Project Final Evaluation Consultancy

Adventist Development and Relief Agency International

Restoring Access to WASH and Food Security in Blue Nile State (RAWA), Sudan

Scope of Work (SOW) for Final Project Evaluation

  1. Purpose of the document

The purpose of this document is to present the scope of work (SOW) and intent of soliciting to undertake the final project evaluation of Restoring Access to WASH and Food Security in Blue Nile State (RAWA), Sudan, for a team of external evaluators or consulting firm. There are a total of seven sectors under the RAWA activity, funded by BHA, namely Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene (WASH), Agriculture, Economic Recovery and Market System (ERMS), Multipurpose Cash Assistance (MPCA), Health, Nutrition and Protection and different interventions are spread over these broader sectors.

A team of evaluators or consulting firm(s) are invited to submit an expression of interest to carry out the final project evaluation as per the scope of work stipulated below.

2. Background of the Context and Project

2.1Summary

Project Title

Restoring Access to WASH and Food Security in Blue Nile State (RAWA)

Implementer

ADRA Sudan, sub: Medair and country partner: SUDO

Award Number:

# 720BHA21GR00209

Budget

1.165 m. (Sept 2021 – Aug 2022), 1.865 m. (Sept 2022 – Aug 2023) and 6 m. (Sept 2023 – Aug 2024) = 9.03 million

Period of Performance

August 2021 – August 2024

Active Geographic Region

  • WASH: Blue Nile Region (BNR): Kurmuk and Bau localities; White Nile State; Kosti and Rabak Localities
  • Agriculture: BNR: Kurmuk and Bau localities
  • ERMS: BNR: Kurmuk, Damazine and Bau
  • MPCA: BNR; Damazine and Rosairies provinces; White Nile State; Kosti and Rabak Localities
  • Protection: BNR; Damazine and Rosairies provinces; White Nile State; Kosti and Rabak Localities
  • Health: Blue Nile State: Bau Locality; Bubok, Gabanet, and Al Shaheed
  • Nutrition: BNS: Kurmuk and Bau Localities

Timeframe of evaluation

May – June 2024

Language of report

English

Language(s) of the project area

Arabic, Phalata, Hamaj and Barta

In-country contact person

Program Director (ADRA Sudan) for the WASH, ERMS, Agriculture, MPCA, and Protection Sectors

Project Coordinator, Medair for the Health and Nutrition Sectors

2.2 Background of the Context

About 15.8 million people, one-third of the population in Sudan, will need humanitarian assistance in 2023, as per Humanitarian Needs Overview, which is a 1.5 million increase (21%) compared to 2022 and is the highest since 2011. Of the 15.8 million people in need, about 11 million need emergency assistance for life-threatening needs related to critical physical and mental well-being[1]. The situation in Sudan has significantly worsened since the fighting between the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) started on April 15, 2023. After nearly six months of war between the SAF and RSF, an estimated 5.6 million people have been displaced within and outside Sudan, with up to 9,000 people reportedly killed and 25 million people in need of aid. Sudan has become the largest internal displacement crisis in the world, with over 7.1 million people displaced within the country. Before the outbreak of war, Sudan was already a complex, chronic emergency with ethnic violence, high levels of displacement, and chronic poverty, with a lack of access to healthcare, clean water, nutritious foods, appropriate shelter, and education. Additionally, global warming is exacerbating environmental issues. Along with the bureaucratic and access impediments (BAI), these issues add to the complexity of the response.

The humanitarian situation in Blue Nile State (BNS) remains dire, nearly a decade since the outbreak of violence in that region of Sudan. BNS has suffered from civil wars and recent flare-ups between the two factions within the SPLA. Lack of life-saving necessities and a combination of essential protection services have risked lives and left people with little to no dignity. Within BNS, more than 64 per cent of the population remains in need of humanitarian assistance, including over 30,000 internally displaced persons (IDPs).[2] A UNHCR report revealed that across both the refugee/returnee population and the host communities, host communities’ residents in BNS were found to experience the greatest health vulnerability. According to OCHA’s MSNA 2021, more than 60 per cent of households in BNS reported health as among the top three priority needs. Access to WASH in primary health centres is also limited.

The protracted crisis, continuous displacement, and conflict in neighbouring Ethiopia have limited already-scarce resources and infrastructure. Communities are more vulnerable and exposed to protection risks, such as 50 per cent of girls in BNS are married before the age of 18.[3] In mid-July 2022, inter-communal violence erupted between Hausa, Berta, Hamaj, and other ethnic groups in the northern part of BNS. These clashes left hundreds of people dead and caused thousands to flee to the state’s capital, Damazine, and safe parts of Ar Rusayris. Since then, inter-communal violence has flared up a few times, resulting in at least 127,000 people displaced within and outside BNS into neighboring states. In early 2023, there was a substantial increase of returnees into the Bau locality due to the spontaneous return of tens of thousands of refugees from South Sudan and Ethiopia, including Bubok, Gabanet, and Al Shaheed. Most of these returnees have not arrived in time for the planting season and hence face an increased food insecurity vulnerability and increased risk of malnutrition, especially among children under five and PLW. More influx of returnees and IDPs in the area means higher demand for health care services, particularly for women, girls, and children, as well as Persons with Disabilities (PWD).

