JOB SUMMARY:
The DANIDA SPA Education and Child Protection Programme in Yemen is being implemented in Sa’ada Governorate which is one of the areas most affected by the conflict. As per the latest Education Cluster data, 273.873 school-aged children (53% boys) are in need of humanitarian assistance. Humanitarian actors have a limited presence in Sa’ada due to active fighting and access challenges – frontline. This has led to very few national and international organisations working in education and Child Protection (CP) programmes despite massive needs in the governorate. Based on the Education Cluster severity analysis, all districts (except Razih) in Sa`ada are considered priority 4 with a total number of 139,519 school-aged boys and girls in acute need.
The program outcome indicators:
This Mid-term evaluation, through comparison to the baseline findings, monitoring reports and the progress achieved in terms of the IPTT, will come up with an analysis of actions’ impacts on beneficiaries and sound recommendations on how to improve Save the Children programming while maximizing benefits to the supported communities.
The objectives of this mid-term evaluation are to:
WHY:
WHAT:
WHO & HOW:
The primary audiences of this evaluation are the donor DANIDA, Save the Children Member Office and Country Office, Ministry of Education and other project stakeholders, who will use the assessment of program outcomes to inform their evidence-based programming and learning agendas, as well as the evaluation recommendations to inform relevant programmatic and operational processes as well as future program design.
Area of Evaluation Overarching objectives/questions Implementation/
Process – How well was the program/project implemented? (see key study questions regarding fidelity and process)
– Did program/project beneficiaries (women, girls, boys and men) have a positive experience with the program? (see key study questions regarding satisfaction and experience)
– Did the program/project activities meet the beneficiaries (women, girls, boys and men) preferences and needs?
– How and why did the intervention make a difference?
Outcome – Did the program/project achieve its intended outcomes? (see key study questions regarding impact, effectiveness and sustainability)
– Did the program support women, girls, boys and men to develop self-confidence and effective decision-making with regards to the program activities and outcomes?
Impact – What positive and negative direct or indirect, intended or unintended effects can be attributed to the programme? [DAC definition]
– What positive and negative direct or indirect, intended or unintended effects on women, girls, boys, and men in the targeted community so far?
The selected consultant will be required to undertake external consultation with the HoM/CO MEAL specialist and the PDQ TAs to further refine the Study questions.
Below questions are to facilitate and guide defining the methodology, as well as to be more focused in study findings.
Criteria Key Study Questions Process
Outcome
Impact
Accountability – How has the program/project approached accountability to girls and boys and the wider community?
– How do girls and boys and community members prefer to be reached, and what is the best modality of communication?
– How do girls, boys, women and men are participating in the project and how their feedback and suggestions are reflected in the project?
X X X Child participation – How have the girls and boys, their needs, desires and suggested solutions, been consulted, accounted for and reflected in programme or project design and implementation?
– How were girls and boys supported to meaningfully participate across the programme/project cycle? What effective mechanisms were used? Were their feedback and complaints informed the implementation approaches and modalities?
– How were feedabcks of boys and girls responded to?
X X X Child rights programming – How has the program/project design and implementation considered a child rights approach?
– Did girls and boys (equally) as well as female and mela community members develop knowledge about children rights?
X X Safe programming – Has the program been designed, planned, implemented and monitored to ensure it is equally safe for girls, boys, women and men?
– How has child safety been integrated into the program/project design and implementation of activities? What aspects of the program/project make girls and boys feel safe?
– How has the program/project assessed the risks for girls and boys (separately) and do these risks still exist to date? Have they been reduced, controlled and managed by the minimizing actions? Are there new risks? What further measures do we need to implement to reduce, remove and control these new emerging risks?
– How did the program activities prevented, mitigated and responded to Gender-based Violence (GBV) against women, girls, boys and men?
X X Equity and equality – Did/does the intervention have an impact on inequality, gender, or marginalization?
– What mechanisms / factors contributed to ensure social equality and behavioural change on negative social norms in the community?
– How did women (as community members such as caregivers, or service providers such as teachers and social workers) participate equally with men in project activities and project decision-making? How did their participation inform the program design and implementation effectively?
X X Fidelity – Did implementation meet quality standards / best practice?
– What were the barriers and facilitators to implementation?
X X X Impact* – Does the program/project contribute to reaching higher level objectives (preferably, overall objective)? Why/ why not?
