Endline Evaluation Consultant

Future Resilience and Development Foundation (FRAD Foundation) is a registered Non-profit organization with the corporate affairs commission (CAC) with CAC No CAC/IT/NO/139393 in 2019 in accordance with the Nigerian Law with office address at House No 55, Mandau Street, Bulumkutu Abuja, Maiduguri, Borno State. As an organization, our approach is founded on the integration between capacity building of our staff and adherence to strict quality assurance procedure, we continue to learn and consider each of our projects as an opportunity to improve performance over time and raise the standards of our organizations and our donors. As an agile organization, we believe in partnership and collaboration, as such we are registered with various network of civil society organization like Network of civil society organizations in Borno, Nigeria Network of NGOs, Network of civil society organizations in lake Chad regions and Network of ECW Youth led organizations.

Project Rationale

As parts of the project mandate Consortium Led (FRAD) and Partners (C3HD and CEDAR) with Stakeholder are planning to conduct Endline evaluations aims to assess the effectiveness of project and establish a basis for learning as well as form part of accountability both for the Consortium team and for the donor (NHF).

With support from the NHF, FRAD, in collaboration with C3HD and CEDAR, is currently implementing a consortium project in Northeast Nigeria. The primary objective of the project is to enhance the inclusion and protection of women and girls with disabilities within the humanitarian response framework in Borno and Yobe states.

At the same time, Borno State has been heavily affected by the ongoing conflict, hosting 81% of the 1.9 million internally displaced persons (IDPs) in the country. Specifically, the Maiduguri Metropolitan Council (MMC) and Jere Local Government Areas (LGAs) in Borno are home to approximately 19% and 18% of the IDPs, respectively.

The consortium project, led by FRAD with support from C3HD and CEDAR, seeks to address the critical humanitarian needs in the region. Project activities are coordinated among consortium partners to ensure a holistic and effective assistance package. Consultations with the Ministry of Health, as well as key UN agencies such as UNICEF and WFP, have been carried out to identify coverage gaps and align the interventions with the state’s priorities.

Purpose of the Evaluation

The purpose of this project evaluation is to assess the project’s achievements in relation to its goals, objectives, and outcomes, and to extract key learnings from the intervention. The evaluation’s findings will contribute to both accountability—toward the Consortium team and the donor (NHF)—and to fostering future learning. It will also provide recommendations for future project designs in the target areas, including newly accessible regions. The evaluation will examine the effectiveness of the implementation strategy and the results achieved, covering aspects such as execution methods, potential for replication, and long-term sustainability. Additionally, it will assess the realization of project outcomes, its scalability for broader application, and the success of the integration approach. The evaluation will also identify opportunities for improvement and knowledge development. To achieve these objectives, the evaluation will focus on the following key areas (evaluation questions).

4.0 Evaluation Questions

The evaluation questions, aligned with the FRAD Evaluation Guidelines, are designed to assess the project’s achievements in terms of its Relevance, Effectiveness, Efficiency, Impact, Coherence, Sustainability, and Equity. The evaluation is structured according to the RCEESI+E framework, with the following proposed sub-objectives:

Relevance

• To evaluate the relevance and rationale of the project, including the mechanisms and modalities used to achieve its objectives.
• To assess how well the project’s programs and schemes align with current best practices for addressing its goals and objectives.
• To examine the relevance of the implementation mechanisms in identifying potential gaps or inefficiencies.

Coherence

• To determine whether the project’s sector components within the Consortium are aligned and mutually supportive, effectively addressing interlinkages within the NHF’s broader program activities.
• To identify any conflicts or trade-offs with other programs or sectors.

Effectiveness

• To assess whether the outputs achieved align with set targets, and to analyze the processes that contributed to successes and challenges.
• To identify any gaps and challenges encountered in meeting targets and implementing the project.
• To evaluate the Consortium’s success in adopting best practices, activity planning, and transparency measures.
• To examine the use of technology, monitoring, evaluation, and accountability systems to prevent leakage in project implementation.
• To document scalable and replicable practices and innovative approaches developed by the Consortium team.

