We strive to advance children’s rights and equality for girls all over the world. As an independent development and humanitarian organisation, we work alongside children, young people, our supporters and partners to tackle the root causes of the challenges facing girls and all vulnerable children. We support children’s rights from birth until they reach adulthood and enable children to prepare for and respond to crises and adversity. We drive changes in practice and policy at local, national and global levels using our reach, experience and knowledge. For over 80 years we have been building powerful partnerships for children, and we are active in over 75 countries.
Plan International Myanmar seeks the services of a skilled evaluation consultant to undertake a mid-term evaluation of a 18 months project in cahttps://www.themimu.info/sites/themimu.info/files/jobs/Plan_International_Term_of_Reference_for_Mid_Term_Evaluation_Consultant_0.pdfmps across three sectors (WASH, Nutrition and Child Protection). The project started on May 1, 2019 and will come to end in October 2020.
The overall aim of the project is to improve humanitarian coping mechanisms of internally displaced persons in Kachin by strengthening the access to preventive nutrition measures, a better understanding of hygiene and measures for child protection. Plan has been active in the field of child protection in the IDP camps since 2013 and is carrying out activities within the Myitkyina, Waingmaw, Bhamo, Mogoung, Chilpwi, Mansi, Puta-O, Shwegu, Sumprabum and Momauk Townships. This project is implemented collaboratively between PLAN International Myanmar and Kachin Baptist Convention (KBC) in Kachin State.
The Project objective is to expand the reach and quality of services provided in IDP camps through expansion of Child Protection services, maintenance of WASH infrastructure and improved knowledge on infant and young child feeding. In order to achieve the objective, the project intervention has been organized in three sectors (CP, Nutrition and WASH) under which one “expected outcome” and five “expected results” are supposed from this project. ‘
Expected Outcome 1: The humanitarian coping mechanisms of internally displaced persons in Kachin are strengthened by access to preventive nutrition measures, a better understanding of hygiene and measures for child protection.
Expected Result 1: Vulnerable groups (children under 5 and PLW) have access to key preventive nutrition specific services and knowledge.
Expected Result 2: Target population has the knowledge and systems to maintain hygienic environment and reduce disease outbreak risk.
Expected Result 3: Children and adolescents have access to psychosocial support services through recreational activities and have increased knowledge, skills and opportunities to advance their development and wellbeing.
Expected Result 4: Community-based groups are supported with appropriate knowledge and skills to effectively address concerns that affect children.
Expected Result 5: Children have access to timely, child-friendly and confidential case management and referral services.
Purpose of the Evaluation:
The evaluation shall focus on the following:
a) Report progress towards the expected outcome and results via measuring the indicators.
b) Make recommendations for potential changes needed before the end of the project in order to achieve the results.
c) Collect viable recommendations from key stakeholders for life-saving actions to be continued under humanitarian funding.
d) Explore to which extent the actions are appropriate to prepare the transition to transitional or development aid and to give recommendations for potential changes in the project to better reach this aim.
The Mid-Term Evaluation shall be conducted and completed in April 2020 and cover the period of May 2019 to January 2020 (9 months). The evaluation is likely to include between 2-3 weeks in the field.
The scope of the evaluation will cover all activities, progress towards results and relevant indicators undertaken in the logical framework of the project. The evaluator will compare planned outputs of the project to actual outputs and assess the actual results to determine project contribution to the achievement of the project objective, as well as lessons learned.
The mid-term evaluation will be conducted to assess the criteria of effectiveness, connectedness, coherence, relevance/appropriateness, efficiency and coverage. It will take into account children’s rights, gender and inclusion components in the 3 sectors integrated in the project: WASH, Child Protection and Nutrition:
Effectiveness: The extent to which, and the reasons behind, the level of achievement of the project or programme’s objectives, and whether these are leading to unintended (positive or negative) consequences for anybody involved or affected by the interventions. Effectiveness also measures the extent to which an activity achieves its purpose.
Connectedness: Analysis of how activities of a short-term emergency nature are carried out in a context that takes longer-term and interconnected problems into account. Suggest potential changes in order to maximise sustainability of the actions or supporting a transition plan.
Coherence: The extent to which the interventions are adapted to prevalent
security, developmental, humanitarian, trade and military policies and analysis of how all policies take into account humanitarian and human-rights considerations.
Analysis on the extent to which policies of different actors are complementary or contradictory.
Relevance/ Appropriateness: The extent to which the interventions and their approaches were suited to the priorities and policies of the people and communities they were intended to benefit.
Efficiency: The extent to which financial resources were used efficiently; how economically inputs were converted to outputs.
