Terms of Reference - FLOW Women’s Rights to Sustainable
Livelihoods Project End of Project Evaluation
1) Summary of the evaluation Terms of Reference
This is a terms of reference for an end of project evaluation being undertaken by the
women’s rights to sustainable livelihoods project in Ghana and in Rwanda which started in
2012 and will end in December 2015. These terms of reference outline the key purpose and
objectives, expected methodology and deliverable of the evaluation. The Evaluation is
expected to highlight the project results, impact and the processes which led to these, key
lessons learnt, point out to new policy programme directions and facilitate the sustainability
of the project.
2) Background: Women’s Rights to Sustainable Livelihoods end of project evaluation
The women’s rights to sustainable livelihoods project was funded by the Dutch Government
and aims to increase the food security of 5,400 women farmers in Ghana and Rwanda by
reducing and redistributing their unpaid care work and improving their farming practices. The
project started in 2012 and will end in December 2015. The project is being implemented in
2 Local Rights Programmes (LRPs – ActionAid’s programme areas) in Ghana and 2 LRPs in
Rwanda and has 5 main outcomes. These are:
1. 5,400 women (3000 in Ghana and 2400 in Rwanda) smallholder farmers in 4 LRPs in
Ghana and Rwanda are organised and their work as farmers and carers is recognised by
the community
2. 5,400 women smallholder farmers meet regularly with local and national policy makers
and engage in planning and budgeting processes to demand more resources to support
them in food production and unpaid care work
3. Hours spent by 2,700 women (1,500 in Ghana and 1,200 in Rwanda) on unpaid care
work are significantly reduced as a result of low cost pilot interventions such as
community-run childcare centres, household rainwater storage, community tree lots and
community sensitization meetings
4. 5,400 women smallholder farmers have more secure and sustainable access to food and
are producing increased surplus for sale
5. Greater visibility of women’s unpaid care work and farming activities leads to an increase
in donor, regional and international commitments to support rural women smallholder
farmers.
The project’s key interventions include, supporting collective organisations, political
engagement, and leadership of women farmers, reducing time spent on unpaid care work,
Improving food and nutrition security, evidence-based research on women smallholder
farmers’ multiple roles to inform national and international advocacy,
3. Objectives and purpose of the evaluation
The overall purpose of the evaluation is to assess the effectiveness of the project, the extent
to which the project has achieved its goals and objectives, and to assess the project’s
contribution to any changes in women’s rights and improved climate resilient sustainable
agriculture (CRSA).
Specific objectives of the evaluation are to:
i)
Assess the extent to which the project has achieved its objectives and
contributed to any observed changes in women’s rights and improved climate
resilient sustainable agriculture
1
ii)
iii)
iv)
v)
vi)
Assess the process of change by which project objectives have been achieved
(or not) and the relative effectiveness of specific intervention strategies (relating
to unpaid care work initiatives, the use of time diaries, CRSA, etc.)
To assess the extent to which the project was implemented:
a. in line with ActionAid’s HRBA Principles (particularly with regards to women’s
rights, accountability to people living in poverty, and power dynamics), and;
b. in terms of the efficient use of resources in relation to the planned activities,
outputs and outcomes.
To identify and document lessons learnt and good practices which can inform
future programming and wider organisational learning on unpaid care work,
climate resilient sustainable agriculture and women’s rights
Make specific, actionable recommendations for up-scaling and replication of
project interventions and policy directions on unpaid care work and CRSA
approaches based on an understanding of how the project has or has not worked
in different contexts and what were the enabling factors and barriers to change
Use the (draft) ActionAid International Evaluation Principles and Quality
Standards and technical guidance for the evaluation and to make
recommendations for their improvement.
4.0 Key evaluation questions to be answered
In fulfilling the aims and objectives of this ToR, the evaluation is also expected to address
and answer the following evaluation questions related to the effectiveness of the project in
each country:
1. How have women and men perceived and engaged with community groups, the use
of REFLECT methodologies, and time diaries? How have different power dynamics
shaped women’s engagement and have there been any unintended consequences,
positive or negative?
2. If and how has women’s participation in leadership and decision making changed
within communities and in engagements with local and national duty-bearers?
