Oxfam

Consultancy-Final Evaluation of “OQ Integrated & Inclusive Humanitarian WASH and Protection Response (INT10403)

  • Mosul
  • Oxfam
  • Posted date: 2 weeks before
  • End date: 2024-05-21

No longer available to submit
لم يعد متاحا لتقديم

Job Title: Consultancy-Final Evaluation of “OQ Integrated & Inclusive Humanitarian WASH and Protection Response (INT10403)

Job In Mosul

Company: Oxfam

Start Date: 2024-05-09

End Date: 2024-05-21




Job Description

 

  1. BACKGROUND:

 

Oxfam is a global movement of people working together to end the injustice of poverty. Together we save, protect and rebuild lives. And we won’t stop until every person on the planet can defeat poverty or any type of inequality or discrimination. We are an international confederation of 20 organisations (affiliates) working together with partners and local communities in the areas of humanitarian, development and campaigning, in more than 90 countries. All our work is led by three core values: Empowerment, Accountability, Inclusiveness.

 

The Iraq 2021 Humanitarian Needs Overview (HNO) identified 2.4 million individuals with acute humanitarian needs[1], while COVID-19 has increased the severity of humanitarian needs by 35%[2] by reducing livelihood opportunities and access to basic services, which were inadequate prior to the pandemic.  While the overall number of people in need remain comparable to 2020, the number of people in acute need increased from 36% for 45%. According to the clusters, returnees and internally displaced

persons (IDPs) are classified as the most vulnerable groups, with the proportion of returnees facing acute need alone increasing from 28% to 38%[1]. Iraq also has one of the largest populations of Persons Living with Disabilities (PLWDs) in the world[2]. The situation worsened in October 2020 when the Government of Iraq (GoI) began closing IDP camps, forcing thousands of households (HHs) to return to areas where they had not lived for years, where there are no social services to support them.

 

Against this acute crisis backdrop, Oxfam proposed to improve equitable access and use of gender-responsive WASH facilities and protection services in Ninewa and Kirkuk, with a focus on HHs affected by recent camp closures. Targets districts in Kirkuk (Daquq, Hawija, and Kirkuk) and Ninewa (Telafar, Sinjar, Ba’aj, and Hatra) Governates have been selected based on urgent needs and the opportunity to build on GAC’s prior humanitarian and development investments[3]

 

  1. PROJECT INTERVENTION AND TARGET GROUPS:

 

The project has the following goal, outcomes, outputs and key activities.

Ultimate outcome:

 

Ultimate outcome 1000: ‘Increased and maintained human dignity, wellbeing, safety, and lives saved for crisis affected IDP, returnee and host communities, particularly women, girls and IDPs affected by camp closures in Kirkuk and Ninewa Governorates of Iraq

 

Intermediate Outcomes:

 

Intermediate Outcome 1100: Increased and equitable use of disease-preventing, appropriate and gender-responsive WASH materials, facilities and services for crisis-affected women, men, boys, and girls in Kirkuk Governorate

 

Indicators: -

  • % of individuals reporting accessing at least 80 liters/person/day of safe potable water per day (disaggregated by sex)
  • % of individuals accessing functioning sanitation facilities (disaggregated by sex)
  • % of individuals applying improved hygiene practices (disaggregated by sex)

Intermediate Outcome 1200: 1200 Reduced barriers to, and enhanced use of, lifesaving protection services and community-based humanitarian interventions for vulnerable conflict-affected women, men, girls, and boys, including Persons Living with Disabilities (PLWDs) in Kirkuk and Ninewa Governorates

 

Indicators: -

  • % of targeted vulnerable individuals reporting reductions in barriers to accessing quality SGBV and protection services (disaggregated by sex, age, ability)
  • % of targeted vulnerable HHs reporting improvements to their wellbeing and safety (disaggregated sex of HH head)

 

Immediate Outcomes:

 

Immediate Outcome 1110: Increased and equitable access to inclusive, safe domestic water for IDP, returnees and host communities, particularly for women, girls and PLWD

 

Indicators: -

 

  • % of target HHs reporting satisfaction with the quality of water at the end of the project (disaggregated by sex of HH head)
  • % of the target HHs reporting improved equitable access to safe domestic water particularly for women, girls and PLWDs (disaggregated by sex of HH head)

Immediate Outcome 1120: Improved access to gender-responsive, safe sanitation services designed by and for women, girls, and PLWDs through community-based solutions.

