Localisation evaluation of Action Against Hunger’s response for the DEC Ukraine Humanitarian Appeal

TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR:

Localisation evaluation of Action Against Hunger’s response for the DEC Ukraine Humanitarian Appeal

Summary table

Remote – with some field visits to Ukraine, Romania, Moldova and Poland.

Dates

Phase 1: March to August 2022
Phase 2a: September 2022 to August 2023
Phase 2b: September 2023 to 2024 (exact month TBC)

Type of contract

Temporary contract for a team of evaluation consultants

Overall objective of evaluation

• Evaluate Action Against Hunger’s DEC-funded response to the Ukraine crisis using the cross-cutting theme of localisation.
• Determine the strengths and weaknesses of local partnerships delivering humanitarian assistance in Moldova, Poland, Romania and Ukraine.
• Assess the extent that localisation enhanced the ability of Action Against Hunger to apply the Core Humanitarian Standard.

1. BACKGROUND AND RATIONALE

Established in 1979, Action Against Hunger is a non-governmental organisation that aims to provide solutions to hunger. Our mission is to save lives by eliminating hunger through the prevention, detection and treatment of under-nutrition, particularly during and after emergency situations linked to conflicts or natural disasters. We focus on nutrition, health and healthcare practices; food security and livelihoods; water, sanitation and hygiene and advocacy. In 2022, Action Against Hunger worked across 55 countries.

The Disasters Emergency Committee (DEC) brings together fifteen of the UK’s leading aid charities to raise funds in response to major international humanitarian crises. Each are experts in humanitarian aid and specialise in different areas of disaster response. They come together to fundraise quickly and efficiently at times of crisis overseas and speak in one voice and make fundraising more efficient once an appeal is launched.

Action Against Hunger became a member of the Disasters Emergency Committee (DEC) in 2018. As a DEC member organisation, the AAH Network has supported the DEC Ukraine Humanitarian Appeal.

A DEC-funded response has been delivered by Action Against Hunger in Moldova, Poland, Romania and Ukraine. Activities began in March 2022 and will come to an end in 2024.

The DEC has funded Action Against Hunger to deliver a response to the Ukraine crisis, focussed on cash-based interventions, mental health and psychosocial support as well as the distribution of food items and hygiene kits. Refugees, IDPs and host communities have been targeted by the intervention.

The rationale for conducting this evaluation is to strengthen the ability of Action Against Hunger to deliver localised humanitarian responses in the future. This is an increasingly important consideration for the Network. Action Against Hunger is committed to shifting the power to local and national civil society, as well as putting people and communities at the centre of programming. This evaluation will collect evidence and make recommendations about how this objective can be achieved.

Action Against Hunger’s Local Partnership Policy defines what the Network understands by localisation and local partnerships. This document also sets out a commitment to partnering with local/national (L/N) actors wherever possible, to acknowledging, respecting and strengthening the capacity, leadership and systems at a L/N level while learning from L/N actors and to ensuring our work always adds value and complements that of L/N actors. (This policy document was not in place for the whole of the response, as a result it will be used as a theoretical framework in a formative evaluation to identify learning areas.

The evaluation should also build upon and respond to Options for supporting and strengthening local humanitarian action in Ukraine: a scoping exercise report, published by the DEC in November 2022. This document identified the following four key priorities for promoting localisation within the context of the Ukraine response:

• Funding and financial management,
• Capacity strengthening and organisational development,
• Equitable partnerships, and,
• Coordination and collaboration.

1. OBJECTIVES AND FOCUS OF THE EVALUATION

The first objective of this consultancy is to determine the strengths and weaknesses of Action Against Hunger’s partnerships with L/N actors formed in response to DEC Ukraine Humanitarian Appeal funding. The focus of this evaluation will be partnerships with L/N actors that have no previous humanitarian experience. Across the four countries, the Network has developed formal and sustained partnerships with a wide variety of local organisations (including local non-governmental organisations, national government ministries, local government and community-based organisations). One focus of the evaluation will be to draw lessons learned from the successes and challenges of working in partnership in Ukraine and neighbouring countries to integrate into Network-wide learning

The second objective of this evaluation is to assess the extent that localisation has enabled Action Against Hunger to apply the Core Humanitarian Standard (CHS) within the Ukraine response. The CHS is the benchmark used by both the DEC and Action Against Hunger to define what quality and accountability mean in the context of humanitarian action. It will therefore be the standard by which the evaluation team assesses the intervention. Each of the nine CHS commitments will be used as criteria to structure the evaluation findings. Questions using the CHS are proposed in Table 1 below. (These questions are preliminary and the appointed evaluation team are welcome to make additions or modifications.)