Efficiency

• To evaluate the efficiency of the different sectors and processes involved in the project, including institutional and human resource capacity, and the monitoring systems in place.

Sustainability

• To assess the economic, social, and environmental sustainability of the sectors implemented by the Consortium.
• To determine if the project’s impacts will be sustainable after the project ends.
• To evaluate the sustainability of the monitoring and accountability mechanisms created at the grassroots level.

Impact

• To assess the outcomes achieved compared to baseline data and targets.
• To analyze the impact of the project and Consortium programs in relation to their objectives and the roles they played.

Equity

• To evaluate the accessibility and availability of the project to the most marginalized households in Yobe and Borno States.
• To assess how well the project reaches vulnerable groups, including women, children, and the elderly.

The Endline evaluation will provide a comprehensive assessment of benchmark indicators, service delivery, and project impact in Yobe and Borno states. This evaluation will measure the effect of the implementation against selected indicators and improve understanding of the project’s achievements and gaps. The findings will provide evidence to guide future adjustments and inform the design of subsequent projects.

The Endline evaluation will focus on the overall project goal of strengthening the inclusion and protection of women and girls with disabilities within the humanitarian response framework in Borno and Yobe States. The evaluation will be conducted with a gender-sensitive, conflict-aware approach and will occur in the final quarters of the project to provide a basis for measuring future program impacts.

The evaluation will be led by a consultant who will consider contextual differences between Yobe and Borno, with an additional focus on newly displaced or returning populations in the areas of implementation. Further details on baseline indicators are provided in the sections below.

5.0 Evaluation Methodology

The evaluation methodology will align with the FRAD Framework for Evaluation, ensuring adherence to standards for planning, managing, conducting, and utilizing evaluations.

The Consortium Lead will oversee the overall management of the assignment, while the MEAL Manager will coordinate the day-to-day consultancy processes, working closely with the consultant. The FRAD Project Coordinator will provide technical oversight and guidance on the tools and methodology used, as well as the final evaluation report.

An independent consultant will carry out the analysis according to the Terms of Reference (ToR), incorporating necessary conflict sensitivity tools and exercises to meet the study’s objectives. Key tools and methods may include: (a) secondary literature review/desk research, (b) Key Informant Interviews (KIIs), (c) Focus Group Discussions (FGDs), (d) observations, and (e) data analysis. The consultant will develop a detailed methodology, including data collection tools and specific questions.

An Endline Evaluation Management Team, comprising four members not directly involved in project operations, will oversee the evaluation process. This team will consist of three members from Consortium partners and the Consortium Lead (Project Coordinator). The team will ensure the evaluation upholds the FRAD Management Policy for Evaluation.

The evaluation team will include up to four members (two from FRAD and two from the consultancy firm). This team will consist of an external evaluator with local context knowledge, who will provide an independent and objective perspective and technical expertise. The external evaluator will be the primary author of the evaluation report and will not have been involved in the Consortium’s operations. The evaluator will be selected through a transparent recruitment process, based on their professional experience, competence, ethics, and integrity.

The team will be gender-balanced and ideally include local experts (with at least 80% of team members being indigenous to the Northeast region). One team member will have a background in Protection, Gender, and Inclusion (PGI) in emergencies, ensuring that FRAD’s Minimum Standard Commitments on Protection, Gender, and Inclusion in Emergencies are followed throughout the evaluation. Each team member will be briefed on and must sign the FRAD Code of Conduct, Child Protection Policy, and Prevention of Sexual Exploitation and Abuse (PSEA) Policy. Background checks and screenings of team members will be mandatory. It is preferable that the team leader or a representative has regional experience and speaks Hausa, and ideally, all team members will have prior experience with evaluation practices. The team leader should ideally have experience in training on ethical data collection and storage.