 

Indicators: -

 

  • % target institutions with gender-sensitive sanitation facilities accessible to women, girls and PLWDs
  • % of sanitation facilities in target institutions properly maintained at the end of the project

 

Immediate Outcome 1130: Improved capacity of targeted communities to exercise health-promotion and dignified hygiene and environmental practices, including COVID-19 Infection Prevention and Control (IPC)

 

Indicators: -

 

  • % of HH representatives that can articulate at least 3 key hygiene & environmental practices that can prevent spread of diseases. (Disaggregated by sex)
  • % of HH representatives that reported improved health and hygiene practices. (Disaggregated by sex)

Immediate Outcome 1210:  Increased access to SGBV and lifesaving protection services for conflict-affected women, men, girls and boys, particularly HHs affected by camp closures.

 

Indicators: -

 

  • % targeted vulnerable people reporting safe access and timeliness of SGBV and emergency protection services (disaggregated by sex and age)
  • % of vulnerable people reporting decreased protection, physical and mental health risks due to CfP and unstructured psychosocial support (PSS) services (disaggregated by sex and age)

 

Immediate Outcome 1220: Improved community capacity to monitor, identify, mitigate and respond to emergency SGBV and protection risks and gaps.

 

Indicators: -

 

  • % of trained women and youth and CBPC members equipped with skills to monitor, identify, and mitigate SGBV and protection risks and gaps within their communities (disaggregated by sex, age, ability)
  • % of targeted women and men and CBPC members reporting improvement to their understanding and practice of SGBV and Protection core standards (disaggregated by sex, age, ability)

 

Outputs:

 

1111 Existing water supply systems upgraded, rehabilitated, and maintained.

 

1112 Gender-balanced and inclusive water management committees and other community-level stakeholders trained and linked to Directorate of Water (DoW) for WASH facilities' operation and maintenance (O&M)

 

1113 Asset Management Plan and water quality analysis conducted with DoW for sustainable and safe water supply O&M

 

1121 Gender-appropriate latrine & handwashing facilities serving women, men, girls, boys and PLWDs, expanded and upgraded in the target communities and institutions.

 

1122 Health facilities and CHVs provided with PPEs and medical supplies for COVID-19 IPC

 

1123 Appropriate safe solid and hazardous wastes practices established in targeted health facilities.

 

1131 Community Health Volunteers (CHVs) and women's groups mobilized and supported to promote inclusive and safe community-based environmental sanitation processes.

 

1132 Community awareness raising sessions delivered on COVID-19 IPC and WASH practices with emphasis on integrating men to share responsibilities for health management at HH level.

 

1133 Essential non-food items delivered to the most vulnerable HHs, with a focus on female- headed HHs, PLWDs, and HHs affected by recent camp closures.

 

1211 SGBV and protection services mapped and shared with communities, clusters and government actors.

 

1212 Timely, confidential and safe case management, legal counselling and services provided to SGBV survivors and other vulnerable HHs facing protection risks.

 

1213 Psychosocial support (PSS) services and recreational activities established targeting vulnerable girls, with a focus on those affected by camp closures.

 

1221 Inclusive Community Based Protection Committees (CBPC) trained on Protection and humanitarian standards and peaceful co-existence activities, especially on those meeting the specialized needs of women, children and PLWDs.

 

1222 Roundtable discussions conducted and facilitated by Oxfam and CBPC with local authorities and other stakeholders to support collaboration on inclusive and lifesaving Protection solutions.

 

1223 Inclusive humanitarian response cycle, quality and accountability capacity development program developed and delivered to local humanitarian actors.

 

  1. OBJECTIVES OF THE FINAL EVALUATION

 

This GAC funded project will end in June 2024 and an external final evaluation is planned to take place on July and August 2024.

 

The overall objective of the GAC final evaluation is to systematically review the overall progress of the project towards the project’s outcomes, assess the learnings from project design and project implementation from our work with partners and communities, and provide recommendations on overall design of the project, modifications, and specific actions that might be taken into consideration in the future during the design of future projects of a similar nature. The scope for evaluation is determined using OECD-DAC criteria for evaluating humanitarian action. Relevant criteria are associated with a number of key questions (under section 5) that are to be addressed and explored.