Table 1: Proposed evaluation questions structured using the Core Humanitarian Standard (CHS)

CHS Commitment number

CHS Commitment

CHS key action

Proposed evaluation question

1

Communities and people affected by crisis receive assistance appropriate to their needs

1.2

To what extent did local partnerships enable the design and implementation of appropriate programmes based on an objective assessment of needs and risks, and an understanding of the vulnerabilities and capacities of different groups?

2

Communities and people affected by crisis have access to the humanitarian assistance they need at the right time.

2.2

Did local partnerships lead to the planning and implementation of programmes in a timely manner, making decisions and acting without delay? If yes, how was this achieved? If no, why were there delays?

3

Communities and people affected by crisis are not negatively affected and are more prepared, resilient and less at-risk as a result of humanitarian action

3.3

To what extent did the response facilitate the development of local leadership and organisations in their capacity as first-responders in the event of future crises?

3.4

Did Action Against Hunger and local partners plan a joint transition or exit strategy in the early stages of the humanitarian programme that ensures longer-term positive effects and reduces the risk of dependency?

4

Communities and people affected by crisis know their rights and entitlements, have access to information and participate in decisions that affect them

4.2

To what extent did local partnerships enable communication in languages, formats and media that are easily understood, respectful and culturally appropriate for different members of the community, especially vulnerable and marginalised groups?

4.4Did localisation encourage and facilitate communities and people affected by crisis to provide feedback on their level of satisfaction with the quality and effectiveness of the assistance received, paying particular attention to the gender, age and diversity of those giving feedback? If yes, how did this happen? If no, why not?

5

Communities and people affected by crisis have access to safe and responsive mechanisms to handle complaints

5.3

Did local partnerships manage complaints in a timely, fair and appropriate manner that prioritises the safety of the complainant and those affected at all stages?

6

Communities and people affected by crisis receive coordinated, complementary assistance.

6.2

Did Action Against Hunger complement activities of national and local authorities? If yes, how was this complementarity achieved? If no, why not?

Did Action Against Hunger empower L/N to represent themselves in relevant clusters and working groups?

6.4

Did Action Against Hunger share necessary information with local partners, local coordination groups and other local relevant actors through appropriate communication channels?

To what extent was there clear communication between Action Against Hunger and L/N actors?

7

Communities and people affected by crisis can expect delivery of improved assistance as organisations learn from experience and reflection

7.3

To what extent did Action Against Hunger and local partners share learning and innovation with each other?

8

Communities and people affected by crisis receive the assistance they require from competent and well-managed staff and volunteers

8.3

To what extent did Action Against Hunger enable local partners to develop and use the necessary personal, technical and management competencies to fulfil their role?

Did Action Against Hunger’s approach to supporting L/N partner indirect costs enable the development of local institutional capacity?

9

Communities and people affected by crisis can expect that the organisations assisting them are managing resources effectively, efficiently and ethically

9.1

Did localisation lead to the design of programmes and implementation of processes to ensure the efficient use of resources, balancing quality, cost and timeliness at each phase of the response?

1. DEFINITIONS

Action Against Hunger defines a local partnership as:

A relationship between Action Against Hunger and one or more local and/or national actors that work together to achieve a defined and shared goal, which contributes to the L/N actor’s work. This relationship may be short-term and operational, or long-term and strategic. Such a relationship is based on shared interest and complementarity, is constructive and dynamic in nature, and mutually beneficial – for our partners, for Action Against Hunger and, most importantly, for the people and communities we serve. (Action Against Hunger, ‘Localisation Partnership Strategy’, pp.5).