All evaluation team members are expected to have strong evaluation experience and the ability to conduct a credible and informed evaluation of the emergency operation and surrounding context, ensuring legitimacy and credibility with stakeholders.

The specific evaluation methodology will be developed in close consultation between the Endline Evaluation team and FRAD, but it will primarily rely on the following methods:

5.1 Survey Design and Sampling

The survey will employ both quantitative and qualitative approaches:

• Quantitative data will be collected at the household level in project locations where Consortium activities are being implemented, along with secondary data from relevant bodies and partners.
• Qualitative data will complement the quantitative findings, with FGDs, observations, and KIIs conducted with various stakeholders and partners involved in BHA implementation.

Survey methods will include:

1. Desktop review of operational documents, organizational background, and any relevant secondary data.
2. Field visits and observations to selected sites and offices of line ministries.
3. Household interviews with sampled clients.
4. Key Informant Interviews (KIIs) with institutional stakeholders and beneficiaries as appropriate.
5. Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) with institutional stakeholders and beneficiaries, time and capacity permitting.

The sampling procedure will vary at each stage, combining probability random sampling with non-probability sampling to ensure consistency with both quantitative and qualitative methods. Probability random sampling will be used for the household survey, ensuring the selection of a representative sample from the population (project participants). Non-probability sampling will be used for KIIs, FGDs, and observations, focusing on specific cases or locations based on the study’s objectives.

In KIIs, a gender, age, and diversity balance will be maintained. For FGDs, separate sessions will be held for adult men, adult women, adolescent boys, and adolescent girls to capture a broad range of perspectives. The evaluation team will also consult with line ministries and local organizations to ensure the inclusion of vulnerable and marginalized community members, particularly in Yobe and Borno. Informed consent will be obtained from all interviewees, and if individuals are under 18, consent will be sought from their guardians or caregivers.

Given the complex nature of the emergency, sensitive cases related to child protection or sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV) may arise during data collection. All evaluation team members will be trained to handle such disclosures appropriately and refer individuals to the relevant services if needed.

6.0 Evaluation Process

Inception Stage:
The consultant will prepare an inception report prior to fieldwork, outlining their understanding of the assignment to ensure a shared understanding between the consultant and the consortium team. The inception report will include a detailed methodology, data sources, data collection methods, and analysis tools. Additionally, the report will contain an Evaluation Matrix aligned with the jointly agreed-upon evaluation questions. The report will also define the scope of work, work plan (including field mission selection), a schedule of tasks (for the 22-day contract period), and deliverables. The draft inception report will be submitted for review and feedback. After addressing comments and obtaining approval, the evaluation can proceed to the actual evaluation stage.

Data Collection and Analysis:
The consultant will propose suitable data collection and analysis tools, methodologies, and approaches in the technical proposal. These will be evaluated by the procurement committee (through technical analysis) and compared with competing proposals. Electronic data collection methods, where appropriate, are also acceptable.

First Draft Reporting Stage:
The consultant will prepare and submit a draft report to the consortium for review and feedback. Findings will be presented to stakeholders during this stage. The consortium team will provide final written comments within three days of receiving the draft report.

Final Reporting Stage:
The final report will be submitted within three days of receiving comments, incorporating feedback from the consortium team. The final report must be approved by FRAD and the IPs’ Senior Management Team (SMT).

Management Response:
A Management Response Team (MRT) will be identified from within FRAD and the IPs to formulate a management response and action plan. This response will be disclosed alongside the evaluation as an annex. The MRT will submit the response and action plan to the SMT, who will oversee the response and ensure follow-up actions.