 

Specific Objectives of the Evaluation:

 

  • To assess the design, planning, delivery and management of the project by Oxfam and its partners in accordance with Oxfam Programme Standards and donor requirements.
  • To identify and assess key internal and external factors that have contributed, affected, or impeded the achievements of the project, and how Oxfam and the partners have managed these factors.
  • Review the project outcome indicators and update the final/endline values in the log frame.
  • To assess the beneficiary targeting, verification and selection processes/approaches of the project
  • To draw key lessons and learning from the project and make recommendations that will help inform Oxfam’s formulation and design of future projects that will benefit the Iraqi displaced, host and returnee communities affected by the armed conflict.
  • To assess the relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, impact and sustainability of the project on IDPs, returnees and remainees on Oxfam and its partners.
  • Describe and assess efforts of stakeholders in support of the implementation of the project.
  • Assess the likelihood of continuation and sustainability of project outcomes and benefits after completion of the project.
  • Examine the extent to which the impact of the project has reached the intended beneficiaries.

 

 

  1. EVALUATION CRITERIA AND KEY QUESTIONS TO BE ADDRESSED IN THE EVALUATION:

 

The project evaluation should be organized taking into consideration of Oxfam’s key evaluation criteria, and program quality standards. The evaluation will also consider key sector and sub-sector indicators for assessing the performance. The following provides a guide to the questions to be addressed by this evaluation, under each of the criteria below:

 

Relevance and Appropriateness:

 

  • Have Oxfam and its partners selected relevant operational areas for their work?
  • Have Oxfam and its partners targeted the most vulnerable people, including vulnerable men, women, boys and girls?
  • To what degree is the intervention addressing the WASH and livelihoods needs of the targeted women, men, boys and girls and contributing to reduced vulnerability?
  • Was project design consistent with the Do No Harm principle? and with a Safe Programming approach?
  • What was the level and quality of participation of the beneficiaries and the partners in project design?
  • How responsive were project activities to the needs of targeted women, men, boys and girls in targeted communities (if possible, please distinguish between displaced/returnee and host communities) given their circumstances and priorities?
  • To what extent have the key contextual changes, threats and opportunities that arose during implementation been influencing and informing project implementation?
  • How and to what extent were monitoring and evaluation findings used to inform decision-making and the improvement of project implementation by Oxfam and partners?
  • Was the project adapted appropriately to changing context and needs in a timely manner? What changes took place in the implementation of the project differed from the original design?

 

Efficiency:

 

  • Was the project implemented based on the best use of existing resources/capacity, e.g. the capacity of the partners and the internal capacity and expertise of Oxfam itself? What key limitations existed on this front? What could Oxfam’s future projects do to increasingly develop and invest in existing resources?
  • How cost-effective was the intervention? What cost-effective alternatives could have been used?
  • Were the resources (financial, human, etc) for running all the activities available, adequate and was this the best use of resources to achieve the results?

 

 

Effectiveness:

 

  • Has the project proceeded well towards the achievement of its outcomes?
  • Is there anything about this project that has had any impact on the beneficiaries (e.g. predictability of aid, etc.)? (positive or negative)
  • Has this project had any impact on the partners? (positive or negative)
  • What were the main challenges of the project and how well have they been addressed? Is there anything in this project that made these challenges more/less manageable?
  • How were beneficiaries selected and were they informed of the selection criteria?
  • How effective were the selection criteria in reaching out to the most vulnerable populations?
  • How inclusive and culturally sensitive were the activities carried out in terms of the approach, quality of participation, information and its dissemination?
  • To what extent has gender been mainstreamed into the project? How could gender be better mainstreamed in a future project?
  • What unintended consequences (if any), whether positive or negative, did the intervention have on women, men, boys and girls so far (IDPs/returnees/host communities)?
  • What system and mechanism are in place (at Oxfam and partners) to ensure accountability to the beneficiaries and how well have they been working throughout the project?
  • Have the ways of working with the partners been contributing to building the capacity of the partners?
  • Were there any risks inherent to the duration of the project, either in the course of or towards the end/after the end of the intervention?
  • What factors have contributed to achieving or not achieving intended outcomes and set objectives of the project? Identify any exceptional experiences/achievements of the project substantiated with evidences, such, but not limited to case studies, best practices, etc.

 

Impact:

 

  • What the positive and negative, intended and unintended, changes produced by the project?
  • Have these changes contributed to any identified changes according to aspirations of project?
  • Analyse the contribution of the project to any observed impact (intended, unintended, positive, negative) and analyse what other actors and factors contributed to the impact. What real difference has the intervention made to the beneficiaries?
  • How many people have been affected? - Are the local communities and stakeholders more resilient than before?
  • How likely is it that any positive changes may be sustained in the short- and medium-term?