Local and national actors are defined as those who are:

• present in locations before, during and after a crisis,
• accountable to national/local laws as well as social and cultural norms,
• accountable to communities and the government where they work, and,
• led by local nationals where they work, and not internationally affiliated in terms of branding, governance, or financing (that results from that affiliation). (Ibid.)

1. EVALUATION PROCESS AND METHODOLOGY

Evaluation approach

Interested candidates should submit a technical proposal that incorporates the following methodological considerations:

• We are open to a range of methodologies, provided brief justification is given in the proposal.
• We anticipate findings will be based on the triangulation of evidence.
• The evaluation will use a participatory methodology. This is defined as L/N actors being empowered to shape the evaluation, findings and recommendations from inception phase to report writing.
• A multi-country perspective should be adopted, and findings should be relevant to the response as a whole.

Data collection techniques and sampling

The three data collection groups for this assessment are representatives of local/national (L/N) actors, Action Against Hunger stakeholders and communities and people affected by crisis. Primary data must be collected from all four locations considered by the evaluation (Moldova, Poland, Romania and Ukraine). The evaluators should therefore budget and plan for in-country and face-to-face data collection. It is expected that the evaluation team will rely on purposive sampling techniques. A quantitative survey using probability sampling is not a requirement of this evaluation.

As a minimum, the following methods should be used by the evaluation team:

• A document review,
• Key informant interviews with L/N actors,
• Key informant interviews with Action Against Hunger team members across the Network,
• Qualitative techniques (for example, focus group discussions) to collect data in collaboration with communities and people affected by crisis, and,
• At least three case studies featuring detailed information about local partnerships formed by Action Against Hunger during the Ukraine response that have a wider applicability in terms of recommendations and lessons learnt for the rest of the Network.

Data analysis

A systematic and rigorous plan for analysing qualitative data should be adopted by the evaluation team (for example, thematic analysis).

1. TIMEFRAME AND DELIVERABLES

The diagram below (Figure 1) suggests an indicative and preliminary workplan for this project. Note that this workplan is subject to change. All changes would be communicated by us in advance and further details can be drawn out during inception phase. The evaluation team are required to abide by DEC Evaluation Guidance. This document specifies that the final report should be submitted no longer than one month after programme activities finish. Data collection in each country should begin while programme activities are on-going and no later than one month before the end of the intervention.

Figure 1: Preliminary evaluation workplan

There are three deliverables for the assignment: a) an inception report, b) an evaluation report, and c)) a findings and recommendations workshop to include both Action Against Hunger and L/N representatives. The structure of the evaluation report should include as a minimum:

• List of abbreviations/acronyms/tables/figures,
• Executive summary,
• Background and context of the Ukraine crisis,
• Evaluation purpose, objectives, scope,
• Methodology (data collection methods, sampling strategies, limitations and challenges),
• Findings,
• Case studies,
• Lessons learned,
• Conclusions, and,
• Recommendations.

1. SAFEGUARDING AND ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS

The evaluation team will be expected to follow the Action Against Hunger International Code of Conduct, the Action Against Hunger UK Anti-Bribery Policy, the Action Against Hunger UK Child Protection Policy and the Action Against Hunger UK Modern Slavery Policy.

1. PROFILE

Action Against Hunger welcomes proposals from consultants who can demonstrate that, as a team, they meet the following criteria:

• A team leader with at least eight to ten years’ experience delivering evaluations of humanitarian interventions – Essential,
• All other team members should have at least five year’s evaluation experience related to the humanitarian sector – Essential,
• An understanding of localisation/shifting the power/the Grand Bargain – Essential,
• Experience working successful with L/N humanitarian actors – Essential,
• Qualitative research skills – Essential,
• Experience of delivering participatory evaluations – Essential,
• Knowledge of cash-based interventions – Essential,
• Knowledge of mental health and psychosocial support – Essential,
• Working knowledge of Ukrainian and Russian – Desirable,
• Experience of conducting evaluations in the context of the Ukraine crisis – Desirable, and,
• Relevant national languages (Romanian and Polish) – Desirable.

How to apply

APPLICATION DETAILS

Please send a technical proposal, a financial proposal, three writing samples of relevant evaluations and details of two references to [email protected].

The deadline for receipt of applications is Friday 8th December. The budget ceiling for this assignment is £55k inclusive of VAT.