2.3 Introduction of the Project

The RAWA project officially started on September 1, 2021, for 12 months, targeting households in Blue Nile State focusing on WASH, Agriculture, and ERMS sectors. After the initial 12 months of project implementation by ADRA, the project was extended for another 12 months until August 2023, and two new sectors, Health, and Nutrition, were added to the cost modification phase. ADRA partnered with Medair for two new sectors. Again, RAWA was extended as a cost modification up to August 2024, and two new sectors, Multipurpose Cash Assistance (MPCA) and Protection, were added in the third year of the project extension. So, ADRA, in partnership with local NGO “SUDO,” is implementing activities under the Water, Sanitation, Hygiene (WASH), Agriculture, Economic Recovery and Market System (ERMS), Multipurpose Cash Assistance (MPCA), and Protection Sector sectors. Medair is implementing interventions in the Health and Nutrition sectors.

The RAWA’s interventions are strategically planned to assist vulnerable communities facing food insecurity and water scarcity. This includes internally displaced persons (IDPs) and areas that have long been deprived of humanitarian aid due to ongoing conflicts. The objective is to address critical life-saving needs in water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH), food security and livelihoods (FSL), health, nutrition, and protection. By taking a comprehensive approach, households will gain access, knowledge, and tools to enhance food security, reduce water-related diseases, and improve health and nutrition situations, as well as increase access to institutional protection mechanisms. Refer to Annex II for the project’s Theory of Change.

In Kurmuk and Bau, ADRA employs a community-based strategy to impact 22,254 people. This involves providing access to clean water, promoting hygiene practices through trained community health promoters, distributing WASH non-food items, and offering agricultural training with improved seeds and tools. The selection of improved seed varieties aligns with the recommendations of the Ministry of Agriculture, focusing on high yield, early maturity, and better grain quality to meet market preferences. The interventions target 13 villages across Kurmk (5 villages) and Bau (8 villages), namely Gabanet, Fadamia, Jaigo, Taga, Bau, Kurkur, Magba, Kumreg, Abaigo, Alkali, Deglog, Gambarda, and Dokan. These interventions are coordinated with the WASH sector to address pressing needs, food insecurity, and lack of resources in these areas. Given the prolonged inaccessibility by humanitarian actors due to conflict, this multifaceted approach presents an opportunity for significant improvements in health and quality of life. In the WASH domain, the project strategically focuses on rehabilitating and upgrading the Gabenet wateryard in Bau Province. Simultaneously, 18 hand pumps in AL Kurmuk and Bau provinces undergo rehabilitation. Water User Committees receive training and spare parts to ensure sustained functionality.

In response to IDPs in Khartoum, the project aimed to rehabilitate 32 hand pumps in Damazine and Al Rosairs and provide hygiene kits to 1,300 households. Hygiene kit distribution, including bath soap, laundry soap, and water jerry cans, is crucial for 3,000 households in the AL-Kurmuk and Bau provinces. Additionally, the manufacturing and distribution of handwashing stations in six health centres contribute to community health. The innovative use of Blue Nile Community Radio to broadcast health awareness messages throughout the project duration demonstrates a commitment to continuous and widespread impact on health practices. In Food Security and Livelihoods (FSL), the project focuses on training 250 lead farmers in farmer field schools. This strategic move empowers these individuals to disseminate the best agricultural practices, benefiting 2,500 farmers. The distribution of hand tools and improved seeds to 1,000 households provides tangible resources critical to improved farm yields. The Blue Nile Community Radio serves as a channel for agricultural awareness, reinforcing the on-the-ground training. In Economic Recovery and Market Systems (ERMS), the project selects, trains, and provides funding to 50 beneficiaries through small business grants. This contributes to individual economic empowerment and community economic resilience.

Originally, In Al Gazira state, the project aims to provide WASH, protection, and Multi-Purpose cash assistance to 46,200 IDPs and conflict-affected/host community members in three localities: Madani Alkubra, Alhasaheesa, and Um Algura. ADRA planned to rehabilitate latrines in 10 locations, including Abdullah Inb Alzubair School, Madani High Secondary School, Hillat Hassan Secondary School, Al Safa Girl Primary School, Rufaida Bint Hakeem School, Arkaweet Commercial School – Madani, Khadeega Bint Khwailid School, Altarbia Al-Hasaheesa, Alshaheed Mohammad Esmael Hassan Student Guesthouse, and Alhomaira School Guesthouse. Additionally, WASH activities involve supplying and installing six water tanks at selected locations, including Almadrasa Alsinaia, installing two solar systems in two boreholes in Madani and supplying six electrical pumps.

After the conflict erupted in Al Gazira, the activities mentioned above were moved to the Blue Nile Region and White Nile State. For BNR, the project aims to target IDPs and host community members for MPCA in Damazine and Rosairies provinces. The protection sector has also been moved to the same target provinces in BNR. In White Nile, the project targets three sectors: MPCA to cover IDPs and host community members; protection; and WASH, as it is planned to rehabilitate latrines in the IDP gathering points and install two solar systems in two boreholes. The mentioned activities for White Nile are targeted at Kosti and Rabak localities.

RAWA focuses on training and strengthening 20 Community-Based Protection Networks (CBPNs) to address protection issues. These committees will be equipped with child protection toolkits to prevent and mitigate violence against children, including IDPs. In addition to the training, CBPNs will receive training kits to facilitate cascading training to the communities. The training will cover identifying risk cases, their management, and referral. ADRA staff will select Individual Protection Assistance (IPA) beneficiaries based on specific recommendations provided by CBPN. The beneficiaries may include unaccompanied or separated children, women at risk, single parents, survivors of SGBV (sexual and gender-based violence), individuals with severe medical conditions, older persons at risk, children at risk, persons living with disabilities, and more.