Impact: Analysis of the (un)intended wider effects of the project (social, economic, technical, environmental) – on individuals, gender- and age-groups, communities and institutions. Examines the longer-term consequences of achieving or not achieving the project objectives on different levels (e.g. macro (sector) and micro (household) level).
Coverage: Analysis of how and to which extent the intervention reaches the major population groups facing life-threatening suffering. Analysis of who was supported by Humanitarian action, and why.
- To which extent have the stated intervention objectives been met?
- Why have particular objectives not been achieved so far?
- What are the weaknesses and strengths of the project design and implementation strategy?
- How did primary stakeholders participate in the design of the intervention?
- Which best practices from the project can be identified that could be applied to future and other on-going projects?
- To what extent was a timely provision of support, goods and services achieved, according to the perceptions of key stakeholders?
- To what extent do the activities support longer-term goals, ensuring a connection between humanitarian action, recovery and development?
- To what extent do strong partnerships exist?
- To what extent are livelihoods of the affected population supported or disrupted by the intervention?
- To which degree does the intervention support and develop government, civil society and other partner’s capacities?
- What exist or transition strategy for the project has been established?
- How does this strategy include timelines, allocation of responsibility and details on handover to government departments and/or development agencies, and adequate availability of funding post-response?
- To what extent do the project measures complement other interventions in the project region?
- To what extent have the identified needs and priorities of the beneficiaries been addressed by the project?
- To which degree has the project been conceived in line with donor policies?
- Why were the types of activities appropriate or not?
- How does the project promote participation and support women’s and men’s coping capacities?
- How does the project take into account different needs of women and girls?
- To which extent has an adequate needs assesment been conducted?
- How is the intervention culturally appropriate?
- To which extent has Plan International the capacity in terms of staffing, local knowledge and experience in the country or region, to conduct a relevant and appropriate response?
- Why did the intervention reach its level of efficiency, for example in relation to planning, expertise of staff in logistics, or policies on purchasing?
- How economically were inputs (financial, human, technical, material ressources) converted into outputs?
- To what extent were inputs locally purchased or imported? Were local tenders sought?
- To what extent did political factors influence the efficiency of the intervention?
- Is the project on track to fulfil the expected overall objectives?
- What do beneficiaries and other stakeholders affected by the intervention perceive to be the effects of the intervention on themselves?
- What were the main reasons that the intervention provided or failed to provide major population groups with assistance and protection, proportionate to their need?
- Is the level of resources provided adequate in comparison to other international emergency responses?
- On a national or regional level, to which extent has aid been provided according to need in different areas? Why/Why not?
- Who at the local level received support and why (break-down by social categories such as socioeconomic grouping, gender, age and ethnicity)?
- What proportion of those in need has been covered?
- To what extent have the protection needs of the target population been met?
- Why was coherence lacking or present until the present stage of the project implementation?
- What were the particular political factors that led to coherence or its lack?
- Were policies of different actors complementary or contradictory?
- To what extent should there be coherence in the mandates and activities of different actors in the context of this intervention?
- To which degree are the different actors coherent in their approach to protection?
- To what extent have existing policies on different levels met the protection needs of primary stakeholders?
Child rights, gender and inclusion:
Plan International Myanmar is committed to the wellbeing of children to together with Gender Equality and does not tolerate child abuse and sexual harassment. Plan International projects apply gender and inclusion sensitive approaches and explicitly aimed for results that improve the rights of children and young people as well as gender equality. Thus, all of Plan International Myanmar’s assessments promote the equal participation of all age groups and especially of children, equal gender participation and inclusion of person with disabilities and all marginalized peoples. How those groups will be included must be reflected in the methodology proposed by the consultant.
The extent to which the project or programme applied gender and inclusion sensitive approaches and explicitly aimed for results that improve the rights of children and young people and gender equality. Further, the extent to which a child-friendly feedback mechanism using the Plan International ‘Feedback Mechanism Scorecard’ was applied and functioning.
Users of the Evaluation:
The results of this evaluation are primarily intended for internal use by Plan International Myanmar to inform future improvements to the project and to transfer learning across the Plan International Myanmar organization network. Findings will also be shared with Plan International Germany and the donor, the German Federal Foreign Office (GFFO). Results and findings will also be shared with targeted communities, and partner organizations. Relevant results and lessons learnt will be shared with other stakeholders, including government offices and cluster organizations.
Methods for Data Collection and Analysis:
The mid-term evaluation will employ quantitative and qualitative methods. Data and information will be gathered from sampled townships of Plan international operational areas. The consultant should develop a plan to include following groups of stakeholders in the evaluation.
1) Direct and non- direct Project beneficiaries: children (boys and girls), women, men and marginalized groups as identified by the project.
2) Implementation Staffs form PLAN and KBC.
