are the reasons for possible conflicts? What intervention may be implemented to enhance cooperation between village and clans?
• What are some of the major challenges?
• Was the intervention appropriate in responding to the community felt needs
• Are the expected results addressing current needs?
• Is the intervention in tandem with local government policy?
• Is the time frame of the proposal respected?
• Has the project achieved its targets to date? If not, why not? Does the project target appropriate beneficiary group
• Have planned activities been carried out appropriately?
• Are funds well utilized and for the intended purpose?
• Are there clear processes and procedures on how the project will achieve its goal?
• Are these processes and procedures followed?
• Are activities implemented within the planned project period?
• Is there foreseeable indication of project extending beyond the planned period?
• Are project inputs utilized properly
• Were the communities involved adequately?
• Is the capacity of the beneficiaries well built to sustain the initiative well beyond project time?
• Are other stakeholders sufficiently involved?
• Does the policy environment support growth of project results after project intervention?
• What other factors could be considered to enhance project sustainability?
• Is the project well encompassing in terms of socio-cultural (gender, ethnic orientation etc) representation?
• What final impact can you foresee?
• Has the project met its goal?
• Is the intervention coherent to local needs?
• What long term benefits do you for see from the project?

The evaluation shall also assess the appreciation of the program by the beneficiaries as well as their participation at various levels of the project management cycle.

Finally, the evaluation should assess how the implementation of the program is respectful of the ethic of humanitarian practice vis-à-vis the SPHERE standards and the Code of conduct for the Red Cross Movement and for NGO during emergency intervention.

Evaluation process and methods

- The consultant will have to develop his/her methodology and tools for data collection. The detailed methodology and tools will have to be validated by Solidarites technical team before proceeding with the data collection.

The evaluation methods should be clearly outlined in the report and their appropriateness, relative to the evaluation's primary purpose, focus and users, should be explained pointing out the strengths and weaknesses of the methods. A description of the overall flow of the evaluation process (i.e. sequence of the key stages) should be given in the evaluation report.

The evaluation approach and the methods used to collect and analyze data should also be described. The nature (e.g., external or mixed) and make up of the team (e.g. sector expertise, local knowledge, gender balance) and its appropriateness for the evaluation should be outlined.

- The consultant will be expected to develop a brief paper (3 pages max) detailing his/her data collection methods and tools to be utilized in data analysis. This paper should come to SI Field Coordinator as proposal attached to application for consultancy services and shall be evaluated against the task and other bidders.

Tools for data collection should be developed before to the field and shared with the project team for comments and validation. Altogether, data collection method should be participatory and inclusive as much as possible.

- After the field work, the evaluation team will present and discuss with the project team the preliminary findings and the proposed recommendations. The consultant will present his/her report to SI one week after the data collection exercise has ended.

SI team will review in three days and hold a debriefing where both parties will share comments and give feedback. The consultant will then, having been given all necessary comments will then be expected to submit the final report in one weeks time after the debrief.

- The evaluation report should outline the sources of biases that might affect the evaluation and how these have been addressed.

- The evaluation report should also present the key constraints to carrying out the evaluation (e.g., lack of baseline data, lack of access to key information sources, use of translators), and the effect of these constraints.

- Whenever secondary sources will be referred to, the evaluator should indicate the level of reliability of the given information.

Procedures and logistics

• The evaluation team must comply, at all time, with Solidarités International rules and procedures related to security and relations with the media.
• The evaluation team must respect the ethic and the deontology related to evaluation practice.
• While working in Nairobi, the evaluation team may require office space in the offices of Solidarités International..
• Logistics, movement and security while in the field will be provided and organized by Solidarités International team.
• All field cost for the team (accommodation, food, water, incentive for meeting, etc. ) shall be covered directly by the consultant.

Deliverables

The evaluation report should include at least:

• One narrative report (max 40 pages)
• An executive summary (2 pages maximum).
• A separate table summarizing the main findings and the lessons learned.
• A separate table showing the different recommendations and tips for their implementation (who will be in charge of implementing this recommendations, when? dead line? necessary means? who will be in charge of checking that the recommendations are being implemented and when? etc.).
• Relevant maps and photographs of the assessed zone and programme.

Note that the quality of the data collection methodology, analysis, documentation of issues and written quality of the report is paramount and no substandard report will be accepted.

Documents of reference (on request only)

• Proposal of the project.
• Last Interim report.
• Current organizational chart.
• Last Activity Progress Update of the programme.
• Relevant maps.

Qualification of the Lead consultant

• Expertise on WASH, Livelihoods, Food Security, development in ASAL areas, work with pastoralists, Disaster Risk Reduction
• Proven record of similar mid-term and final NGOs intervention evaluations
• Proven experience in similar evaluation context (ASAL).
• Strong methodological and writing capacities.

How to apply

Please send your proposal, highlighting the following:

• A brief introduction of bidding firm or person attaching relevant CVs
• Your understanding of the Terms of Reference
• Proposed methodology and approach
• Proposed work plan and budget
• Your availability

All relevant information (CV, cover letter, copies of testimonials, certificate of works and 3 contact references) should be sent to info@solidarites-kenya-som.org before COB 10th August 2011.

Please indicate the consultancy you are applying for in the title of your email. Only short-listed applications will be contacted.