The interventions related to Health and Nutrition are focused on three locations in the Bau locality: Gabanet, Bubok, and Al Shaheed. Medair provides basic emergency health and nutrition services, community-based primary health care treatment for the three common childhood diseases (malaria, diarrhoea, and pneumonia) for children under five, and mental health and psychosocial support (MHPSS) services.

Since the fighting started on April 15, 2023, there have been no significant security incidents in BNS impacting the NGO community. Medair maintained operations and provided health and nutrition services in all three health facilities. Several INGOs, including ADRA and Medair, evacuated their international staff, but some international staff of UN agencies and INGOs, such as OCHA, ADRA, MSF, and ACTED, have returned to BNS. There is no RSF in BNS at present, and the security situation remains relatively calm; however, the situation is unpredictable and can change quickly. During the rainy season, which starts between May and July, access to project sites such as Bubok and Gabanet is difficult as road conditions to these locations are poor, and travel is made even more difficult by the rain, which causes many parts of the road to be muddy and sometimes passable only using tractors.

3. Purpose of Evaluation

The purpose of the final evaluation is two-fold: i) to assess the project’s efficiency, relevance, and potential impact (changes) on households concerning sectoral activities, specifically on goals, purposes, results, and targets, and ii) to identify the best practices and document lessons learned during the project implementation.

Specific objectives of the evaluation are:

  1. Evaluate the project’s relevancy, efficiency, coherence, and coverage of its interventions across all sectors (WASH, Agriculture, ERMS, Health, Nutrition, MPCA and Protection).

  2. Assess to what extent the project’s purposes and goals at all result levels have been achieved and compare the indicators level results with baseline values.

  3. Identify the good practices and lessons learned from the project and provide recommendations for future programming in similar or emergency contexts.

    4. Type of Evaluation and Design:

The evaluation will be a summative performance evaluation. The design of the evaluation will be a mixed evaluation method using a combination of quantitative and qualitative approaches.

5. Evaluation Questions:

The final evaluation seeks to find answers to the following key evaluation questions that are directly linked to the purpose of the evaluation. Also, these evaluation questions will guide the evaluation design, methodology, tools, and techniques.

  1. To what extent was the project’s design suitable for meeting the needs of beneficiaries and key stakeholders in WASH, Agriculture, ERMS, Health, Nutrition, and Protection sectors? To what extent did the project design meet target groups’ and beneficiaries’ needs?
  2. What expected, unexpected, direct, and indirect results were produced by the project activities to improve the food security and livelihood, health and nutrition, and protection of the target population? To what extent did the program achieve its intended changes?
  3. What are the good practices initiated by RAWA in WASH, food security and livelihood, health, nutrition, and protection fields in the project areas, and what lessons were learned from those initiatives?

We anticipate specific lines of inquiry in line with the above evaluation questions and under different sectors from the applicants as a part of the technical proposal. The lines of inquiry, tools, and methodology will be mutually agreed upon between the evaluation team and ADRA before the actual evaluation is carried out.

6. Evaluation Methodology:

6.1 Evaluation Methods

The final project evaluation should include a mixed method and use both qualitative and quantitative tools and techniques to evaluate the project as per the purpose and objectives stated above. In addition, the evaluation design should involve participatory methods to gather an in-depth understanding of the project results in a transparent manner.

6.2 Sampling framework and Sampling:

The sampling frame for WASH, Agriculture, ERMS, MPCA, and Protection Sector will be the project participants who benefitted from the RAWA interventions in the localities stated above in the Summary Section. The sampling should consider a method that will allow representation of different localities. Two-stage cluster sampling is recommended. However, the evaluation team can suggest other appropriate sampling techniques.

The list of participants who benefitted from these interventions will be made available for sampling purposes. The list of all registered beneficiary households at the department, municipality, and village levels will be helpful to identify all clusters. In the first stage, the probability proportional to size (PPS) approach can be applied to ensure that clusters with more households have a higher probability of selection. In the second stage, an equal number of sample units can be selected from each cluster. Then finally, the households within selected clusters can be randomly selected for the household survey.

For the Health and Nutrition sector, population-based surveys will be used, assuming that most beneficiaries or beneficiary households have experienced changes in the indicator(s) in question; the population living in the areas where RAWA has been implemented its interventions will be included in the sampling frame. Two-stage cluster sampling is suggested for the sampling where the villages in all the locations where RAWA is implemented will be treated as clusters. The first stage will involve selecting clusters using probability proportional to size (PPS); the PPS method ensures villages with more households have a greater chance of being selected compared to villages with fewer households, thus giving each household an equal likelihood of being selected at the second stage. The second stage will involve randomly selecting households from the sampled clusters, where interviews will be conducted in line with a set respondent criterion. Selecting more sampling clusters and collecting data from smaller samples from each cluster is recommended to minimize intra-cluster correlation.

The direct beneficiaries, government office staff, political leaders, health workers, community leaders, local partners, and project staff will be the key informants and sources of qualitative data for FGD or KII. The participants for qualitative data can be selected purposively, based on the need and rationale.