3. What have been the most effective strategies for engaging men in the project and
have they led to a change in household division of labour?
4. What has been the relative success of the different pilot interventions in each country
(such as community-run childcare centres, household rainwater storage, and
community tree lots for firewood) on women’s time use and what trade-offs women
have made with each?
5. Have climate resilient sustainable agriculture (CRSA) methods (such as use of green
manure, composting, terracing, multi-purpose trees, intercropping, mulching, ,
community seed control- seed preservation, sustainable water management,
livelihood diversification etc.) had any impact on agricultural productivity, income or
food security, and why or why not?
6. If and how different components of the project (specifically relating to unpaid care
work and CRSA) have combined to lead to women’s economic empowerment, and
how could the conceptual theory underpinning the project be improved?
In addition, the following secondary questions relate to the implementation of the project:
1. If and how women’s needs and viewpoints shaped the programme design and its
implementation?
2. What was the quality of the partnerships involved in implementing the project?
3. Have the time diaries and other M&E processes and data provided evidence of
sufficient quality to use for international advocacy efforts?
2
5.0 Use and users of the evaluation
The evaluation is expected to take an ‘utilisation-focused’ approach. The primary intended
users are:
User
Use of the evaluation
AAI Ghana and Rwanda
quality management and
monitoring and evaluation
officers, International
Secretariat projects and
other AAI project and
senior managers in
countries where CRSA
and unpaid care work is a
priority
The results of the evaluation will be
used to identify the key opportunities
for up scaling, replication of the
project and inform future direction of
similar projects on women
empowerment.
The evaluation will be used to
identify the key lessons learnt
regards women’s empowerment,
food security, unpaid care work,
climate resilient sustainable
agriculture, processes of advocacy,
monitoring, evaluation, connecting
local to regional initiatives and share
them widely across the Action Aid
Federation and with key partners.
Example involvement/ role
the evaluation process






in
Developing Terms of
Reference for the evaluation
Briefing selected evaluator on
the project
Interviewed by the evaluator
as key informants
Providing logistical and
coordination support to the
evaluator as agreed
Writing a management
response to the evaluation
Disseminating the evaluation
internally and externally
The evaluation will generate useful
information in relation to climate
resilient sustainable agriculture
practices which fit well with
ActionAid’s strategic goals on
women empowerment, economic
alternatives and climate resilient
sustainable agriculture.
AAR partners, Faith
Victory Association,
Réseau des femmes and
AAG partners, Songtaba,
Bonatadu and Widows
and Orphans Movement
The results of the evaluation will be
used to identify the key opportunities
for up scaling, replication of the
project, internal linkage of the project
with existing projects and inform
future direction of similar projects on
women empowerment by the
partner.
The evaluation will be used to
identify the key lessons learnt
regards women’s empowerment,
food security, unpaid care work,
climate resilient sustainable
agriculture, processes of advocacy,
monitoring, evaluation, connecting
local to regional initiatives
The evaluation will generate
information regards partner capacity
development needs and
recommendations on successful
3
The partners will feed into the
TOR, and provide logistical
support to local and international
researchers in carrying out the
evaluation,
Partners will support where
possible in data analysis and
reporting on the evaluation
Women
farmers
smallholder
Communities in Ghana
and Rwanda
Dutch Ministry of Foreign
Affairs
project handover
The evaluation will be used by
women smallholder farmers to
identify their key next steps regards
advocacy on climate resilient
sustainable agriculture and
addressing unpaid care work and
other key issues emerging from the
project
The evaluation will be used by
communities to discuss challenges
and lessons and inform future
engagement with local and national
government by communities on
projects.
The evaluation will be used by
communities to reflect on the project
impact regards what worked well as
well as project handover processes.