 

Sustainability:

  • To which extent did the planning and implementation of the interventions take longer-term and integrated problems into account?
  • How did the project consider adequately to the context and the nexus of between humanitarian action, recovery and development?
  • Did the project plan and implement an adequate transition and exit strategy that ensures longer-term positive effects and reduces risk of dependency?
  • How likely will critical services and effects be sustained beyond the duration of the project?
  • How well are the project’s outputs linked to more long-term focused objectives?
  • Assess capacity of key actors to contribute to sustaining the positive changes according to the developed ToC.
  • What were/are the major factors which influenced the achievement or non-achievement of sustainability of the project?
  • To what extent did the benefits of the project continue after donor funding ceased? What were the major factors which influenced the achievement or non-achievement of sustainability of the project?

 

  1. METHODOLOGY:

 

Oxfam recommends mixed methods (a combination of both quantitative and qualitative methods) that will improve the evaluation findings by ensuring that the limitations of one type of data are balanced by the strength of another. Therefore, the data collection for this evaluation will contain various tools and methodologies (both quantitative and qualitative approaches). The consultant will be responsible for designing of tools, data collection, data analysis and report writing using both quantitative and qualitative methods.

 

For the quantitative approach, the consultant will conduct the data collection activities of the endline HH survey in the selected intervention areas to find the endline values of outcome level indicators, which will be compared later against the baseline survey values which was already done at the beginning of the project. Quantitative data using structured questionnaire can be used to see how the project’s intervention bring change to the life of conflict affected communities. The endline survey findings will be also integrated with the evaluation findings according to the key evaluation criteria (relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, sustainability, and impact).   

 

Regarding the qualitative approach, the consultant is expected to develop a through methodology (to be endorsed by Oxfam) for this evaluation based on the expected deliverables & OECD-DAC criteria. The consultant will use qualitative data collection methods, such as, focus group discussions/FGD/ with different groups (men, women), key informant interview/KII/, with local government authorities, Oxfam staff, community leaders, partners and other stakeholders, case studies, etc).

 

The consultant(s) will also do desk study/ literature review, which includes review of different documents, such as baseline and other surveys, project proposals, progress reports, etc and analysing secondary data. The evaluation methodology should make use of baseline and other data already generated by Oxfam’s monitoring and evaluation team. The information and findings of the desk review should be integrated with the data and findings from primary data collection and analysis, and not placed in a separate section.

 

We anticipate that this evaluation will be a participatory review and learning exercise. Thus, it requires the consultant(s)/firms to be experienced in participatory approaches to learning and inquiry, and especially in seeking the views and perceptions of key stakeholders that include:

  • Targeted beneficiaries
  • Partners and actors directly involved in the project at different levels:
  • The local implementing partners.
  • Community leaders (if applicable) and representatives of the affected population.
  • Local authorities.
  • Oxfam staff involved in the implementation of the project (e.g. AMs, Technical Leads, and field program and MEAL team.)

 

The consultant should develop all the necessary data collection tools and sampling methods and share them with the Oxfam MEAL & PQ team for review and approval.  And the data collection tools proposed by the consultant should be able to address the key evaluation questions mentioned above.

The evaluators/external consultants should consider the following methodological topics at a minimum:

  • The evaluator’s understanding of the evaluation questions
  • Description of the phases related to the suggested evaluation methodology.
  • Sources of information for gathering primary and secondary data
  • Sampling techniques, such as sample size, sampling methodology, the area and population group the sample represents.
  • Instruments to be used for data collection.
  • The type of software or ICT tool used for data analysis.
  • Reference indicators and benchmarks for each evaluation question (if relevant).

Immediate Outcomes:

 

Immediate Outcome 1110: Increased and equitable access to inclusive, safe domestic water for IDP, returnees and host communities, particularly for women, girls and PLWD

 

Indicators: -

 

  • % of target HHs reporting satisfaction with the quality of water at the end of the project (disaggregated by sex of HH head)
  • % of the target HHs reporting improved equitable access to safe domestic water particularly for women, girls and PLWDs (disaggregated by sex of HH head)

Immediate Outcome 1120: Improved access to gender-responsive, safe sanitation services designed by and for women, girls, and PLWDs through community-based solutions.