6.3 Sample Size

At a 95% confidence level, with a 5% margin of error, a design adjustment of 2 for cluster sampling, and an adjustment of 10% for the non-response rate, a sample size of 396 was used for the baseline of WASH, Agriculture, and ERMS sector-related indicators. The sample size calculation formula taken from the feed in the future guide is given below for reference.

initial = The initial sample size required by the surveys for each of the two-time points (i.e., for both the baseline and end-line);\

  • Dest = Design effect of 2. The estimated design effect (DEFF) of the survey, which represents the ratio of the statistical variance (square of the SE) under the current multi-stage cluster sampling design to the statistical variance under a design using simple random sampling (SRS).
  • δ = the minimum meaningful effect size to be achieved over the time frame specified by the two surveys; note that 𝛿 ≠ 0 to compute formula (1).
  • P1, est = survey estimate of the minimum meaningful effect size to be achieved over the time frame specified by the two surveys; note that 𝛿 ≠ 0 to compute formula (1). the true (but unknown) population proportion (P1 at baseline). A value can be obtained from a recent survey that collects data on the same indicator, conducted in the same country or region of the country.
  • P2, est = represents a survey estimate of the true (but unknown) population proportion (P2 at end-line).
  • z1-α = is the value from the Normal Probability Distribution corresponding to a confidence level 1-𝛼
  • Z1-β = the value from the Normal Probability Distribution corresponding to a power level of 1-𝛽

However, for the Health and Nutrition sector indicators, the sample size was 658, calculated considering factors as per the BHA Emergency M&E Guidance:

  • Estimated proportion or mean: This is the survey estimate of the true (but unknown) population proportion or mean at the time of the survey.

  • Standard deviation**.** The standard deviation is a measure of dispersion in the sample distribution for an indicator and is expressed in the same units as the indicator.

  • Critical value of normal probability distribution (z-value). The point on the normal probability distribution curve corresponds to a specific confidence level in the sample estimate. A 95 per cent confidence level is the most used. The z-value for a 95 per cent confidence level is 1.96 for a two-sided test and 1.64 for a one-sided test.

  • Effect Size. The effect size is the targeted amount of change to be measured when comparing two data points, e.g., from baseline to end line. The smaller the amount of change to be measured, the larger the sample size.

  • Margin of Error**.** The margin of error is the amount of error considered to be acceptable in estimating the proportion or mean. This value is typically set between 5 and 10 per cent. The larger the acceptable margin of error, the smaller the sample size.

  • Design Effect. The design effect measures the sampling error associated with the survey design. In two-stage cluster designs where households are selected after communities are selected, we use a design effect of 2 as a rule of thumb unless a more accurate estimate of the design effect can be made based on previous or similar survey data. The design effect of 2 indicates that the sampling error is twice that compared to using a single-stage SRS design.

  • Non-response. In surveys, some people who are selected to participate will not be available or willing to complete the survey. This is called non-response and must be considered when calculating sample size. We can use a nonresponse rate of 10 per cent as a rule of thumb until a more accurate estimate is available (e.g., based on previous survey data).

    6.4 Data Collection Tools and Techniques

It is suggested that a similar sample size be adhered to be able to compare the results against baseline values. It is highly recommended that the applicants come up with the most appropriate sampling strategy to cover all the sectors comprehensively.

The suggested list of data collection tools and techniques is given below; however, the evaluation team is expected to develop specific tools to meet the requirements of the evaluation objectives. By nature of the final evaluation, a key task is to assess the achievements of the project’s indicators and compare them against the baseline values. Thus, it is important to use the same data collection tools used in the baseline survey. Therefore,

  • The quantitative survey should be a household-level survey, conducted among the project’s beneficiaries for WASH, Agriculture, ERMS, MPCA and Protection sector. However, the survey should be population level for the Health and Nutrition Sector interventions.

  • For qualitative approaches, focus group discussions (FGD), Key Informant Interviews (KII), and direct observations should be conducted with appropriate stakeholders, project participants, and community leaders in the project area. The participants would be direct beneficiaries, key government department staff, political leaders, health workers, community leaders, local partners, and project staff.

  • A desk review of the project documents and reports and other relevant appropriate literature should also be considered.

    6.5 Data Analysis:

A trained enumerator and field team should be mobilized for the fieldwork and data collection, adhering to the evaluation and research ethics, the do-no-harm principle and other safety measures.

Selection of respondents for the quantitative survey: Within households, the household head and/or an adult female and male should be selected as respondents, and in some cases, respondents should include all members >18 years of age, depending on the data type. If no adult is willing to participate in the survey or no adult is present in a selected household when an enumerator arrives, unless it is determined that the household head is not an adult (i.e., it is a child-headed household), efforts will be made to return at least twice in hopes of finding an adult respondent. After three failed attempts to encounter an adult or head of household, the enumerator should move to the next closest house as a substitute. If there is no successful contact there, then the enumerator should move to the house that is the second closest to the originally selected house, and so on, until a replacement is found. Children who head households should be interviewed as their households’ representatives.

The data must be cleaned and error-free by cleaning inconsistencies and any possible outliers. Then, the data analysis should be performed to calculate the results of the respective indicators included in the ITT and Annex I. Also, the outcome level indicators data should be disaggregated by sex (female and male), gendered household type (F&M, FNM, MNF, CNA), and age depending on the type of outcome indicator (refer to ITT for disaggregation). These comparisons should be made using statistical methods in statistical software (e.g., SPSS, STATA, R), and where appropriate, standard statistical tests should be performed to assess the significant difference between baseline and final evaluation.