– What is the impact or effect of the programme or project in proportion to the overall situation of the target group or those effected (especially women and girls)?
– What are the intended or unintended effects of the programme, either positive or negative, direct or indirect?
X Inclusion – How did the program/project consider inclusion of vulnerable groups in the design and its implementation of activities?
– Did the program address different needs of girls, boys, women and men from IDPs, host community, disability/without disability, and from minority groups equally?
– How were girls, boys, women and men with disabilities engaged and benefitted from the program services equally with those without disabilities?
– How did girls, boys, women and men with disabilities and from minority groups participate effectively in the project and how their participation informed the program design and implementation?
X X X Process – How well did staff/partnerships work together?
– How can implementation of the program be improved in terms of coordination with different stakeholders?
– Have MEAL activities been implemented as planned? Were they relevant and appropriate? How could they be improved?
X X Reach and uptake – Did the program/project reach its intended target populations (women, girls, boys and men) equally? Why/ why not?
– How do girls and boys/families who accessed and completed the program differ from those who did not?
– What were the barriers and facilitators to women, girls, boys and men accessing/
completing the program?
X X X Replicability and scale – Are the evaluation findings generalizable to other contexts?
– Will the project or programme work in a different context?
X X Satisfaction and experience – How satisfied were the program/project beneficiaries (women, men, girls and men- separately)?
– Did program beneficiaries (women, men, girls and boys- separately) feel the services they received were acceptable, appropriate, and suited to their needs?
X X Gender sensitivity – How has the program/project considered gender sensitivity both in the design and its implementation of activities?
– Has the program/project incorporated different needs and accessibility of boys and girls, men and women?
– Has the program/project outcomes or results been equally represented?
– What are the gender gaps that the program/project addressed and what remaining aspects need to be considered further?
– How were the project activities tailored according to the different needs and the effective participation to women, girls, boys, and men separately?
X X X The evaluation will be based on the selective OECD-DAC criteria and is also expected to consider Save the Children quality benchmarks for high-impact responses and programs.
The study deliverables and tentative timeline (subject to the commencement date of the study) are outlined below. Head of MEAL and MEAL specialist will agree on final milestones and deadlines at the inception phase.
Deliverables and Tentative Timeline
Deliverable / Milestones Timeline The consultant is contracted and commences work 7.8.2024 The consultant will facilitate a workshop with the relevant stakeholders at the commencement of the project to develop the inception report. 11.8.2024 The consultant will submit an inception report* in line with the provided template, including:
15.8.2024
Ethics submission (*****if applicable*****):
Should approval from a Human Research Ethics Committee be required, an ethics submission should include:
18.8.2024 Final data collection tools (in the report language):
22.8.2024 An [Power Point Presentation] including a summary of formative findings from the study. The focus will be on:
25.8.2024 A Study Report* (Draft Version – template available if useful though external actors may want to use theirs) including the following elements:
A consolidated set of feedback from key stakeholders will be provided by Save The Children within 1 weeks of the submission of the draft report.
30.8.2024 Data and analyses including all encrypted raw data, databases and analysis outputs based on gender, age and disability 6.9.2024 Final Study Report* incorporating feedback from consultation on the Draft Study Report 16.9.2024 Knowledge translation materials:
31.9.2024
QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE:
The following qualifications and skills are expected of the lead consultancy:
Assigned staff must have:
Expected outputs
The expected outputs of this evaluation are as follows:
The Organisation
We employ approximately 25,000 people across the globe and work on the ground in over 100 countries to help children affected by crises, or those that need better healthcare, education and child protection. We also campaign and advocate at the highest levels to realise the right of children and to ensure their voices are heard.
ABSTRACT:
Save the Children Mid-term Evaluation Consultant -Re-advertised Yemen Save the Children Jobs 2024
Save the Children looking for “Mid-term Evaluation Consultant -Re-advertised”. Applicants with an Advanced degree may apply on or before 31-Jul-24.
The Save the Children has published a job vacancy announcement on 17-Jul-24 for qualified applicants to fill in the vacant post of Mid-term Evaluation Consultant -Re-advertised to be based in , Yemen. For more jobs, please visit https://unjoblink.org
Company Name: Save the Children
Job Title: Mid-term Evaluation Consultant -Re-advertised
Duty Station: , Yemen
Country: Yemen
Application Deadline: 31-Jul-24