7.0 Deliverables

The final analytical report should meet NHF requirements and include the following components:

1. Inception Report:
   • Inception workshop
   • Preliminary desk review
   • Development of data collection plan and tools
   • Writing of inception report
2. Comprehensive Desk Review:
   • Conduct an in-depth literature review
3. Data Collection:
   • Refine tools based on desk review
   • Distribute online survey
   • Train enumerators
   • Conduct Key Informant Interviews (KIIs) and Focus Group Discussions (FGDs)
4. Reporting:
   • Clean and analyze data
   • Organize and hold a remote workshop to present preliminary findings and conduct conflict and context analysis sensitization
   • Draft report writing
   • Organize and hold remote workshops to present findings and recommendations and co-develop work plans
   • Final report writing

8.0 Evaluation Quality and Ethics

The evaluators must take all reasonable steps to ensure participants’ anonymity. Verbal consent will be obtained before interviews, and individuals who choose not to participate will have their decision respected. All collected information will remain confidential, and the evaluation team will adhere to the standards set forth in the FRAD/Humanitarian Framework for Evaluation.

The FRAD evaluation standards include:

1. Utility: Evaluations must be useful and used.
2. Feasibility: Evaluations must be realistic, diplomatic, and cost-effective.
3. Ethics & Legality: Evaluations must be ethical and legal, respecting the welfare of those involved. IRC Code of Conduct, Child Protection Policy, and Prevention of Sexual Exploitation and Abuse (PSEA) must be adhered to.
4. Impartiality & Independence: Evaluations must be impartial, providing an unbiased assessment.
5. Transparency: Evaluation activities should be open and transparent.
6. Accuracy: Evaluations should be technically accurate, with detailed information on data collection, analysis, and interpretation methods.
7. Participation: Stakeholders should be meaningfully involved in the evaluation process where appropriate.
8. Collaboration: Collaboration between key partners enhances the legitimacy and utility of the evaluation.

9.0 Request for Proposal

Required Professional Skills:

This consultancy is open to individuals or teams of national consultants with specialized knowledge and research expertise in humanitarian response assessments, such as Multisectoral Needs Assessments (MSNA), in-depth evaluations, and research studies. The consultants should have the following qualifications, skills, and experience:

• Master’s degree in Statistics, Education, Economics, Social Sciences, or other relevant fields.
• Relevant bachelor’s degree with extensive expertise in humanitarian or development work, ideally in Northeast Nigeria.
• Proven experience conducting project-level evaluations in multi-sectoral settings, either as the sole evaluator or as head of the evaluation team.
• Experience in humanitarian emergencies, project management, monitoring, and evaluation, particularly in Northeast Nigeria, is an advantage.
• Strong cross-cultural communication and facilitation skills.
• Proven research and analytical abilities.
• Experience with research/evaluation in sensitive environments, particularly in emergencies.
• Provide three sample evaluation reports from previous projects.
• Familiarity with the Northeast Nigeria context, geography, and culture.
• At least 5 years of significant experience in conflict sensitivity analysis and ethical qualitative research on conflict-related issues, including conflict transformation.
• Proven expertise in conducting context and conflict analysis and integrating conflict sensitivity into strategic and operational frameworks.
• Conflict sensitivity expertise in complex humanitarian contexts, ideally in sub-Saharan Africa.
• Proficiency in English (written and oral) and, preferably, a local language from Northeast Nigeria.
• Excellent writing skills, with the ability to link findings, analysis, and recommendations.
• A flexible attitude toward receiving feedback.

How to apply

Applications
Interested and qualified candidates are invited to apply by submitting the following to the email address: consultancy-services@fradfoundation.org

• A concise proposal outlining how the work will be carried out, including a technical proposal with the full schedule and methodology for the study.
• A detailed work schedule from the start to the completion of the consultancy, including a technical approach and suggested timeline.
• A budget breakdown for the work to be undertaken, submitted in a single Excel worksheet, with categories for personnel, fees, travel, and other costs.
• The consultant’s CV.
• References from previous similar assignments, including tools, toolboxes, technical guidance, training manuals, etc.
• A sample of a final report from a previous evaluation the consultant has worked on.