 

Indicators: -

 

  • % target institutions with gender-sensitive sanitation facilities accessible to women, girls and PLWDs
  • % of sanitation facilities in target institutions properly maintained at the end of the project

 

Immediate Outcome 1130: Improved capacity of targeted communities to exercise health-promotion and dignified hygiene and environmental practices, including COVID-19 Infection Prevention and Control (IPC)

 

Indicators: -

 

  • % of HH representatives that can articulate at least 3 key hygiene & environmental practices that can prevent spread of diseases. (Disaggregated by sex)
  • % of HH representatives that reported improved health and hygiene practices. (Disaggregated by sex)

Immediate Outcome 1210:  Increased access to SGBV and lifesaving protection services for conflict-affected women, men, girls and boys, particularly HHs affected by camp closures.

 

Indicators: -

 

  • % targeted vulnerable people reporting safe access and timeliness of SGBV and emergency protection services (disaggregated by sex and age)
  • % of vulnerable people reporting decreased protection, physical and mental health risks due to CfP and unstructured psychosocial support (PSS) services (disaggregated by sex and age)

 

Immediate Outcome 1220: Improved community capacity to monitor, identify, mitigate and respond to emergency SGBV and protection risks and gaps.

 

Indicators: -

 

  • % of trained women and youth and CBPC members equipped with skills to monitor, identify, and mitigate SGBV and protection risks and gaps within their communities (disaggregated by sex, age, ability)
  • % of targeted women and men and CBPC members reporting improvement to their understanding and practice of SGBV and Protection core standards (disaggregated by sex, age, ability)

 

Outputs:

 

1111 Existing water supply systems upgraded, rehabilitated, and maintained.

 

1112 Gender-balanced and inclusive water management committees and other community-level stakeholders trained and linked to Directorate of Water (DoW) for WASH facilities' operation and maintenance (O&M)

 

1113 Asset Management Plan and water quality analysis conducted with DoW for sustainable and safe water supply O&M

 

1121 Gender-appropriate latrine & handwashing facilities serving women, men, girls, boys and PLWDs, expanded and upgraded in the target communities and institutions.

 

1122 Health facilities and CHVs provided with PPEs and medical supplies for COVID-19 IPC

 

1123 Appropriate safe solid and hazardous wastes practices established in targeted health facilities.

 

1131 Community Health Volunteers (CHVs) and women's groups mobilized and supported to promote inclusive and safe community-based environmental sanitation processes.

 

1132 Community awareness raising sessions delivered on COVID-19 IPC and WASH practices with emphasis on integrating men to share responsibilities for health management at HH level.

 

1133 Essential non-food items delivered to the most vulnerable HHs, with a focus on female- headed HHs, PLWDs, and HHs affected by recent camp closures.

 

1211 SGBV and protection services mapped and shared with communities, clusters and government actors.

 

1212 Timely, confidential and safe case management, legal counselling and services provided to SGBV survivors and other vulnerable HHs facing protection risks.

 

1213 Psychosocial support (PSS) services and recreational activities established targeting vulnerable girls, with a focus on those affected by camp closures.

 

1221 Inclusive Community Based Protection Committees (CBPC) trained on Protection and humanitarian standards and peaceful co-existence activities, especially on those meeting the specialized needs of women, children and PLWDs.

 

1222 Roundtable discussions conducted and facilitated by Oxfam and CBPC with local authorities and other stakeholders to support collaboration on inclusive and lifesaving Protection solutions.

 

1223 Inclusive humanitarian response cycle, quality and accountability capacity development program developed and delivered to local humanitarian actors.

 

  1. 8- TIMEFRAME, KEY ACTIVITIES AND EXPECTED LEVEL OF EFFORT

     

    Timeframe: The evaluation is to be carried out in July 2024, with the final report submitted to Oxfam as per the timeline below. The exact dates of the evaluation are to be confirmed with the selected consultant(s) or firm. Corona Virus may impact on the evaluation process and final date of submission the report.

     

    Total expected level of effort: 25 working days

    Note: Following are the suggested number of days. Actual days will be agreed with the selected consultant(s)/firm as per workplan to be delivered during the time frame.

