Request For Offer (RFO) for Evaluation of CVA Food Security (PR ref. DUB-MEV-27775-v2)

+++ CLARIFICATIONS: Please read the RFO (‘Request For Offer’) document on the GOAL Tenders website, for more specific information on the method of applying for this order – https://goalglobal.org/tenders +++

Evaluation of GOAL’s CVA for food security

2019-to date

Terms of Reference

March 2024

Background

CVA (Cash and Voucher Assistance) refers to projects where cash transfers or vouchers for goods or services are provided to individuals, households, or community recipients. It is a form of assistance, not a result in itself. The recipients use CVA to meet their needs and make a difference to their lives. CVA can be used on its own, or as complementary to services and in-kind assistance. CVA can be used to achieve outcomes such as enabling people to meet their basic needs, health, water and sanitation, food, nutrition, shelter, protection etc. This evaluation is primarily focused on the achievement of improved food security outcomes by GOAL’s CVA with the view to document best practice and make recommendations for improvements and scale up.

It is globally accepted that assistance transferred in the form of cash and vouchers (particularly cash) can be more efficient, effective, and better for people and markets compared to other forms of assistance. It is fast becoming the modality of choice for a growing number of donors. A report by the Global Public Policy Institute estimated that cash assistance is appropriate in 70%-80% of all humanitarian crises. The rapid growth of CVA in crisis and fragile settings where GOAL works, means that CVA is a ‘must-have’ in its programming toolbox. By integrating and expanding quality CVA in GOAL’s programming, GOAL places itself on the radar of CVA oriented donors as a CVA ready partner.

GOAL’s work on CVA

In 2019, GOAL delivered approximately €31.28 million in CVA out of which €24.5 million was in vouchers from Syria in a single programme. Although most of GOAL’s CVA monetary value was distributed through vouchers, cash is overwhelmingly the most frequently used modality across GOAL. Likewise, GOAL reaches twice as many people through cash rather than vouchers. In 2021, 26% of GOAL’s grants contained CVA. CVA and food security programming more broadly generates by far the largest number of communications to our Community Feedback Mechanism (CFM), beneficiary selection and verification as well as community engagement with GOAL.

All of GOAL’s country offices have experience of using CVA, however there are variations in the frequency which CVA is utilised in programming and the quality of design and implementation. As mentioned above, GOAL uses CVA to achieve various outcomes, but the focus of this evaluation will be on improved food security including on the quality of design and implementation of CVA for such outcomes. Other achievements and positive or negative consequences intended or unintended can also be documented.

Objectives of the evaluation

1. Describe the scale of GOAL’s CVA for improved food security of the last five years mapping out geographic spread, number of projects, intervention type, expenditure, and reach.
2. Assess and document the relevance, effectiveness, impact, and efficiency of GOAL’s CVA into improved food security over the last four years.
3. Make recommendations, as appropriate, for improvements and scale up of GOAL’s CVA for improved food security in the current and other geographical locations.

Evaluation questions

Some of the key evaluation questions to be address include, but are not limited to:

1. What is the scale of GOAL’s CVA for improved food security? Its geographical spread, the number of projects implemented over the last four years, the type of interventions, expenditure, and beneficiary reach?
2. Have the objectives and design of CVA responded to food security needs of beneficiaries, global, country(ies), and partners as well as food security policies, and priorities, and have they continued to do so if/when circumstances changed? What is demonstrable from the CFM? What other needs have they responded to, if any?
3. Has CVA achieved, or it is expected to achieve, food security objectives, and results (e.g., improved household food consumption score, diet diversification, etc), including any differential results across groups (sex, age, disability, refugee/IDP/host population)? What other objectives and results, if any?
4. Has CVA generated or is it expected to generate significant positive or negative, intended, or unintended, higher-level effects in food security among participating communities? What other areas, if any?
5. Has CVA delivered, or is likely to deliver, results in the most cost effective and timely way as compared to feasible alternatives in the context? What technologies were used, if any?
6. Are there any recommendations for improvement and scale up of CVA regarding food security, or other areas, in the current and other geographical locations?

Evaluation tasks

In consultation with GOAL’s Evaluation Commissioning Manager, Head of MEAL (Monitoring, Evaluation, Accountability and Learning):

1. Refine the evaluation objectives and primary evaluation questions as per the ToR (Terms of References)
2. Incorporate specific evaluation questions regarding strategic programme areas and pilot activities undertaken, as appropriate
3. Devise and test a methodology and evaluation tools to address the specific objectives and individual research questions of the evaluation
4. Conduct secondary data collection and research, including using GOAL’s existing project monitoring data, evaluations (if relevant) and donor reports to identify gaps in data coverage and knowledge
5. Collect primary data to establish GOAL’s performance against selected programme indicators and the evaluation criteria outlined above
6. Provide a draft report that will be incorporated into ongoing and future programme planning, with recommendations for improvements and scale up in the current and other geographical locations
7. Incorporate GOAL’s feedback into the draft report and prepare a final report (with an Executive Summary that can be used as a stand-alone document) which describes the findings of the evaluation, and provides actionable recommendations
8. Facilitate a workshop to share the findings of the evaluation with GOAL, partner staff and other stakeholders

Methodology

A recommended methodology is outlined below, but the final methodology and tools to be used will be determined by the evaluation team in consultation with Head of MEAL and will be contingent on the above tasks.

GOAL recommends a mixed methods approach that can quantify impact of the programme and achievements against food security targets and indicators while qualitatively outlining how these were achieved and what can be learnt from them. Field visits are suggested in 1-2 in the countries where GOAL operates CVA (e.g., but not limited to, Zimbabwe, Honduras).