Similarly, qualitative data should be examined for themes and patterns in content, paying attention to what was said, by whom, where, and with what attitude. Likewise, good practices and lessons learned should be withdrawn from qualitative information collected from the direct beneficiaries and relevant stakeholders.

7. Evaluation Timeline

Although the RAWA project is expected to be completed in August 2024, the final evaluation is proposed to be undertaken between June and August 2024, considering the weather and accessibility issues in the project areas (as project areas are inaccessible in rainy months that start from late June until September). The final evaluation will be conducted in the Blue Nile (Al-Damazine, Al-Rosaires, Bau and Kurmuk provinces), and White Nile State ( Kosti and Rabak localities). A total of 40 working days is allocated for the final evaluation, spread over 3 months between June and August 2024.

Based on the nature of indicators under different sectors, data sources, and accessibility to field areas, the data collection plan must be adjusted. Thus, it is expected to have a flexible field team for the duration of the evaluation.

The key tasks consist of the inception report, tools, evaluation methodology design, fieldwork and report writing, and results dissemination. A tentative timeline for the evaluation is illustrated in the below graph.

Activity Details

Week 1:

  • Introductory meeting with Consultant and RAWA team, Signing of contract

Week 2:

  • Desk Review and Inception Report, including methodology, tools and instruments, and dummy tables

Week 3:

  • Training of enumerators
  • Survey instruments tested

Week 4:

  • Quantitative Data Collection
  • Qualitative Data Collection (KII and FGDs)

Week 5:

  • Qualitative Data Collection (KII and FGDs)
  • Draft evaluation report
  • Feedback and incorporation of feedback
  • Presentation of the evaluation findings

Week 6:

  • Feedback and incorporation of feedback
  • Final evaluation report

8. Dissemination of Evaluation Findings

The final evaluation results will be shared with local leaders and stakeholders at the project’s closure or community forum.

Debriefing and Discussion of Preliminary Draft Evaluation Report: The evaluation consultant will present the major findings of the evaluation to ADRA and Medair through a PowerPoint presentation after submission of the draft report. The debriefing will include a discussion of achievements and challenges as well as any recommendations for possible modifications to project approaches, results, or activities.

Draft Evaluation Report: A draft report of the findings and recommendations will be shared with ADRA and the Medair office for review and feedback. The written report should clearly describe the findings, conclusions, and recommendations.

***Final Report:***The final report should incorporate all the comments and feedback from ADRA and Medair, which will later be disseminated to donors, BHA, and similar like-minded international and national organizations.

The structure should include an executive summary, introduction, methodology, findings, conclusion, and recommendations.

Refer to section “18. Report Structure” for details about the report’s structure. The report should be written in English and submitted electronically to ADRA. The length of the main body of the report should be within 20 – 25 pages, excluding annexes.

9. Evaluation Team

To undertake this final evaluation, the evaluation team or consulting firm should have at least a team of 3 – 5 experts comprised of a team leader/evaluation expert, a WASH expert, a Health expert, a Nutrition expert, a Protection expert, and an Agriculture and livelihood expert with significant knowledge and experiences of evaluating emergency programs in a complex setting. Having past experience in evaluating BHA-funded projects in Sudan will be an asset. Specific requirements and requisites of evaluation team members are given below:

9.1 Team Leader:

  • Post-graduate degree in Development Studies, Monitoring and Evaluation, WASH, Agriculture, Health and Nutrition, or any applicable social sciences field.

  • S/he should have at least five years of senior-level experience in evaluating similar programs in a developing country context.

  • S/he should have at least three years of experience conducting endline surveys for NGOs in the WASH, food security, nutrition, and livelihood sectors.

  • Experience in leading and organizing evaluation teams.

  • S/he should have extensive experience conducting qualitative and quantitative evaluations/assessments and be familiar with the non-profit sector.

  • Experience in analyzing survey data.

  • Excellent oral and written communication skills are essential. The consultant should also have prior expertise in directing evaluation teams and producing high-quality documentation.

  • Language Skills: English (must), Arabic (asset)

    9.2 WASH Specialist

  • Post-graduate degree in WASH or Public Health.

  • S/he should have at least three years of experience conducting surveys and evaluations for NGOs in the WASH, health, food security, nutrition, and livelihood sectors.

  • Capacity to work in a team and lead quantitative and qualitative evaluations.

  • Experience in analyzing mixed methods survey data.

  • Sound understanding of WASH in emergency and conflict situations.

  • Ability to work with community and stakeholders.

  • Excellent oral and written communication skills are essential.

  • Language Skills: English (must), Arabic (asset)

    9.3 Health and Nutrition Specialist

  • Post-graduate degree in WASH or Public Health.

  • S/he should have at least three years of experience conducting surveys and evaluations for NGOs in the WASH, health, food security, nutrition, and livelihood sectors.

  • Capacity to work in a team and lead quantitative and qualitative evaluations.

  • Experience in analyzing mixed methods survey data.

  • Sound understanding of Health and Nutrition in emergency and conflict situations.

  • Ability to work with community and stakeholders.

  • Excellent oral and written communication skills are essential.

  • Language Skills: English (must), Arabic (asset)

    9.4 Protection and GESI Specialist

  • Post-graduate degree in Social Science, GESI, or Development Studies with a focus on Gender or Protection.

