Jordan: End-line Study of Combating the Worst Forms of Child Labour in Jordan (2023-2026)

Background:

Child labour, especially its worst forms in hazardous sectors, remains a critical child protection issue in Jordan. In the Balqa and Zarqa governorates, many vulnerable children (girls and boys aged 6–17) are at risk of engaging in hazardous work due to economic hardship, limited access to education, and social norms. The “Combatting the Worst Forms of Child Labour” (CWFCL) project was launched to address these challenges by integrating child protection, education, and livelihoods support in target communities of Balqa and Zarqa governorates.

About Plan International: 

Plan International is an independent development and humanitarian organisation that advances children’s rights and equality for girls. We believe in the power and potential of every child, but know this is often suppressed by poverty, violence, exclusion and discrimination. Working together with children, young people, supporters and partners, we strive for a just world, tackling the root causes of the challenges girls and vulnerable children face. We support children’s rights from birth until they reach adulthood, and enable children to prepare for – and respond to – crises and adversity. We place a specific focus on girls and young women, who are most often left behind. We have been building powerful partnerships for children for more than 80 years, and are now active in more than 70 countries.

Plan International Jordan was established in 2016 and has programmes throughout the country (Amman, Jordan Valley, Karak, Jarash, Azraq camp, and Zarqa). Working in partnerships with local, national and international organisations, Plan aims to support the recovery and resilience of Jordanian host populations and Syrian refugees, as in the project covered by this final evaluation.

Plan International France (PIF) is also commissioning office, as it provides funds to implement this project especially in the framework of support from AFD (Agence Française de Développement). PIF oversees the CWFCL in Jordan project and leads communications with the donor AFD as it guides Plan Jordan for the CWFCL overall project management especially in terms of Quality and Conformity.

Project Background: 

Funded by the Agence Française de Développement (AFD), Plan International, in partnership with Jordan Valley Development and Reconstruction Association (JVDRA) and Tamkeen for Legal Aid and Human Rights, has started to implement a 3-year project starting in October 2023. The overall objective of the project is to contribute to the elimination of Worst Forms of Child Labour in hazardous sectors through comprehensive and inclusive child protection prevention and response services.

The specific objective of the project is to ensure that by 2026, girls and boys (aged 6 to 17 years, with at least 50% being girls) are less at risk of, or removed from the worst forms of child labour in hazardous sectors within Zarqa and Balqa Governorates.

The project is aiming to achieve the following results:

• Children at risk from the targeted communities (6 to 17 years old, at least 50% of girls) after participating in the project, have improved knowledge, attitudes and practices to protect themselves from the WFCL hazardous sectors. The target is 700 girls and boys.
• Targeted adolescents, parents and caregivers refrain from engaging in or sending their children to the WFCL in the hazardous sectors after participating in Plan’s Parenting for Protection Programme and/or benefit equitably from enhanced access to sustainable, dignifying livelihood skills-building opportunities. The target is 280 parents/caregivers.
• Targeted communities and civil society representatives, key national actors (National Child Labour Task Force - CLTF), local authorities, and employers in the targeted communities are better enabled to prevent and respond to the WFCL in the hazardous sectors. The target is 4200 community members reached through initiatives and awareness sessions.

Purpose of the Study: 

The project has been implemented since 2023 in selected communities of Balqa and Zarqa governorates. It directly targets about 700 children (6–17 years) at risk of child labour, 280 parents/caregivers (50% women, 50% men) in positive parenting sessions, and 140 adolescents/household members in livelihoods training. Additionally, the project engages local officials and community members at large through advocacy and awareness activities, in total 3000 participants from awareness-raising sessions, 1200 community members from initiatives, 20 Community-based Child Protection Committee (CBCPC) members, 20 media personnel and 25 CLTF members under result 3. As the project concludes its first phase, a second phase is being conceptualized to build on its achievements. The endline evaluation outlined in this ToR will assess the results of the first phase and generate insights to inform both final donor reporting and the design of the next phase.