Planning

Before arriving in country(ies), the evaluation team may do the following:

• Review key internal and external documents, analysis of data as appropriate
• Propose the appropriate methodology to be developed for the context to evaluate the existing projects and address the evaluation criteria above
• Prepare an outline of the data collection methods that are required and the relevant survey templates and participatory data collection guides to be used for data collection
• Develop a work plan consisting of key milestones required for data collection for any logistics support to be arranged, if necessary, by the MEAL Coordinator(s)

On arrival in-country(ies), the evaluation team may:

• Hold a short planning meeting with the MEAL Coordinator(s) and relevant programme team(s), to review and amend the questions as needed for the data collection tools
• Liaise with the MEAL Coordinator(s) on the training and recruitment of the data collection staff and the use of mobile data collection for the proposed survey tools and qualitative guides
• Hold a brief workshop with GOAL local Senior Management Team(s) to communicate evaluation

questions and methods proposed.

Post-site visit

• Data analysis, report development and finalisation, prepare summary of findings and hold the workshop

Primary data collection

To the greatest extent possible, the evaluation should consider both beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries, examining any potential positive or negative spill over effects.

While quantitative methods such as household surveys, observation checklists, and physical testing are desirable for the measurement of indicators, GOAL expects a balance of quantitative and qualitative methods to better understand the mechanisms that produce certain results or may hinder greater results.

Data analysis

GOAL expects all quantitative data to be rigorously analysed and representative of the project area within the reasonable limits and constraints of the context. Qualitative data should also be rigorously analysed and primarily focus on developing a deeper understanding about the relevance of the programme, and providing

recommendations for improving or strengthening the impact, effectiveness, and sustainability of the programme.

Presentation and documentation of findings and recommendations

The evaluation may start in July 2024, although this can change as long as the final approved report is submitted by end of November 2024.

The findings of the evaluation must be shared with GOAL in the following formats:

• Draft Evaluation Report submitted to GOAL’s Evaluation Commissioning Manager and MEAL Coordinator(s), Programme Director(s) of the country(ies) assessed for feedback and comments, two weeks after conclusion of field visit(s).
• Final Evaluation Report must be clear and concise and the following sections must be included as a minimum: Executive Summary, Literature Review, Methodology, Analysis of Findings, Recommendations, Annexes: TORs, a list of individuals interviewed, statistical outputs, templates of data collection tools used, a description of the methods employed, a summary of survey results (if appropriate) and any other relevant materials. The report should not exceed 30 pages in total excluding Annexes.
• Closing workshop with GOAL staff to present findings and share feedback with presentation materials left with GOAL.

Deliverable 1: Inception Report

Deliverable 2: Draft Report

Deliverable 3: Final Evaluation Report

Deliverable 4: Dissemination of Findings Workshop

Dissemination of findings

Results and recommendations will be made available externally to interested stakeholders at the discretion of GOAL HQ and country senior management. The final report and any primary data collected will be the property of GOAL.

If sections of the evaluation are deemed useful or informative for the greater humanitarian and development community as lessons learned or opportunities to improve programming, GOAL reserves the right to create a separate report with excerpts from the final evaluation report to share with the wider community. At the key findings stage, GOAL may request that the consultant produce such a report along with the final evaluation report. A separate contract can be negotiated for this.

Ethical considerations

The evaluation team will make clear to all participating stakeholders that they are under no obligation to participate in the evaluation study. All participants will be assured that there will be no negative consequences if they choose not to participate. The evaluation team will obtain informed consent from the participants. The team will ensure prior permission is received for taking and use of visual still/ moving images for specific purposes, i.e., for evaluation report and presentations. The evaluation team will assure the participants’ anonymity and confidentiality and will ensure the visual data is protected and used for agreed purposes only. In particular, the evaluation team will employ robust data security measures to further ensure participants’ confidentiality and anonymity. The evaluation team is responsible for determining whether their proposed methodology would require Institutional Review Board (IRB) clearance and will be responsible for clearing the process and training if such approval is required.

Assumptions and requirements

• Evaluators will have access to all relevant documentation and can take part in relevant meetings and field trips
• GOAL will provide a focal point within GOAL staff in the field site(s) for coordination on planning and conducting the evaluation.
• Evaluators will have access to key staff in the responding GOAL offices and partner offices to obtain adequate information provided.
• The evaluation team will have access to beneficiaries and their communities for conducting interviews.
• GOAL to provide relevant security briefings and organise relevant travel permits if required.
• Security concerns could impact the timing and the scope of the evaluation. It is important for the team to remain flexible. They must be open to making changes to the schedule and itinerary such as visiting alternate sites, conducting remote reviews and interviews, etc.
• GOAL will provide population data for sampling, if required.
• GOAL will provide logistical support, if required.

Evaluator(s) profile

For the purposes of this evaluation, GOAL welcomes international and national evaluators to apply.

The profile of the lead consultant is:

• Individuals or firms in academia, social research, or humanitarian evaluation with a background in economics, food security, CVA or other related fields
• Extensive experience of conducting evaluations along DAC (Development Assistance Committee) OECD (Organisation of Economic Cooperation and Development) evaluation criteria, ideally leading an evaluation team and experience of designing evaluation methodology / tools, data analysis etc.
• Experience of working in humanitarian contexts and good understanding of humanitarian and work – both in programmes and operations
• In-depth knowledge of quantitative and qualitative research methods
• Competent in using statistical packages for quantitative and qualitative analyses
• Capacity to work collaboratively with multiple stakeholders
• Excellent communication, analytical and writing in English, French and Spanish preferred