     

    • Review essential documents of the project, including but not limited to the original project proposal, interim or on-going internal reports, and evaluations and lessons learned exercises undertaken thus far and review the key questions suggested and if necessary, propose adjustment (3 to 4 days) – work to be done from consultant’s/firm’s home location, all documents will be shared by Oxfam via email);
    • Develop and submit the draft inception report with a detailed evaluation plan (to be endorsed by Oxfam) (2 to 3 day);
    • Developing and translation of evaluation tools (Tools must be developed in English and translated in Arabic to administer in the field. (2 to 3 days)
    • Primary data collection (quantitative and qualitative) (8 to 10 days in Iraq- Ninewa and SalahAddin Governorate).
    • Data analysis and preparation of draft evaluation report (7 to 10 days);
    • Meeting (online) to share and validate the findings from the evaluation (1 day). Selected Oxfam and partner staff will participate in this meeting.
    • Finalize the final evaluation report and send it to Oxfam (2 to 3 days). Oxfam will then prepare a management response to be annexed to the evaluation report.

     

    Working closely:

     

    The consultant(s) /firm will report directly to the Program Quality and MEAL Lead and will work closely with Programme Managers and field teams. The Program Quality and MEAL Lead will coordinate and facilitate the evaluation process with the selected firm/consultant(s) in collaboration with the Program Managers and MEAL & PQ team.

     

     

    1. EXPECTED OUTPUTS:

     

    1. Develop a detailed evaluation plan (to be submitted after the document review but before the data collection - to be endorsed by Oxfam), outlining the proposed methodology.
    2. Draft evaluation report in English to be presented to Oxfam (no more than 40 pages excluding annexes, including executive summary not exceeding 3 pages);
    3. Meeting to present the draft findings of the evaluation, and to give feedback to Oxfam staff and the partners.
    4. A draft copy of the evaluation report within one week (7 days) of the meeting with Oxfam and partner staff. Feedback from Oxfam will be provided within one (1) week after the submission of the draft report. The consultant/firm will review, then submit a second draft, which will also be subject to Oxfam’s feedback within 2 days. The final report will be produced in 3 working days of submission of the comments. It will include changes/modifications, agreed between Oxfam in Iraq and the consultant/firm. Some minimum guidelines on the evaluation report:
      • The report should systematically answer the key questions posed.
      • It should fairly and clearly represent the views of the different actors/stakeholders.
      • It should give the conclusions of the evaluator, in a way that is clear and substantiated by the available evidence.

     

    Please note that the consultant should submit the final evaluation report with Oxfam before/on 20 August 2024

     

    1. Payment and instructions for interested consultants/firms

     

    Overall expression of interest/EOIs/ will be evaluated based on technical and financial proposals demonstrating value of money and strong technical description.  

     

    Payment will be done in two instalments, 30% upon contract signature, 70% upon Oxfam’s approval of the final evaluation report.

     

    What costs to include in the offer: Consultants/firms should include the following costs in their offer’s budget: daily rate, cost of international travel (home location of consultant/firm to Erbil and back, applies to international consultants only); cost for enumerators/data collectors for the endline survey.

     

    What costs not to include in the offer: Oxfam will pay for and procure the following for the evaluation and therefore the following costs should NOT be included in the offer: pick-up/drop-off of consultant(s) from airport, travel inside Iraq for data collection and meetings, interpretation services during meetings with beneficiaries/the partner, printing/photocopying costs.

     

    Note that payment will be made based on the budget in the offer (not based on actual expenses incurred by the consultant). No receipts will be requested from the consultant towards the end of the evaluation.

     

     

    1. CODES OF BEHAVIOUR:

     

    The evaluation process will be directed by Oxfam’s guidelines for the ethical conduct of evaluations and research, guiding the evaluation team through careful consideration of the key ethical implications at every stage of the evaluation. These guidelines are available at this link: http://policy-practice.oxfam.org.uk/publications/undertaking-research-with-ethics-253032 

     

    Selected consultant or firm will be asked to sign and adhere with Oxfam’s Code of Conduct.

    1. SHARING AND USING FINDINGS:

     

    The Oxfam International’s Policy on Program Evaluation requires Confederation members to act on the commitment to transparency by making public the Executive Summary and a Management Response to all final evaluations. The Policy is available at this link: http://www.oxfam.org/sites/www.oxfam.org/files/oxfam-program-evaluation-policy-dec10.pdf

     

    1. DISCLOSURE:

    Although free to discuss with the authorities on anything relevant to the assignment, under the terms of reference, the consultant is not authorized to make any commitments on behalf of Oxfam. All data collected as part of this consultancy belongs to Oxfam and public dissemination of the data and evaluation products can only be done with the written consent of the Oxfam.