3) Community Volunteers.
4) Wider Stakeholders (Camp Management Committee, Child Protection Groups, WASH committee, Nutrition Groups, Nurses, Camp Authorities, Religious Leaders and local authorities).
An appropriate sampling technique shall be designed by the consultant to determine sample size of respondents to generate representative conclusions. Data and information gathered will be analysed and presented systematically.
The design of questionnaires shall be inclusive, age and gender appropriate and include marginalized beneficiaries. The questionnaires shall measure the project indicators achievement and answer the Evaluation Questions.
The consultancy shall also include case studies (with pictures) on beneficiaries or other key stakeholders for each of the sector of intervention (Nutrition, Child Protection and WASH).
At a minimum the evaluation shall cover the following number of camps and population groups: The mid-term evaluation will be conducted with a representative sample (Man = 11512, Woman = 13902, Boy = 11087, Girl = 11151) of 39 camps targeted by the project.
Ethics and Child Protection:
Plan International is committed to ensuring that the rights of those participating in data collection or analysis are respected and protected, in accordance with Ethical MERL Framework and our Safeguarding Children and Young People Policy. All applicants should include details in their proposal on how they will ensure ethics and child protection in the data collection process. Specifically, the consultant(s) shall explain how appropriate, safe, non-discriminatory participation of all stakeholders will be ensured and how special attention will be paid to the needs of children and other vulnerable groups. The consultant(s) shall also explain how confidentiality and anonymity of participants will be guaranteed. Successful applicants will have to read, sign and abide by the Plan International Safeguarding Children and Young People Policy as well as the Plan International Code of Conduct and Anti-Fraud Policy.
Within 2 weeks after contract sing off
Final questionnaires both qualitative & quantitative
Final Data Collection Tools:
Together with inception report
- qualitative and quantitative
Completed Consent Forms:
- PII Code of Conduct
- PII Safeguarding Policy
- Ethical MERL Framework
Draft Evaluation Report (incl. case studies):
3 weeks after data collection
Final Evaluation Report (including Executive Summary):
One month after data collection completion
- Max 30 pages (excl. Annexes)
- 1 p. executive summary
Cleaned Data (including transcripts):
Submit together with final report
Other Communication Products for Dissemination:
Submit together with final report
- Incl. high quality photos
- Min. 3 case studies
Timeline (consultant to complete with proposal):
Timeframe for this evaluation : March – April 2020.
The consultant need to submit the final complete report at the End of April 2020.
The applicant’s budget proposition shall include:
Round trip flights to Myitkyina from consultant’s home.
Daily consultant fee.
Taxi fare if needed (up to 10,000 Kyats for airport transfers in Yangon and Myitkyina).
Associated evaluator costs including transportation to evaluation sites, printing/duplication etc.
The consultant will be responsible for covering their own food and beverage costs (when not included with accommodation).
- Extensive theoretical and practical experience in humanitarian contexts preferably proven M&E experience with two or several of the target sectors.
- Proven technical understanding of humanitarian programming (either through CV or sample of previous work) and ability to measure behavioural baseline and behavioural change.
- Budget calculation and team structure are clear in proposal.
- Proven experience in carrying out evaluations.
- Previous experience in project evaluation on this or related topics is considered an advantage.
- Proficiency in quantitative and qualitative methods of data collection.
- Proven experience with data analysis and proficiency in statistics.
- Proven technical capacity in project evaluation with strong analytical methods.
- Experience in Myanmar.
- Knowledge of Kachin Language(s) by team members will be considered an advantage.
- Willingness and capacity to be flexible and accommodating when faced with difficult and frustrating working conditions.
- Ability and willingness to frequently travel and stay at field base.
- Ability to submit a concise and well written analytical report on the results of the surveys in error-free English.
- Applicants who are using child-friendly and mobile data collection methods will be prioritized.
How to Apply:
Interested applicants should provide a proposal covering the following aspects to Myanmar.CO@plan-international.org no later than 12th March 2020, 5:00 PM. Late applicants will not be considered. Subject Line for Application: GFFO Mid-Term Evaluation Consultant.
Detailed response to the TOR.
Proposed methodology and data collection tools.
Ethics and child safeguarding approaches, including any identified risks and associated mitigation strategies.
CVs of team members.
Example of previous work.
Detailed budget, including daily fee rates, expenses, taxes etc.
Police Certificates of Good Conduct.
Only shortlisted candidates will be contacted. Plan International is an equal opportunity employer and women are encouraged to apply. Plan International Myanmar is committed to the well-being of children together with Gender Equality and do not tolerate child abuse and sexual harassment. All Plan International Myanmar Staffs are required to sign and adhere with Plan’s Safeguarding Policy at all times.