The evaluation report will be used as
part of the monitoring and evaluation
of the FLOW grant which ends in
2015





Active
participants
in
evaluation data gathering
exercises, providing their
opinions and feedback on the
project and reflections on
if/how it has affected them
Evaluator to provide a
summary of their take away
messages before leaving
each community, to be
commented on and validated
by women
Selected
participants
in
evaluation data gathering
exercises, providing their
opinions and feedback on the
project and reflections on
if/how it has affected them.
the community members will
include
traditional
and
religious,
government
community leaders and local
authorities
Evaluation report to be
shared with the Dutch
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
6.0 Scope of the evaluation
In terms of outcome 1- 4 of the project, the evaluation will take place in the Southern Region
of Rwanda in Nyanza and Gisagara Districts and in Ghana it will take place in Nanumba and
Talensi/Nabdam in Ghana. The evaluation will involve consultative process with direct and
indirect beneficiaries of the project. These will include women smallholder farmers, local
leaders, local government authorities from the Ministry of Gender and Family Promotion,
Ministry of Agriculture and Animal resources in Rwanda and the Ministry of Food and
Agriculture, gender and women’s affairs, traditional leaders in Ghana.
Ghana
In Ghana the project is being done in 2 Local Rights Programmes (LRPS – ActionAid’s
geographic area of operation) Talensi/Nabdam LRP is located in the Upper East Region,
the second poorest region in Ghana. Nanumba LRP is located in the Northern Region of
Ghana and it is the third poorest region in the country. There are 42 women’s groups in
Talensi/ Nabdam. There are 58 women’s groups in Nanumba
Rwanda
In Nyanza LRP covers Nyanza district located in southern Rwanda which was deeply
affected by the 1994 genocide and Gisagara LRP is the district neighbouring Nyanza and
Burundi. It is an area that has suffered from food insecurity and high poverty levels. There
are 40 women’s groups in each of the two LRPs . There are sectors in each LRP.
4
In terms of the outcome 5 of the project the evaluation will include telephone/skype
interviews with members of the African Union Department of Agriculture and Rural Economy,
NEPAD/ CAADP and members of UNEP, UN Women, as well as representatives from
Groots, FEMNET, Acord, SID, and Daughter of Mumbi Global Resource Center
7.0 Expected methodology / Approach to the evaluation
The consultant is expected to use a variety of methods to collect and analyse data and bring
out a clear gender analysis throughout the evaluation. The consultant is also expected to
refer to tools used by ActionAid in the mid- term evaluation to ensure comparability of data
over the time frame of the project.
We welcome suggestions for methodological approaches that address the objectives and
evaluation questions set out in this ToR that include strong gender-responsive or feminist
evaluation principles, but as a guide we expect this may include the following tasks from the
consultant:
Inception Phase to include:
a) Introductory briefings with ActionAid project team and technical advisors within
ActionAid International, ActionAid Ghana and ActionAid Rwanda
b) Literature review of existing project and contextual documents
Including but not limited to:
 The FLOW women’s rights to sustainable livelihoods Project Proposal,
 FLOW monitoring protocol,
 Baseline Survey report for AAR and AAG and consolidated baseline report
 2012, 2013, 2014, FLOW annual reports, work plans and budget
 Climate resilient sustainable agriculture toolkit
 Delivering women farmers rights policy brief
 workshop reports and field visit reports
 Annual review meeting reports
 FLOW M and E tools used in annual reporting for 2015
 Identification and review of secondary data particularly to use as comparison data and
for triangulation
c) Detailed methodology, data collection tools, work plan
Including but not limited to:
 Reviewing existing data collection tools to identify key indicators (within the project log
frame or not) for which comparable data is available (from baseline, mid-term and
monitoring tools) and that can be used to demonstrate changes over time
 Finalise and agree overall methodological design and approach for the evaluation,
including details of sampling strategy and size and analytical framework
 Finalise management and coordination arrangements for the evaluation in all
countries/internationally
 Adapt/develop specific data collection tools or processes (i.e. focus group discussion
guides etc.)
 Develop clear and simple ethical protocol and guidelines for the evaluation
Data collection phase to include:
Including but not limited to:
d) Field visits and community discussions
5



The consultant will conduct field visits and hold community discussions in areas where
the project is being implemented
Data collection (qualitative and quantitative) from a sample of women in Ghana and
Rwanda reflective of the following groups: women who have benefitted from child care
centres, seed and grain banks, climate resilient sustainable agriculture and food
processing, training on leadership and engagement with local authorities
Data collection (qualitative and quantitative) from men and other community members
directly or indirectly involved in the project (and possibly community members not
involved in the project by way of comparison) and local authorities (traditional and
elected)
e) Interviews and focus group discussions with AAR, AAG, and partner staff, AAI IS
advocacy and resilient livelihoods team, local authorities (traditional and elected) and
local development institutions, Government, Ministries and Parliamentarians,
traditional leaders and other key actors.






f) Key informant interviews (remotely or in person) with the following:
Local government authorities in the selected areas of the study
National level officials in each country
Civic organisation including farmers network and women’s organisation in each country
Representatives from AU and NEPAD/CAADP
Representative from UNEP and UN Women
Civil society organisations on regional advocacy
g) Statistical analysis of Time diaries, the consultant is expected to review the time
diaries reports being collected in the two countries and ascertain the overall impact of
the project on women’s time use.
The consultant is expected to develop an analytical framework through which to organise
data and address the evaluation questions as above. Further, in analysing data, the
consultant will be expected to highlight the perspectives of different stakeholders, and
different understandings of if, how, and for who change has occurred. The analysis should
draw on and make comparisons to existing data sources (baseline, mid-term and monitoring
data etc.) and if and where possible use secondary data to compare project level changes
with non-project level changes or use other evaluative approaches to assess the project’s
contribution to change (as in objective 1).
ActionAid expects all evaluations to be carried out in line with AA Evaluation Standards.
These standards will be shared on request, but in practical terms include the need for the
evaluation and the evaluator to:



Feeding back: the evaluators should as a minimum commit to feeding key findings back
to the communities involved in the evaluation before leaving ‘the field’. Options for
validation of results and feeding back final evaluation findings must be considered.
Transparency and ethical standards: the evaluators should explain clearly to
communities involved in the evaluation what the purpose of the exercise is, how people’s
information will be used. The evaluation should follow ActionAid’s ethical standards for
research and data collection, and should include a risk assessment covering security
risks to communities. As a minimum the evaluation should ‘do no harm’.
Community voices: it is essential that the evaluation reflects the voices of women and
men involved in the project. People should be consulted as part of the evaluation, and
their voices should be included in the evaluation report as direct quotes and case
6



studies. In line with ActionAid’s mandate the evaluation should prioritise people living in
poverty and exclusion, especially women.
Women’s rights: Women’s rights must be respected in all evaluations. All evaluations
should seek to explore how women have been affected by an intervention and the effect
of the intervention on gender relations. It is essential that women’s voices are heard
clearly in the evaluation. The timing and location of evaluation activities and the
composition of the evaluation team should be designed to maximise women’s ability to
participate in the evaluation.
Transparency about methodology: The evaluation should include a detailed and
transparent discussion of the methodology used and key decisions taken in designing
and implementing the evaluation. This should include information about the sampling
(approach to sampling, numbers of people/communities covered, to what extent it was
representative), what tools were used and why, methodological limitations and gaps in
the evaluation.
Disaggregated data: All data, qualitative and quantitative, collected through the review
must be disaggregated by sex and age as a minimum. Further disaggregation according
to relevant areas of social exclusion to be conducted where possible.
8.0 Coordination, roles and responsibilities for implementing the evaluation
ActionAid International is looking for an evaluation consultant(s) to lead the evaluation of the
multi-county project.
This lead evaluator will develop the methodology and tools for the project evaluation in all
countries, in consultation with countries. The lead evaluator will be directly involved in the
management and execution of the evaluation in at least one of the two project countries.
Details will depend on the location of the selected lead consultant (and applications from
consultants based in any country are eligible) and their proposed methodology, work-plan
and budget.
In the case that the lead consultant is not based in Ghana or Rwanda, it is suggested that
the lead consultant conduct the evaluation directly in Rwanda, and indirectly support a
national-level consultant to be recruited in Ghana (herein referred to as the national
consultant).
In this case, the terms of reference of the national consultant shall be discussed and agreed
upon by the lead consultant and ActionAid Ghana. ActionAid Ghana would be responsible
for hiring the national consultant and payment of the national consultant, and the national
consultant would conduct the evaluation using the methodology and tools discussed and
agreed with the lead consultant. The national consultant will be expected to respond to any
queries, clarifications and details required by the lead consultant before and during the
evaluation.
The lead evaluator will be responsible for data quality from all countries, and for developing
methodology, consolidating all data collected, analysing it, and producing a final evaluation
report. The lead consultant would ideally still visit Ghana to support the national consultant,
but may not need to be involved in all data collection.
The lead evaluation consultant will report to AA International Secretariat (AAIS) and will be
supported by the international project manager from the ActionAid International Secretariat,
based in Zimbabwe. AAI IS will lead coordination of the evaluation across the two countries,
and will provide all necessary project information; introductions to relevant stakeholders at
the international level; and any general logistical support and advice.
AA Ghana will lead the coordination of the evaluation in Ghana with the support of its three
partners. AA Rwanda will lead the coordination of the evaluation in Rwanda with the support
7
of its two partners. In both countries, this will involve: introductory briefings with the
consultant(s); logistical support arranging visas and booking accommodation as required;
providing contact details and introductions to key stakeholders; mobilising community
members to be involved in the evaluation; if required, recommendations for research
assistants, interpreters or other local human resources as needed.
The selected lead evaluation consultant(s) may also be requested to work with a member of
ActionAid International’s EAGLEs (Evaluation and Accountability Global Leaders) network.
During the inception phase, the possibility of an EAGLEs member being involved in some
part of the evaluation may be explored (depending on availability and timing). This would be
to provide the EAGLEs member with a learning opportunity through accompanying the
evaluation process, and to contribute their own knowledge of ActionAid and technical
expertise in evaluations. The involvement of the EAGLEs member would be funded
separately by ActionAid. The decision to involve EAGLEs would be at the discretion of the
lead evaluator and would in no way affect the independence of the lead evaluator.
9.0 Outputs / deliverables of the evaluation
1. An inception report from the evaluator with detailed methodology, tools and work plan
2. A draft evaluation report to be produced by external evaluator
3. Final evaluation report that incorporates feedback received from ActionAid and meets
agreed quality standards and evaluator. The report (not more than 50 pages excluding
annexes) should be very precise, must answer each evaluation objectives and should at
least contain the following (this can be discussed within the inception phase):
a. Cover page (title of the evaluation report, date, name of consultants)
b. Contents table
c. Executive summary of no more than 2 pages outlining the key purpose of the
evaluation, main points of analysis, key findings, conclusions and
recommendations
d. Introduction outlining the background to the project and the evaluation
e. Purpose and objectives of the evaluation
f. Analytical framework of the evaluation
g. Methodology/approach, indicators used, ethical issues and limitations of the
evaluation
h. Summary results against project log-frame indicators
i. Major findings (data analysis, including gender analysis and response to
evaluation questions)
j. Lessons learned and recommendations
k. Annexes: details of data collection tools, schedule of field visits and meetings; list
of people interviewed; bibliography of key documents consulted; TOR for the
evaluation
l. Annexes may also include more detailed country-level reports or case studies
(exact format to be agreed during inception phase)
4. The evaluation team is required to make a presentation of key findings to ActionAid
(possibly remotely)
5. Recommendations following on from key findings of the evaluation are to be discussed,
and possibly ‘co-created’ with ActionAid and partner staff to encourage relevance,
ownership and action of recommendations
6. Draft summary report (summarising key findings and recommendations, up to 4 pages)
that can be used to disseminate findings, written in English but in clear and plain
language and style suitable for project communities
8
7. The raw data (all transcripts, quantitative data, and data collection tools) must be handed
over to ActionAid together with the evaluation report.
8. A short (maximum two page) report providing feedback to ActionAid International on the
draft Evaluation Principles and Standards (their applicability and usability)
Management Response: The report will be followed by a management response from
ActionAid, outlining areas that we agree with and will take forward in future responses;
responding to areas highlighted as requiring improvement; outlining any findings that we
disagree with which have not been resolved through providing comments on the draft report,
and indicating how learning will be taken on board in this and future responses.
10.0
Expected timetable for the evaluation
The consultancy will be required to start in early September, and will be completed no later
than the end of November.
The table below gives suggested, approximate timeline for planning purposes only. A
detailed work plan will be finalised and agreed during the inception phase.
Activity
Approximate
Tentative
Number of days dates
(for
planning
only)
Discussion and interpretation of TOR with
1
5th
October
consultants
2015
Potentially participate in project workshop (a project 3
19-23 October
workshop is being held in Nairobi. This may present
2015
an opportunity for the lead consultant to meet and
discuss with key members of the project team from
both countries, but this is optional and will depend on
final timings)
Literature review
2
End of October
2015
Preparation of data collection tools and submission 2
of inception report
12 - 18
Data collection in field
mid
November
2015
Data analysis and
6
19st November
preparation of draft report
2015
Online discussion of draft report
and sending
21stNovember
comments to consultant (ActionAid)
2015
Finalisation of country level report
4
By
31st
November
2015
Consolidation of global draft reports first draft
4
5th December
2015
9
Finalisation of report
2
Production of evaluation summary for feedback to 2
beneficiary communities
Feedback on the (draft) ActionAid International 1
Evaluation Principles and Quality Standards and
technical guidance
11.0
18th December
2015
End December
2015
End-December
2015
Budget
The total indicative budget available for the evaluation is £23,000 (including all applicable
taxes), which should cover all costs including consultants’ fee for conducting the entire
assignment (including travel, daily allowances and out-of-pocket expenses, and all in-country
data collection costs). This includes all costs associated with the evaluation in Ghana.
However, if a national level consultant is to be recruited separately in Ghana (see section 8
above) then the costs of this (consultancy fees and all data collection costs) would be
deducted from the total available, and the approximate amount available for the lead
consultant would be £16,500.
12.0
Evaluation team qualifications and how they should apply
Selection Criteria
ActionAid is seeking proposals from individuals or teams with the following skills and
experiences:
1. Demonstrable expertise on women’s rights and gender equality programmes and in
human rights based approaches
2. Understanding of rural livelihoods and climate change adaptation programmes,
particularly in Ghana, Rwanda or the region, would be preferable
3. Substantial evaluation experience including experience in conducting feminist and/or
gender-responsive evaluations
4. Previous experience working with communities using participatory approaches
5. Substantial experience conducting qualitative research and data analysis
6. Ability to conduct statistical analysis of monitoring and survey data
7. Demonstrated understanding of and commitment to ethical issues in
research/evaluations
8. Experience in managing and coordinating evaluation/research exercises, including with
or through country-based partners, delivering agreed outputs on time and on budget
9. Ability to write high quality, clear, concise reports in English
Selected consultant(s) will be expected to sign and abide by ActionAid values and key
policies (including Anti-Sexual Harassment Policy, Child Protection Policy etc.).
How to apply
We invite interested individuals to submit the following application documents:
A. Copy of CV of the consultant(s) who will undertake the research and evaluation
(maximum 3 sides of A4 each);
B. Proposal (maximum 8 sides of A4) detailing a) how the Consultant(s) meets the
selection criteria and b) their understanding of the TOR and methodology. Please
ensure your proposal explicitly answers the following questions:
10
i.
C.
D.
E.
F.
What will you do to successfully engage with the intended users as identified
in this ToR?
ii.
What evaluation approach and methods do you suggest to answer the
evaluation questions given in the ToR?
iii.
How will your proposed approach involve women participating in the project in
the two countries?
iv.
What do you foresee to be the main ethical issues and what will be your
approach to addressing them?
v.
What risks do you foresee in relation to this evaluation consultancy and how
will you mitigate them?
A proposed activities schedule/work plan with time frame;
Financial proposal detailing consultant(s) itemized fees, data collection and
administrative costs
One recent example of similar evaluation report written by the applicant (if joint
authored to include a description of the role of the named consultant in the report);
Contact details of two independent referees
Please send your applications to:
Christina.Kwangwari@actionaid.org, and chrispines.oloo@actionaid.org
The deadline for applying is 7th October 2015. We are aiming to select the consultant by 10th
October and start the contract by 12th October 2015.
13.0
Terms of payment
The payment will be done according to the following time frame/arrangement:
Instalments
Amount
Time line
1st instalment
30% of the total amount
After Inception meeting and sharing
inception report from the evaluator with
detailed methodology, tools and work plan
2nd instalment
50% of the total amount
After presenting field data summery and
sending draft report
3rd instalment
20% of the total amount
After satisfactory completion of final report &
summary external report
11