     

    14.Bid Evaluation Criteria

     

    Bid Evaluation Criteria

     

     

    Part

     

    Criteria

     

    Award criteria’s

     

    Score

     

     

    A

    Consultant's Qualifications and experience in the field covered by the TOR

    Academic Qualifications

    10%

    Specialization and proven experience in the field related to the assignment.

    15%

    Qualifications, skills, and experience of the Team to be engaged for the assignment

    10%

     

     

    B

    Quality / Understanding of the TOR

    Meeting technical requirements (quality of the proposal) OR Level of understanding the assignment as per TOR.It considers how deep the consultant understood the work including the scope. (Not just copy and paste from the TOR content)

    10%

    Adequacy of the proposed approach and methodology to undertake the task based on the TOR & scope

    20%

    Proposed workplan (realistic of workplan)

    Detailed Work Plan to carry out the work highlighting key milestones & deadlines

    5%

     

    C

    Financial Proposal

    Clarity of the cost breakdown

    20%

    Fair and reasonable budget 

    10%



Mandatory qualification:
• A minimum of 10 years of experience in humanitarian and development interventions in conducting evaluations for international humanitarian organisations and donor agencies
• Demonstrated experience in the monitoring and evaluation of WASH and Livelihoods, with preferably some experience in gender and protection in emergencies programming or programmatic knowledge of these two sectors.
• Experience in the use of quantitative and participatory qualitative methods of data collection
• Strong facilitation and English writing skills are also required.
• Knowledge of ICT tools for mobile data collection (Survey CTO)

- Commitment to safeguarding policy.
• Commitment to feminist principles in Evaluation.
• Knowledge of the context in Iraq or in middle east and familiarity or direct experience working in Iraq or in the Middle East broadly
Following are not mandatory but desirable:
• Familiarity or fluency in Arabic is an advantage.
Experience of working modalities of Oxfam, is preferred.


Interested Individuals, organizations or research/consultancy firms, with the experience and skills descried in the ToR should submit Expression of Interest/EOI/. The EOI must include

  1. A cover letter of no more than 2 pages introducing the evaluator/organisation and how the skills and competencies described above are met, with concrete examples. Please also use this cover letter to indicate the consultants’ availability for the proposed period. Note: the evaluation should start as early as possible in July 2024 to conclude in August 2024
  2.  Technical Proposal: The technical proposal should include an interpretation of the objectives of the consultancy, detailed methodology and an elaborate work plan. Organization/individual capacity statement, past experience and activities related to evaluation, CVs of the consulting team and their roles in the achievement of the assignment; names, addresses and telephone numbers of three professional referees.
  3.  Financial Proposal: A one-page budget of the offer, covering all major anticipated costs; (proposed budget should not be included in the technical proposal). 4. Two to three samples of evaluation reports for evaluations conducted in WASH, and/or livelihoods or in other sectors
  4. Two to three samples of evaluation reports for evaluations conducted in WASH, and/or livelihoods or in other sectors

Please submit the EOI and other documents by 12:00 am Iraq time by 21 May 2024 to irqconsultancy@oxfam.org.uk  with “Final Evaluation of “OQ Integrated & Inclusive Humanitarian WASH and Protection Response Ninewa Kirkuk, funded by GAC” in the subject line. No EOIs will be accepted after deadline.
All questions or clarifications of a technical nature are to be sent to irqconsultancy@oxfam.org.uk Interested applicants can collect the Terms of Reference/ToR/ from OXFAM in IRAQ Country Office, starting from May 7, 2024. Or Oxfam Logistics/HR team can send the ToR for interested applicants via email. Applicants are required to carefully read through the ToR, make a note of the planned timetable, and submit their responses by 21 May 2024 (5:00 Pm). No questions or clarification will be entertained after 31 August 2021 COB.

 

TOR LINK: https://jobs.oxfam.org.uk/vacancy/21034/description


This invitation to tender has been issued for the sole purpose of obtaining offers for the provision of the services requested against the TOR. OXFAM reserves the right not to enter into or award a contract as result of this invitation to tender. OXFAM also reserves the right to terminate any contract issued as a result of this invitation to tender as set out in the contract terms and conditions.
OXFAM in Iraq office is located in Erbil, Ankawa



Source : NGOs Jobs & Bids