  • S/he should have at least three years of experience conducting surveys and evaluations for NGOs in the WASH, health, food security, nutrition, and livelihood sectors.

  • Capacity to work in a team and lead quantitative and qualitative evaluations.

  • Experience in analyzing mixed methods survey data.

  • Sound understanding of WASH in emergency and conflict situations.

  • Ability to work with community and stakeholders.

  • Excellent oral and written communication skills are essential.

  • Language Skills: English (must), Arabic (asset)

    9.5 Agriculture and livelihood Specialist

  • Post-graduate degree in Agriculture or Food Security or Development Studies.

  • S/he should have at least three years of experience conducting surveys and evaluations for NGOs in the WASH, health, food security, nutrition, and livelihood sectors.

  • Capacity to work in a team and lead quantitative and qualitative evaluations.

  • Experience in analyzing survey data of mixed methods.

  • Sound understanding of food security and livelihood in emergency and conflict situations.

  • Ability to work with community and stakeholders.

  • Excellent oral and written communication skills are essential.

  • Language Skills: English (must), Arabic (asset)

The applicant can also include experienced field researchers and enumerators in the team.

10. Role of ADRA:

  • Organize an inception meeting with the consulting firm/evaluation team for introduction and orientation on the evaluation objectives and expectations.
  • As highlighted below, ADRA will provide relevant program documents for review.
  1. List of Program Indicators
  2. Program MEAL Plan
  3. Implementation Area Map
  4. Program Proposal
  5. Baseline Survey questionnaire
  • Review the Questionnaire submitted by evaluation and provide feedback and endorsement.
  • Review the FDGs guide and KII checklist and provide feedback and endorsement.
  • Payment to the consulting firm/evaluation team as per the agreement.
  • Responsible for all logistical elements, including hiring enumerators and managing their payments and transportation
  • Facilitate online training for enumerators led by the consultant via online platforms such as Microsoft Teams, Zoom, Google Meet, etc.
  • Provide intelligence of project locations that will be helpful for planning methodology and for the fieldwork.

11. Role of Evaluation team/Consulting firm

  • Design and translate the survey questionnaires in English and Arabic.
  • Creating the questionnaire in the Kobo toolbox.
  • Design and Translation of the FDGs guide and KII interview checklist in English and Arabic.
  • Provide online training to enumerators on data collection tools.
  • Remote Facilitation of fieldwork, i.e., Household survey, KII, and FGD facilitation.
  • Remote supervision of fieldwork and quality assurance of data collected.
  • Management of field data (cleaning and analysis).
  • Present preliminary findings to the ADRA team.
  • Report writing – draft and finalize the evaluation report.

12. Final Evaluation Cost and Payment

Interested applicants are requested to submit a cost proposal to undertake the final project evaluation, including applicable tax, accommodation, fieldwork, and travel. ADRA will not be responsible for any financial obligation unless agreed in signing and in advance. However, ADRA will assist in terms of coordination with relevant stakeholders and field-level mobility. In addition, ADRA will make payment in three (3) installments. The payment will be made in phases as follows:

  1. 30% of the contract sum will be paid at the start of the consultancy.
  2. 30% of the contract sum will be paid upon completion and submission of the first draft report.
  3. 40% of the contract sum will be paid upon submission and acceptance of the final.

13. Logistics and Reporting

13.1 Reporting relations

ADRA Sudan is responsible for the recruitment and briefing of the final project evaluation external evaluator(s) and will be the point of contact for the entire duration of the evaluation. The consultant will report to the Programs Director with technical guidance from the MEAL Manager.

13.2 Logistics and Administrative Support

The consultant should state what logistical and administrative support s/he will provide and what support s/he will require from the ADRA project team. The evaluation team should adhere to health protocols and safety measures as deemed necessary to prevent the spread of any hazards and respect the do no harm principle all the time.

14. Deliverables

The consultants must submit the following reports, all written in English:

  • Presentation slide of key findings (PPT).

  • Inception Report with draft/finalized data collection tools.

  • Final evaluation report (about 20-25 pages without annexes).

  • An electronic Dataset of the questionnaire, consent form raw data, output tables, codebook, and syntax.

    15. Communication and confidentiality

The consultant will report to the Program Director with technical guidance from the MEAL Manager and Program Manager. ADRA will also provide logistical and technical support to facilitate required meetings and interviews, as may be necessary. The evaluation team should emphasize transparent and open communication with key stakeholders to ensure a smooth and efficient process and enhance the learning from this evaluation.

ADRA considers it unethical for any evaluation team member to use information gathered from the final project evaluation for anything other than the program under review. If a viable reason exists for using the information obtained for other purposes, then ADRA must be consulted, and prior permission secured. This must be adhered to, especially when the material is controversial and exclusively involves the private lives of the target population. ADRA will provide clean data sets to USAID to comply with the recent FFPIB 02-11 requirements.

16. Distribution of Survey Report

The ultimate responsibility for gathering and disseminating information from all its USAID-funded programs worldwide lies within ADRA International. Therefore, ADRA International expects the survey team, particularly the hired consultant, to turn over all the data and other information used as the basis of the team’s final inferences to ADRA International. It is ADRA’s position that the assignment is not final until it is 1) presented to ADRA, 2) both the consultant and ADRA have openly discussed the contents, and 3) a clear understanding of all conclusions and any differing views are reached between the consultant and ADRA as reflected in the final document. ADRA does not edit or change the final report of the team in any form or fashion without the team’s consent. If the team and ADRA remain to have a difference of opinion regarding the final report of the final project evaluation, ADRA will distribute the document intact but will attach a letter to the report stating its own position.

