Lutheran World Relief- East African Regional Office (LWR-EARO) is working with Neema and Makindu River Self Help groups to implement a 24 month-long project in Makindu District. The project, Rapid Response to Hunger and Lack of Resiliency in Eastern Kenya, was started November 25th 2009, and is scheduled to end on November 30th 2011. The main goal of this project is to bring vulnerable populations back from the brink of starvation by providing immediate access to food and water, and to avoid further expansion of the crisis by increasing resiliency and effective agricultural production in drought affected areas of Eastern Kenya.
The partners, in collaboration with the LWR-EARO, are in the process of identifying a competent consultant to conduct and end of project evaluation to determine the impact of the cash for work activities and achievement of the project objectives.
II. The Project
The Rapid Response to Hunger and Lack of Resiliency in Eastern Kenya project is taking place in the Kiu and Mulili locations of Makindu District, Makueni county. The project applies a multi-faceted approach, which includes a cash-for-work component, activities to boost local food and cash crop production and marketing, and an organizational strengthening component. The key objectives are as follows:
Objective 1: Immediately increase food, non-food and water accessibility for 7,500 community members (and indirectly their 37,500 household members) through the provision of cash for work on the rehabilitation of Neema and Makindu river irrigation networks
Objective 2: Increase resiliency for climate and price shocks by boosting sustainable local production and farmer income through the acquisition of needed management and technical skills and access to financial services for more than 1,000 farmers in Makindu district
Objective 3: Build the capacity of Neema and Makindu SHGs to implement effective emergency response and agricultural resiliency programming
See further details on activities and expected outcomes in the logframe attached.
III. The partners
LWR is working with two local partners in the Makindu District:
NEEMA SHG is an umbrella CBO formed by 5 Self Help Groups (SHGs) representing 5 farms using water from Makindu River to irrigate their farms. The five groups are based in Kiu Sub location, Makindu Division of Makindu District. NEEMA Self Help Group (SHG) was formed in 2006 and was registered with the department of culture and social services in April 2009 with a membership of 480. The group started with an objective of improving household incomes through irrigation farming and collective marketing. The SHG management committee is composed of a 13 members and is tasked with scheduling and rationing of water among the 5 irrigation farms that use the same water source to irrigate their farms.
Makindu River SHG
Makindu River Irrigation Farms Self Help Group (SHG) was formed in 2006 under the name of Mtakuja Irrigation farm. The name was changed from Mtakuja to Makindu River Irrigation Farms SHG in July 2009 when the group had to comply with new Government regulations for users of river water for irrigation to register with Water Resources Management Authority (WARMA) as a River Water Users Association. Registration with WARMA was done in July 2009. The group was established with an aim of harnessing water from Makindu River and channeling it to irrigation canals for group members to grow crops for both consumption and income generation. The group is based in Kiboko Location, Mulili sub-location of Makindu District and serves 180 members out of a total membership of 300. The group has been undertaking irrigation farming using water from Makindu River and although the river is dry, the group members have dug shallow wells along the river and use motorized water pumps to pump water to the canals.
IV. Purpose and scope of work
The objective of the evaluation will be to assess the overall and specific impact made by the project on the partners and beneficiaries and therefore determine the effectiveness of the intervention strategies.
Overall evaluation objectives:
1. Determine the extent to which the expected outcomes were achieved and how they contributed to the achievement of the project objectives
2. Assess the effectiveness of the project approach and key strategies in achieving the project goal
3. Identify and document both short and long term project impact and any unforeseen impact whether negative or positive
4. Identify and document key lessons learnt from the project approach, identify what these lessons demonstrate for the replicability of the project approach and how the lessons can be used to implement related projects in the future
Specifically, the evaluation should respond to the following aspects:
1) Outcome Achievement: Determine to what extent the intended outputs and outcomes were achieved in relation to targets set in the logical framework by reviewing project baseline and mid-term data, and developing a participatory methodology to collect new data on end-of-project results. Specifically:
a) What progress has been made against project outputs?
b) Present evidence of changes in measures of outcomes and outcome indicators in terms of human capital, economic capital, environmental capital and social capital targeted in the project’s logframe.
c) How did these changes contribute to achievement of the project’s objectives and goal?
d) If these outcomes were not achieved, why?
2) Effectiveness:
i. How effective and appropriate was the project approach?
ii. How were the beneficiaries involved, how effective was this and what have been the benefits of or difficulties with this involvement?
iii. How has the ongoing drought affected the partners and beneficiaries in achieving the desired project result?
3) Impact: Details of the broader economic, social, and political consequences of the project and how it contributed to the overall objectives of the project.
i. What was the project’s overall impact and how did this compare with what was expected?
ii. What difference has been made to the lives of those involved in the project?
iii. Have there been any unplanned effects (both negative and positive)?
iv. Are the results of activities sustainable and to what extent? What collaborative partnerships were explored by the partner apart from the partnership with LWR? How has/could this collaboration, and networking support sustainability?
4) Lessons Learned/Recommendations: Key lessons learned throughout the period of the project, which can be utilized to guide future strategies or projects.
i. Were there any significant changes in the project design or the project context between the time of project conceptualization and implementation? What were the reasons for these and what lessons can be learned from this for application elsewhere? What lessons were learned with respect to innovative project approaches that were highlighted in the project proposal?
ii. What are recommendations for sustainability, future project design and management?
Proposed methodologies should include quantitative and qualitative approaches, in a manner suited to the time allotted and the scope of partner actions, as outlined in Section III.
Required Deliverables
• Final methodology section (agreed following consultant selection)
• An evaluation workplan
• Finalized data collection/survey tools
• A draft evaluation report
• Final report to be presented to LWR, partner representatives and community stakeholders
Implementation period
The consultant/consultancy firm will be engaged on a short term basis to an agreed action plan for a period not exceeding twenty working (20) days and should be available immediately.
V. Qualifications
• A reliable and effective evaluator with experience in conducting participatory evaluations and a proven record in delivering professional results
• Knowledge and previous experience in evaluating agricultural, food security and/ or cash-for-work programs
• Fully acquainted with participatory methodologies for M&E
• Fluent in English and Kiswahili
• Experience in the Eastern Kenya region would be advantageous
• Only Kenya-based candidates will be considered due to time and resource considerations
VI. Submission of Proposal – deadline October 28th, 2011
The consultancy firm/consultant should provide the following;
1. Capability statement – evidence of similar assignments undertaken in the last 3-5 years , resumes of key personnel and their availability to execute the assignment
2. A clear proposal outlining the methodology that will be used (qualitative and quantitative).
3. Proposed timeline for carrying out the tasks and submission of deliverables
4. Budget/ cost proposal
5. Contact details for at least 3 organizations who have engaged the applicant for similar assignments who may be contacted by LWR during the proposal review process.
All application materials should be submitted electronically to info@lwrearo.org
Project Evaluator (Consultant) Lutheran World Relief
Reviewed by Unknown
on
8:42:00 AM
Rating:
No comments: