International Organization for Migration
General Functions:
The International Organization for Migration (IOM), the UN Migration Agency, and United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), and the UN Refugee Agency have jointly implemented a 36-month project financed by the European Union under the Instrument for Pre-Accession (IPA) instrument. This 36-month project intended to support institutional and legal reform of migration management in Türkiye.
Over the last years, Türkiye has developed a comprehensive legal and institutional framework, including the adoption of the Law on Foreigners and International Protection (LFIP), the establishment of the Directorate General of Migration Management, and the implementation of secondary legislation providing the basis for effective migration management and international protection system in Türkiye, the latter representing Türkiye’s commitments under international refugee law. As per the LFIP, the now Presidency of Migration Management (PMM) is the designated authority managing Removal Centres (RCs) where persons under administrative detention are placed for processing and/or return procedures.
The exponential increase in the number of apprehended irregular migrants places a serious burden on the operational capacities of RCs, leading to considerable overcrowding and a range of other challenges relating to effective access to rights and the provision of services. There is a need to provide tailored capacity development to RC staff, including the managerial staff, operational staff, security, and psychosocial support staff, to ensure the proper provision of services that comply with the LFIP and other relevant international and European Union (EU) standards, while at the same time, to protect the staff who work there through occupational health measures. Moreover, the institutionalization of capacity development tools such as developing a pool of trainers; developing standards operating procedures (SOPs) and guidelines are needed to ensure continued and sustainable provision of services on issues concerning the prevention and control of contagious diseases, harm reduction, internal monitoring, complaint mechanisms and response management, asylum and appeal procedures, access to legal assistance and legal aid, identification of and response to vulnerable groups, referral mechanisms, and Alternatives to Detentions (ATDs) are essential to improve the material conditions and procedural safeguards in RCs. Additional internal mechanisms to be set through the activities in this action include strengthened enforcement of the provisions of the LFIP setting out access to asylum procedures from removal centres through the development of SOPs, enhanced access to legal aid and assistance, and increased know-how of the staff and through tools developed.
As per Law on Foreigners and International Protection (LFIP), the Presidency of Migration Management (PMM) is the designated authority in charge of issuing administrative detention and ATD decisions, as well as managing Removal Centers (RCs) and implementing ATD measures.
ATDs in Türkiye came into effect with an amendment in the LFIP on 24 December 2019. Article 57/A of LFIP stipulates seven different ATD measures; 1-residence at a given address, 2 regular reporting to the authorities, 3-family-based return, 4-counselling on return, 5-volunteering in public benefit services, 6-guarantee and 7-electronic monitoring.
Following the introduction of ATD measures with the amendment of the LFIP, PMM’s official letter dated 27.01.2020 and numbered 4342 instructed 81 PDMMs to “establish a mechanism within Provincial Directorate to monitor the implementation of alternative measures for irregular migrants and assign an appropriate number of personnel for this task.” Moreover, secondary legislation on the implementation of ATDs, namely “Regulation on ATDs,” was adopted and published in the Official Gazette on 14.09.2022.
The current action aims to support PMM to manage irregular migration better and reinforce the procedural safeguards at the RCs in line with international and EU standards and best practices. The action further aims to strengthen national capacities and knowledge on immigration detention practices and standards and on promoting ATDs while supporting developments of national policies and practices, especially on ATDs. It is essential that ATDs are available in law and implemented in practice; conditions of immigration detention, where detention is necessary and unavoidable, meet international and EU standards.
The specific results of the project are:
Result 1 – Institutional capacities of removal centres are strengthened in terms of internal control, complaints handling, access to rights, including legal aid, provision of services, interagency referral, and harm reduction of persons under administrative detention.
Result 2 – PMM enhances procedural safeguards for persons under administrative detention to access rights and services, including access to asylum procedures for those needing international protection and access to information in removal centres.
Result 3 – PMM develops pathways to viable alternatives to administrative detention.
Evaluation purpose and objective
The general objective is to evaluate the project’s implementation and assess how the progress has contributed to achieving project outputs, outcomes, and the overall objective. The external final evaluation aims to assess relevance, coherence, effectiveness, efficiency, sustainability, and impact , and cross-cutting issues (age, gender, and human rights). The evaluation will identify lessons learned and recommendations to maximize the potential to achieve the desired outcomes for similar projects in the future. The evaluation will inform the project management, the donor (EU-IPA), and key partners about the project performance, how well the project did, the quality of project implementation, and any bottlenecks faced in implementation. As such, the evaluation will also allow the donor and stakeholders to assess the project’s accountability to targeted population.
Evaluation scope
The final evaluation will cover 01 February 2021 – 31 January 2024. The evaluation team will use inclusive and participatory approaches to cover relevant stakeholders in all provinces in Türkiye, where the project is being implemented.
The final evaluation will include recommendations, good practices and lessons learned from the analysis. The evaluation will also cover the following IOM cross-cutting themes:
- Gender
- Rights-based approach
- Human rights
Evaluation criteria
The final evaluation will be based on the six OECD-DAC criteria: relevance, coherence, efficiency, effectiveness, impact, and sustainability. The evaluator will also focus on cross-cutting issues (age, gender, and human rights).
Evaluation questions
This section gives an overview of guiding questions proposed for each evaluation criterion. During the inception phase, the evaluator may modify the questions in consultation with the IOM and UNHCR teams. The evaluation questions may also be supplemented by additional, detailed, and specific sub-questions as appropriate and needed in consultation with the IOM and UNHCR team during the inception phase of the evaluation.
The following key questions will guide the project evaluation:
Evaluation Criteria:
Relevance
Evaluation Questions:
- Did the project’s intended results align with and support the Government of Türkiye’s strategies and priorities related to migration?
- How well was the project aligned with the IOM regional and global strategies and supported them regarding irregular migration and alternatives to administrative detention?
- How effectively did the project respond to the needs and priorities of the stakeholders, including the Government of Türkiye and other identified key groups at the design and implementation stage?
Evaluation Criteria:
Effectiveness
Evaluation Questions:
- How well was the project able to accomplish the results across all levels of the results chain? If not, what was the reason behind the shortfall?
- How did the intervention address the gaps in the capacity of the different stakeholders?
- What were the major internal and external factors influencing the achievement of the project’s expected outcomes? Did existing practices effectively adapt to mitigate the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic and the 2023 Türkiye -Syria earthquake?
- Were there differential results for different people? If so, how and why?
Evaluation Criteria:
Efficiency
Evaluation Questions:
- How well was the project implemented according to the work plan and with appropriate resource allocation?
- What steps have been taken to guarantee the efficient utilization of resources?
- What were the reasons for possible delays in project implementation? What is the assessment of the impact of both internal and external delays on the project, and what measures were taken to address and respond to these delays? Did the project have the necessary coordination mechanisms and communication flow to efficiently convert the allocated resources into the expected outputs?
Evaluation Criteria:
Coherence
Evaluation Questions:
- How did the project seek synergies and complement other related initiatives? Additionally, have there been any other parallel efforts in migration management by IOM, the government, or other national and international actors that this project can be compared to? If so, what is the added value of this project in comparison to those other efforts?
- To what extent were the project design, delivery and results coherent with irregular migration, especially fostering alternatives to administrative detention policies and strategies?
Evaluation Criteria:
Impact
Evaluation Questions:
- To what extent did the project contribute to improving the capacity of the removal centres and fostering alternatives to administrative detention with the existing policies and strategies of the EU?
- To what degree did the project impact positive and negative changes, both intentional and unintentional? Were appropriate steps taken to address unforeseen negative consequences in a timely manner? What are the direct and indirect outcomes of the project, and how do they compare to other factors that contributed to the observed changes?
Evaluation Criteria:
Sustainability
Evaluation Questions:
- How well were the government institutions integrated into the project that are likely to continue functioning after the project ended?
- What were the major sustainability challenges? How could the project increase sustainability through design, implementation, and monitoring?
- Are the benefits generated likely to continue once external support ceases? If so, how?
Evaluation Criteria:
Cross-cutting issues: Human Rights and Gender
Evaluation Questions:
- How well did the project facilitate and ensure the participation of stakeholders during the implementation of the project? (A rights-based approach)
- To what extent did the project ensure respect for the relevant human rights of migrants? (Human rights)
- How was the integration of gender and age mainstreamed into the project’s design and implementation, including a participative and non-discriminatory planning and design process? (Gender)
- Was particular attention paid to the project’s role in advancing gender equality? (Gender)
- For activities involving research reports, manuals, handbooks, or other publications, were gender and age considerations fully integrated, incorporating specific needs, concerns, and implications for men, women, girls, and boys? (Gender)
- How well did the project activities promote gender-balanced and age-balanced participation in terms of members of steering committees, trainers, beneficiaries, and other stakeholders? (Age and Gender)
The evaluator should collect findings and draw conclusions on the above key questions. Recommendations should focus on dealing with identified challenges and gaps. The evaluation should identify good practices or drawbacks in the project implementation, capture lessons learned, and provide recommendations for follow-up and additional activities within available project resources and correctional efforts if needed
Evaluation methodology
The evaluation will use a combination of quantitative and qualitative methodologies to collect data from various sources. This dual-method approach aims to generate reliable evidence for a comprehensive understanding of the project’s outputs, outcomes, and objectives, ensuring cross-validation of the collected data. The evaluation will also comprise a thorough analysis of information from multiple sources, including desk reviews, surveys, focus group discussions, and interviews with PMM as they key beneficiary and the Ministry of Family, Labour and Social Services (MoFLSS), Ministry of Health (MoH), Ministry of National Education (MoNE), Gendarmerie General Command, Bar Associations, NGOs and INGOs, Local public institutions (Human Rights and Equality Institution of Türkiye (HREIT), The Ombudsman Institution of the Republic of Türkiye), and the relevant law enforcement agencies . The data and findings will be disaggregated based on gender, age, nationality, geographic location, and different vulnerabilities. evaluation will provide quantitative and qualitative data through the following methods:
- Desk review of all relevant project documentation, including project proposal, results matrix, work plans, project reports both from IOM and UNHCR, lessons learned reports (per activity and yearly), monitoring reports, national and international policies, and strategies etc. ,
- Focus group discussions, surveys, and in-depth semi-structured interviews will gather primary data from the involved parties. The evaluator will prepare the tools, and the IOM and UNHCR team will approve them before data collection.
The evaluator will execute the work with the support and oversight of the IOM and UNHCR project teams and the IOM MEAL team. For the preparation of the evaluation process, the kick-off meeting will serve to elucidate the respective responsibilities of all stakeholders in the evaluation process, address any outstanding queries, articulate expectations, and establish regular communication channels for a smooth evaluation process. The evaluator is expected to propose alternative approaches and methodologies deemed pertinent to the evaluation.
Ethics, norms, and standards for evaluation
The evaluation will be conducted in line with IOM’s and UNHCR’s Data Protection Principles. IOM abides by the Norms and Standards of UNEG and expects all evaluation stakeholders and the consultant(s) to be familiar with the UNEG Ethical Guidelines for Evaluation and the UNEG Codes of Conduct for Evaluation in the UN System.
Evaluation deliverables
The external evaluator is expected to deliver the following:
- Inception report
The evaluator will prepare and share an inception report that should include an evaluation matrix, evaluation methodology, work plan, focus group discussion guides, survey questionnaires, interview guides, and other data collection instruments for the evaluation. The inception report will demonstrate the evaluator’s understanding of the ToR and suggest methodologies based on a review of the ToR, desk review and initial discussions. The IOM and UNHCR teams will complete and review the analysis plans before the data collection phase. IOM will provide the template for an Inception Report and an Evaluation Matrix for reference, and the quality of the report will be assessed using the quality control tool for inception reports, a tool that will be provided by IOM.
The inception report should include all the data collection tools to be used, the data collection schedule, and all areas of the assignment for which the evaluator requires support from the IOM and UNHCR teams.
- Presentation of the initial findings
The evaluator is expected to present the initial findings and lessons learned to the stakeholders to address any misinterpretation of the data, identify gaps, and provide feedback.
- A draft evaluation report
The evaluator will present the draft report for IOM and UNHCR to review, including the debrief and feedback provided.
- Final evaluation report
The evaluator will submit a final evaluation report using the template provided by IOM. The evaluator will make factual corrections to the report on the comments and feedback received on the draft version.
- Evaluation Brief
The evaluator will prepare a two-page evaluation brief using the IOM template and submit it for review. It will be finalized together with the final report.
- Lessons learned report
The evaluator will prepare the lessons learned report that includes the lessons learned, recommendations and best practices and submit it for review. It will be finalized together with the final report.
- Management response matrix
The evaluator will draft a management response matrix using the IOM template and submit it for completion and follow-up.
- The final presentation of the evaluation report
Upon completion of the report, the evaluator will present the findings through an online meeting for IOM and UNHCR staff, donors, beneficiary institutions, and other key stakeholders. The participation of the stakeholders will be identified and agreed upon as per availability.
- Submit a designed final evaluation report
The evaluator will submit the designed final evaluation report using the IOM Brand Style Guide, IOM Publications Layout Manual and donor (European Union) visibility requirements.
All deliverables are to be written in English and meet professional language standards per the IOM House Style Manual. The reports will be evaluated per the UNEG quality checklist and the IOM quality control tool for evaluation reports (will be provided). IOM will retain the right to withhold payment to the evaluator if deliverables are deemed not up to reasonably expected standards.
Upon completing the final evaluation report, the evaluator will design the report in alignment with the guidelines mentioned above.
Specifications of roles
The role of the IOM and UNHCR project team, evaluator, and stakeholders are identified below:
The Evaluator:
- Carry out the evaluation as per the ToR.
- Implement the data collection, analysis, and reporting activities of the final evaluation.
- Conduct bilateral meetings with the IOM and UNHCR teams to provide regular updates, share challenges, and flag any challenges or emerging issues.
- Prepare and deliver the inception report, final report, two-page evaluation brief, the visual presentation of the evaluation of the findings and recommendations and a draft management follow-up response matrix.
The evaluation manager will be the National Programme Officer (IBG), who will coordinate and liaise closely with the following colleagues and units within IOM and UNHCR in close coordination with the IOM Türkiye MEAL Unit.
The MEAL Unit of IOM:
- Initiate a kick-off meeting with the evaluator and agree on a work plan with the evaluator.
- Provide the evaluator with general information and documents related to the project.
- Review the deliverables submitted by the evaluator.
- Coordinate the review of the evaluation deliverables with relevant persons, IOM staff, and other key stakeholders.
- Review and ensure factual corrections are incorporated and accepted in the final report.
- Facilitate the finalization of the management response matrix.
The Project teams of IOM and UNHCR:
- Provide the evaluator with general information, project documents, donor reports and budget information related to the project.
- Review the deliverables submitted by the evaluator.
- Assist in scheduling in-person and virtual meetings and send meeting request correspondence to identified key stakeholders.
- Provide support in logistical and travel arrangements as required.
- Coordinate with relevant stakeholders, including government counterparts.
The Government stakeholders/beneficiaries:
- Coordinate with IOM and UNHCR to schedule meetings.
- Review the deliverables submitted by the evaluator.
- Prepare feedback and response for evaluation questions (PMM).
Schedule
The final evaluation will take 35 days, including preparation, data collection, analysis, and reporting (47 days total, including IOM-UNHCR review). The assignment is expected to commence in January 2024.
Activity: Kick-off meeting, exchange of relevant project documents.
Responsible party: IOM and UNHCR team*
Number of days: One day
Timing: Week 1
Activity: Review documents and prepare a detailed inception report, including the evaluation matrix, the data collection tools and propose a field visit plan
Responsible party: Evaluator
Number of days: Six days
Timing: Week 1
Activity: Review the inception report and all the deliverables
Responsible party: IOM and UNHCR team
Number of days: Three days
Timing:Week 2
Activity: Submission of the inception report and the data collection plan
Responsible party: Evaluator
Number of days: Two days
Timing: Week 2
Activity: Planning and facilitation of the data collection activities, including pre-testing, logistical arrangements , and schedule.
Responsible party: Evaluator, in coordination with the IOM and UNHCR Team
Number of days: One day
Timing: Week 2
Activity: Data collection, including travel time (if applicable)
Responsible party: Evaluator, in coordination with the IOM and UNHCR Team
Number of days: Four days
Timing: Weeks 2 and 3
Activity: Data collection, including travel time (if applicable).
Responsible party: Evaluator
Number of days: Five
Timing: Weeks 3 and 4
Activity: Deliver a PowerPoint presentation to the IOM and UNHCR teams
Responsible party: Evaluator
Number of days: One day
Timing: Week 4
Activity: Submission of the draft final evaluation report and draft lessons learned report
Responsible party: Evaluator
Number of days: Six days
Timing: Week4 and 5
Activity: Review the report and provide factual corrections
Responsible party: IOM, UNHCR and stakeholders
Number of days: Five days
Timing: Week 5
Activity: Revision of the final evaluation and lesson-learned report, along with evaluation brief and draft management response matrix
Responsible party: Evaluator
Number of days: Eight days
Timing: Week 5 and 6
Activity: Review of the evaluation brief and draft management response matrix
Responsible party: IOM and UNHCR team
Number of days: Three days
Timing: Week 7
Activity: The final evaluation presentation
Responsible party: Evaluator
Number of days: One day
Timing: Week 7
Activity: Submission of the designed final report and the lessons learned report
Responsible party: Evaluator
Number of days: One day
Timing: Week 7
*****The dates mentioned pertain to IOM, UNHCR and stakeholders and are not factored into the total days allocated for the evaluator. However, it encompasses the overall duration required for the evaluation to conclude.
Evaluation budget
The external evaluator will cover all expenses for this external evaluation, including travel expenses, accommodation, translation, data collection and report design fees. A detailed work plan will be prepared and agreed on between the evaluator, the IOM, and the UNHCR team.
Payment Plan
Deliverable: Submission of the inception report
Percentage of the Payment: 15%
Deliverable: Submission of the first draft of the report
Percentage of the Payment: 30%
Deliverable: Submission of the final reports, including the brief and management response matrix
Percentage of the Payment: 40%
Submission of the designed reports: 15%
Total: %100
Duration of the Contract
The overall evaluation process is expected to take 35 days, including preparation, data collection, analysis, and reporting. The evaluator should be able to undertake the tasks concurrently to fit within the planned timeframe without compromising the quality expected. The assignment is expected to be between January 2024 and February 2024.
Required Qualifications:
IOM Türkiye is seeking an independent, multidisciplinary external evaluator. The evaluator may be based in any country but should be willing to travel to Türkiye to conduct the evaluation. The candidate should have experience conducting similar types of evaluation.
Experience:
- The evaluator should have at least ten years of experience in conducting project evaluations.
- Sound experience with both quantitative and qualitative research methods and analytical tools.
- The candidate should have a Master’s degree or equivalent in evaluation, law, social sciences, public policy, development studies, or related fields.
- Demonstrated sound understanding of thematic migration topics, e.g., migration governance, labor migration, trafficking in persons, crisis management, border management, etc.
- Experience in conducting evaluations on IOM Immigration and Border Governance (IBG) projects is an advantage.
- Excellent analytical, oral, and written communication skills in English.
- Experience collecting qualitative and quantitative data under challenging circumstances and using inclusive and participatory approaches.
- Ability to create graphic visuals on key findings.
- Experience in technical and analytical report writing.
- Experience in working in complex institutional environments.
- Displays cultural, gender, religion, race, nationality, and age sensitivity and adaptability.
Ability to work with minimal supervision and to meet deadlines
Languages:
- Fluency in English is required.
Required Competencies
The incumbent is expected to demonstrate the following values and competencies:
Values
- Inclusion and respect for diversity: respects and promotes individual and cultural differences; encourages diversity and inclusion wherever possible.
- Integrity and transparency: maintains high ethical standards and acts in a manner consistent with organizational principles/rules and standards of conduct.
- Professionalism: demonstrates ability to work in a composed, competent and committed manner and exercises careful judgment in meeting day-to-day challenges.
Core Competencies – behavioural indicators level 2
- Teamwork: develops and promotes effective collaboration within and across units to achieve shared goals and optimize results.
- Delivering results: produces and delivers quality results in a service-oriented and timely manner; is action oriented and committed to achieving agreed outcomes.
- Managing and sharing knowledge: continuously seeks to learn, share knowledge and innovate.
- Accountability: takes ownership for achieving the Organization’s priorities and assumes responsibility for own action and delegated work.
- Communication: encourages and contributes to clear and open communication; explains complex matters in an informative, inspiring and motivational way.
Other:
The consultant must adhere to the International Organization for Migration (IOM) Data Protection Principles (IN/138) and maintain confidentiality.
The consultant will be responsible for following IOM writing guidelines and latest glossaries in all given assignments for accurate translation.
Any offer made to the candidate in relation to this vacancy notice is subject to funding confirmation.
Appointment will be subject to certification that the candidate is medically fit for appointment, accreditation, any residency or visa requirements, and security clearances.
How to apply
The interested candidate must submit the following documents:
- Technical proposal – outlining proposed evaluation methodology, including data collection plans and analysis techniques, quality control measures, and timelines.
- Financial proposal – all-inclusive budget for the evaluation, including expert fees and all other expenses to be incurred, with a breakdown of costs.
- CV of the candidate.
- References – names and contacts of three referees.
Candidate should submit their application via email to [email protected] with the subject line “Final External Evaluation – Removal Centres’ Capacities and Alternatives to Detention” no later than 1 January 2024.
Any questions regarding the call for application should be sent to [email protected]
Please note that late submissions will not be entertained.