17. Report Structure

The final project evaluation report will be written in English and adhere to the structure below. The necessary and relevant tables, figures, SOW, pictures, and graphs should be added as annexures.

Executive Summary

A succinct summary of report contents

Introduction

  • Purpose of the final project evaluation.
  • Organization context.
  • Logic and assumptions of the final project evaluation.
  • Overview of USAID /BHA funded activities.

Final Evaluation Methodology

  • Final project evaluation plan
  • Strengths and weaknesses of selected design and research methods
  • Limitations and assumptions related to the final evaluation.
  • Summary of problems and issues encountered.

Findings

  • Overall Results.
  • Assessment of the accuracy of reported results.
  • Indicators’ final values and comparison with baseline values with appropriate narratives of high achievement or under-achievements, including any disaggregation.

Analysis:

  • Results showing outcomes and impact attributable to the project.

Conclusions

  • Summary of answers responding to the evaluation questions.
  • Overall recommendation
  1. Annexures:
  2. Annex I – RAWA project Indicators

Sector

Subsector

BHA Indicator

Indicators

Disaggregation

Purpose 1: To improve access to safe water sources and supply and hygiene practices at the household level, thus improving the overall health conditions of the affected population.

Intermediate Outcome 1.1: Increased access to improved water sources, and improved hygiene, and sanitation practices.

WASH

Hygiene Promotion

W10

Percent of people targeted by the hygiene promotion programs who know at least three (3) of the five (5) critical times to wash hands

Male/Female

WASH

Hygiene Promotion

W11

Percent of households targeted by the hygiene promotion activity who store their drinking water safely in clean containers.

N/A

WASH

Hygiene Promotion

W8

Percent of households with soap and water at a designated handwashing on premises

Gendered HH Type: F&M, FNM, MNF, CNA

WASH

Water Supply

W33

Percent of households targeted by WASH programming that are collecting all water for drinking, cooking and hygiene from improved water sources

N/A

WASH

Water Supply

W40

Percent of water points developed, repaired, or rehabilitated that are clean and protected from contamination.

N/A

WASH

Water Supply

W35

Percent of households whose drinking water supplies have a free residual chlorine (FRC) > 0.2 mg/L

N/A

WASH

Sanitation

W15

Percent of households in target areas practicing open defecation

Gendered HH Type

WASH

Sanitation

W19

Percent of latrines/defecation sites in the target population with handwashing facilities that are functional and in use

N/A

Purpose 2: To improve access to food supplies through increased access to agricultural inputs and resilient practices while also increasing household income from new and restored livelihoods.

Intermediate Outcome 2.1: Increased access to nutritious food through new and restored agricultural livelihoods.

Agriculture

Improving Agricultural Production

A4

Number of beneficiaries households using improved post-harvest storage practices

Gendered HH Type

Agriculture

Pests and Pesticides

A10

Number and percent of hectares protected against disease or pest attacks

N/A

Agriculture

Improving Agricultural Production

A2

Number of hectares under improved management practices or technologies with BHA assistance

N/A

Agriculture

Improving Agricultural Production

A5

Percentage of households with access to sufficient seed to plant

Gendered HH Type

Agriculture

Pests and Pesticides

A12

Percent of individuals who received training that are practicing appropriate crop protection procedures

Male/Female

ERMS

Livelihoods Development

E2

Percentage of beneficiaries reporting net income from their livelihood

Male/Female

Purpose 3: To increase access to quality essential services and reduce excess morbidity through integrated health and nutrition services.

Intermediate Outcome 3.1: Vulnerable host, returnees and IDP populations have access to lifesaving preventive and curative integrated health care services at supported health facilities

Purpose 4: Increased access to basic lifesaving services, reduced prevalence of food insecurities and higher safety and security of targeted population from harassment and abuses

Outcome 4.1. Protection and restoration of livelihoods and well-being

Multipurpose Cash Assistance

Multipurpose Cash

M02

Percent of (beneficiary) households who report being able to meet their basic needs as they define and prioritize them

Basic Needs Met: all, most, half, some, none

Multipurpose Cash Assistance

Multipurpose Cash

M03

Percent of beneficiaries reporting that humanitarian assistance is delivered in a safe, accessible, accountable, and participatory manner

Sex: female, male

Age: 0-17 years; 18-49 years; 50 and above

Multipurpose Cash Assistance

Multipurpose Cash

FS01

Percent of households with poor, borderline, and acceptable Food Consumption Score (FCS)

Mean, Median & number of beneficiaries households.

Gendered Household Type (F&M, FNM, MNF, CNA)

Protection

Prevention and Response to Gender based Violence

CP01

Percent of beneficiaries who are confident that residents of their community are protected from GBV

Female/Male

Protection

Psychosocial Support Services

CP02

Target population reports a change in personal well-being (e.g., self-confidence, concentration).

Female/Male

Protection

Prevention and Response to Gender based Violence

CP03

Percent of beneficiaries who recognize acts of GBV

Female/Male

Protection

Prevention and Response to Gender based Violence

CP04

Percent of beneficiaries who know ways to respond to signs of GBV within their community

Female/Male

Health Sector

Basic Primary Healthcare

H07

Percent of deliveries attended by a skilled attendant

Midwife, Doctor, Nurses with midwifery and lifesaving skills.

Health Facility, Home, Other

Basic Primary Healthcare

H08

Percent of pregnant women who have attended at least two comprehensive antenatal clinics

NA

Basic Primary Healthcare

H09

Percent of newborns that receive postnatal care within three days delivery

Female/Male

Basic Primary Healthcare

H15

Percent of community members who can recall target health education messages

Female/Male

Public Health Emergencies

Percent of target population who can recall 2 or more protective measures

Nutrition Sector

Maternal Infant and Young Child Nutrition in Emergencies

N08

Percent of infants 0-5 months of age who are fed exclusively with breast milk

Female/Male

Maternal Infant and Young Child Nutrition in Emergencies

N09

Percent of children 6-23 months of age who receive foods from 5 or more food groups (MDD)

Female/Male

  1. Annex II – Project’s Hypothesis and Theory of Change

The Restoring Access to WASH and Food Security in BNS (RAWA) program operates on the following hypothesis: To provide life-saving integrated interventions in BNS to address the protracted WASH, Health, Nutrition, and Protection conditions faced by the population and alleviate the underlying food security issues by restoring livelihoods and agriculture cultivation. RAWAs activities are grounded in this development hypothesis and are focused squarely on the following fifteen parallel “If” statements:

  • IF RAWA rehabilitates critical water infrastructure such as hand pumps and haffir water systems; THEN, it will increase safe access to clean and safe water to people within the target communities.
  • IF RAWA provides Multipurpose Cash Assistance equating to the National Sudan Minimum Expenditure Basket; THEN it will increase vulnerable households access to basic lifesaving services and decrease prevalence of food insecurity.
  • IF RAWA enhances water access for IDPs in collective shelters; THEN prevalence it will decrease the prevalence of diseases especially AWD.
  • IF RAWA builds the capacity/ understanding of the community in identifying and resolving protection risks and rights violation; THEN it will improve the support and protection of women and children and human rights are upheld by the community.
  • IF RAWA vulnerable individuals receive proper referral and case management, then SGBV, GBV and separated children will receive proper care and assistance.
  • IF RAWA works with local partners and community structures; THEN it will ensure grassroot targeting and efforts and build community resilience to shocks.
  • IF RAWA sets up dedicated protection teams and a referral pathway, then the vulnerable and at-risk populations (women, children, and persons with disability) are safe and secure from harassment and abuse.
  • IF RAWA provides WASH NFIs kits to extremely vulnerable households; THEN, it will further mitigate the risks of transmissions of vector-borne diseases/water related diseases.
  • IF RAWA provides hygiene promotion activities, education, and communication materials to the participants; THEN, the program participants will be better prepared to make the best use of water infrastructure.
  • IF RAWA Rehabilitates institutional latrines and sanitation facilities such as health facility latrines; THEN, it will decrease the prevalence of diseases, especially AWD and improve protection of women and children and access to safe sanitation facilities.
  • IF RAWA trains smallholder farmers on best practices that aim to increase yield, and provide agriculture inputs, in addition to strengthening their production capacity through farmer field schools; THEN, the program participants will be able to decrease their crop yield losses and enhance household level food security and income.
  • If RAWA provides strategic access to cash assistance for small businesses interrupted by conflict; THEN, communities will have improved access to these small businesses and vulnerable households will be able to increase their income resulting in improving their food security.
  • IF RAWA continues support for health facilities and provides primary healthcare services in the supported health facilities and their catchments, as well as emergency mobile PHC services; THEN, it will increase access to high-quality, life-sustaining, and life-saving health services among affected populations especially for women of childbearing age and children under five.
  • IF RAWA increases the number of trained and equipped facility and community-based nutrition service providers and core nutrition activities to screen, refer and treat cases of severe or moderate malnutrition; THEN, rates of malnutrition-related risk of death will be reduced and rates of malnutrition cures will be increased for children under five years of age and pregnant and lactating women.
  • IF RAWA’s mother-to-mother support groups established are sustained and supported. THEN optimal health and nutrition behaviors will be more consistently practiced amongst the community particularly among pregnant and lactating women (PLW) and children under two and the adverse effects of malnutrition on children’s mental and physical development and life-long learning capacity will be reduced.

[1] Humanitarian Needs Overview Nov 2022, https://reliefweb.int/report/sudan/sudan-humanitarian-needs-overview-2023-november-2022

[2] EIHAN Baseline Report, ADRA Sudan Sept 2020.

[3] ADRA’s Gender Assessment in Blue Nile State, August 2020.

How to apply

Interested and eligible consulting firm(s) or a team of experts meeting the requirements should submit their application for this consultancy electronically to [email protected] and copy [email protected] no later than July 30, 2024. The application should include:

  1. Technical proposal: A detailed technical proposal consisting of methodology details per this SOW. The copy of the experts’ CVs should be a maximum of 3 pages. The proposal should also include references from their previous work and contact details.
  2. Financial Proposal: A financial proposal in USD with a breakdown per day or whole must be submitted along with the application. The budget must cover all consultant fees (e.g., travel to BN & WN and accommodation fees).

Job Notifications
Subscribe to receive notifications for the latest job vacancies.