This external endline evaluation is commissioned to assess the performance and results of the “Combatting Child Labour” project and to draw lessons to guide future programming. The evaluation serves a dual purpose: (1) to provide an evidence-based, independent assessment of how well the project met its objectives (for accountability in final reporting to stakeholders, including the donor and national partners), and (2) to generate actionable recommendations and lessons learned that will directly inform the development of the full proposal for the next project phase. Ultimately, the evaluation will help ensure that the next phase is grounded in the successes, challenges, and contextual realities identified in phase one.

Evaluation Objectives: The specific objectives of the endline evaluation are to:

• Assess the relevance of the project in relation to the needs and priorities of the target groups, as well as the internal and external coherence of the intervention, and evaluate its performance in terms of effectiveness and efficiency.
• Examine the integration of cross-cutting issues, particularly gender equality and child protection (CP), by identifying key obstacles, areas requiring attention, and enabling factors that have influenced implementation and outcomes.
• Assess the quality and effectiveness of partnerships, particularly the collaboration and coordination mechanisms established with Tamkeen, JVDRA, and other stakeholders involved in project delivery and community engagement.
• Identify lessons learned and provide actionable, realistic recommendations to inform the design and implementation of Phase 2 of the project. These recommendations should be context-specific and aligned with the scope, resources, and budget of this particular intervention, ensuring that they are feasible, relevant, and directly applicable.

Scope of the Evaluation:

Geographic Scope: The evaluation will cover project activities and results in Balqa and Zarqa governorates of Jordan. Within these governorates, the focus will be on the specific communities and locations where project interventions were implemented (including community centers, informal education class sites, vocational training centers, and areas where community initiatives took place). Field visits and data collection should be conducted in both governorates to ensure representation of the different local contexts and stakeholders. The evaluator(s) should be prepared to travel to project sites in both Balqa and Zarqa, coordinating closely with the project team for site selection and scheduling. In addition, please note that for some activities led under Result 3 (notably those related to advocacy), a national context should be considered.

Thematic Scope: The evaluation encompasses all major thematic components of the project, as defined by the project’s logical framework. This includes:

• Child protection and education interventions (child-friendly sessions on psychosocial support, life skills, informal education courses for out-of-school children, and referral of children to protection/education/health services).
• Household economic empowerment interventions (positive parenting sessions, livelihoods skills training, referrals to income-generating opportunities, and provision of vocational start-up kits or micro-grants to selected families).
• Community engagement and advocacy (formation and support of community-based child protection committees, community awareness campaigns, media training and competitions, and collaboration with the National Child Labour Task Force and local authorities on child labour issues).
• Cross-cutting issues such as gender equality and inclusion (e.g., ensuring at least 50% female participation, addressing the needs of Syrian refugees vs. Jordanian families), child participation (engaging youth voices in program activities), and partnership dynamics (coordination between Plan International, local NGO partners, government bodies) and capacity-building of each entity are also within the scope of inquiry. The evaluator should consider these dimensions when assessing performance and formulating findings.

Proposed Methodology & Scope of Work: 

The evaluation will employ a mixed-methods approach, combining qualitative and quantitative data collection and analysis. Bidders are expected to propose a detailed methodology in their technical proposals. However, the approach should align with the following guidance and principles:

• Desk Review: The evaluator will start with a thorough review of all relevant project documents and data. This includes the project proposal and logframe/MERL framework, baseline study reports, any mid-term or monitoring reports (including KAP survey results, pre/post-tests results from parenting sessions, livelihoods tracking data, etc.), progress reports to the donor, and any case studies or success stories. This review will help to understand the project theory of change, indicators, and reported achievements, and to identify information gaps. In addition, the evaluator will review and integrate the findings and deliverables of the Change-Oriented Approach (COA) consultancy, aiming at designing a change-oriented Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) framework and identifying the most significant changes (MSC) generated through that process. These documents will be shared with the evaluator by Plan International and are expected to provide valuable insights into project achievements, learning, and qualitative changes at the beneficiary level.
• Quantitative Analysis: The evaluation should analyse quantitative data to measure outcomes. This may involve:
  • Reviewing monitoring data against targets (e.g. number of children who improved their knowledge, % of parents reporting changed attitudes, % of households with improved economic security, etc.).
  • Quantitative survey questionnaire with a sample of beneficiaries to collect quantitative outcome data (such as knowledge assessment scores, school enrolment status of children, changes in household income or livelihood status, etc.).
  • Ensure disaggregation of data by sex, age group, and other relevant variables (e.g., nationality – Jordanian vs. Syrian, location – Balqa vs. Zarqa) to assess equitable results. This will address whether outcomes differed for girls and boys, or among different sub-groups.
• Qualitative Methods: In-depth qualitative methods are essential to understand the context, explain why and how results were achieved or not, and to capture stakeholder perspectives. The methods should include:
  Key Informant Interviews (KIIs): one-on-one (or small group) interviews with key stakeholders such as project managers and coordinators (from Plan and partner NGOs), community facilitators/volunteers involved in implementation, medias, and relevant officials (e.g., representatives of the Ministry of Labour, Ministry of Education, Ministry of Social Development, or Child Labour Task Force members at national or governorate level). KIIs will gather insights on project relevance, coordination, efficiency, and perceived outcomes.
• Focus Group Discussions (FGDs): with various beneficiary groups. Suggested FGDs include:
  • Groups of parents/caregivers who participated in the parenting program (separately with mothers and fathers if culturally appropriate, to encourage open discussion).
  • Groups of adolescents (especially those 15–17) who received livelihood training or informal education support.
  • Groups of younger children (perhaps 10–14 years old) who participated in the life skills or psychosocial sessions – if involving children, the evaluator must use child-friendly, participatory techniques and ensure ethical protocols (parental consent, child assent, safe environment) are in place.
  • Community Child Protection Committee members and/or community leaders who were involved in awareness initiatives.
• Observation: Where feasible, direct observation of any ongoing activities (or site visits to facilities like informal classrooms, vocational training centers, etc.) to witness conditions and context. Although the project will be ending, observation can still be useful (e.g., seeing any child-friendly spaces established, infrastructure provided like learning materials or tablets, etc.).
• Case Studies: The evaluator may choose a few representative case studies (e.g., a household that benefited from multiple components, or an account of a child withdrawn from labour and supported in his or her return to school) to illustrate qualitative outcomes and give depth to the findings.

Evaluation Criteria and Evaluation Questions:

The evaluation will be structured around the OECD-DAC evaluation criteria (2020), with primary emphasis on Relevance, Effectiveness, Coherence, and Efficiency. In addition, limited exploration of Effects and conditions for sustainability will be included as forward-looking elements, recognizing that the project is in its first phase and these areas may not fully materialize yet. Below are the key evaluation questions under each criterion that the evaluation should address:

• Relevance – “Is the intervention doing the right thing?”
  • Alignment with Needs: To what extent did the project’s objectives and design respond to the actual needs and priorities of the target groups in Balqa and Zarqa? For example, were the issues addressed (child labour in hazardous sectors, lack of education, household poverty) identified as priorities by the community, children, and local authorities?
  • Contextual and Cultural Fit: How well did the project’s strategies and services fit the local context and cultural norms? Were activities (such as parenting sessions or life skills curricula) appropriately tailored in terms of age, gender, and cultural sensitivity?
  • Coherence - The extent to which the design and objectives of the project took into consideration the context in which it was implemented
  • Alignment with Policies and Partners: To what extent is the project aligned with national policies and other initiatives on child labour and child protection? (e.g., consistency with Jordan’s National Framework to Combat Child Labour, or complementarity with other NGO or government programs in the target areas). Did the project coordinate effectively with government efforts (through the CLTF or ministries) and avoid duplication? Conversely, are there any gaps in relevance where the project might have missed key needs or stakeholders?
    How have external factors, such as cuts to foreign aid or political changes in Syria, affected the project implementation and its stakeholders during the last years?
• Effectiveness – “Is the intervention achieving its objectives?”
  • Achievement of Outputs and Outcomes: To what extent were the project’s stated results achieved or are likely to be achieved by endline? Consider each main result area:
  • Children’s protection and education: Did targeted children gain improved knowledge and skills to protect themselves from WFCL (as measured by KAP assessments or other tests)? Were any children removed from hazardous work or prevented from entering it as a result of the project? How many children accessed informal education, and how many have transitioned back into formal schooling or safer environments? How many children have attended school more regularly / have had increased attendance? Have the children achieved better school results?
  • Caregiver behavior and livelihoods: Did parents/caregivers demonstrate improved parenting practices and attitudes against child labour after the sessions? Did households experience better economic security or livelihood improvements (e.g., new income activities, increased income, or access to job opportunities) after participating in training or receiving support? Is there evidence that these changes reduced the economic push factors for child labour?
  • Community and systems change: Did community committees and key stakeholders take actions to prevent/respond to child labour (such as conducting awareness sessions, reporting cases, or influencing local policies)? Are local and national stakeholders (like partners, CLTF members) more engaged or knowledgeable on child labour issues due to the project?
  • Factors Affecting Performance: What were the main factors that facilitated or hindered the achievement of results? Consider internal factors (project management, staff capacity, partner collaboration, monitoring systems) and external factors (economic conditions, changes in government policy, community attitudes). For instance, were there any significant challenges (e.g., children dropping out of sessions, families moving away, inflation affecting livelihoods inputs) and how were they mitigated? Conversely, what successful strategies or adaptive measures did the project implement to accelerate progress?
  • Equity and Inclusion: How effectively did the project reach and benefit different sub-groups among the target population? Specifically, did it ensure gender equality (e.g., equal or equitable benefits for girls and boys, mothers and fathers) and inclusion of vulnerable groups (such as Syrian refugee families, people with disabilities, minority groups, or the most economically deprived households)? Identify any disparities in outcomes – for example, were there differences in effectiveness of interventions for girls versus boys, or between Balqa and Zarqa contexts – and analyse the reasons.
  • Partnership: To what extent project governance, partnership relations and collaboration between stakeholders have been effective? To what extent are partnerships enhancing the objectives set for them in terms of enhancing the likelihood of effectiveness? To what extent have the various stakeholders involved in this project in Jordan, including local implementing partners and Plan International Jordan, enhanced their abilities to prevent child labour?
• Efficiency – “How well are resources being used?”
  • Resource Use and Value for Money: Did the project use its financial and human resources in the most economical way to achieve its results? Assess the cost-effectiveness of major interventions – for example, was the scale of outcomes (number of children/families reached and benefits achieved) reasonable in relation to the budget invested? Examine whether activities were delivered on time and within budget, and if not, what were the reasons (e.g., delays due to external factors, or reallocation of funds for emerging needs).
  • Management and Coordination: How efficient were the project’s management structures and partnerships? Consider:
  • The division of roles between Plan International and partner organizations (Tamkeen, JVDRA, etc.): Were roles and responsibilities clearly defined and carried out efficiently?
    Adaptability: Did the project management respond efficiently to challenges or changes?
  • Timeliness: Were activities implemented as scheduled and were outputs delivered in a timely manner? If there were any delays or extensions, what caused them and how did they affect project efficiency and outcomes? Also, assess the timing of inputs – e.g., were livelihood supports provided at a time that beneficiaries could make best use of them, were trainings scheduled conveniently, etc.
  • Impact (Potential Effects) – “What difference is the intervention making?”
  • (Note: As a first-phase project, measurable long-term impact may be limited; the evaluation will focus on signs of impact and potential future impact.)
  • Evidence of Change: Is there any evidence that the project contributed to long-term changes in the lives of participants or communities? For instance, are there documented cases of children leaving hazardous work and returning to school (and staying in school)? Have any families’ livelihoods improved to the extent that they no longer consider child labour as an option? Where possible, gather anecdotes or data on such transformative changes.
  • Unmet Needs and Future Impact: What needs or issues remain that will require attention in the next phase to achieve broader impact? This question is forward-looking: based on stakeholder input, identify areas where the project did not reach or changes that did not happen yet (for example, if certain hard-to-reach groups of working children were not enrolled, or if underlying economic conditions in communities still drive child labour). Understanding this will help tailor the next phase for greater impact.
• Sustainability (Forward-Looking) – “Will the benefits last?”
  • Continuation of Benefits: To what extent are the benefits of the project likely to continue after project closure? For example, will trained facilitators, community committees, and parents continue applying their knowledge and efforts to combat child labour without project support? Are children who were enrolled in informal education likely to continue their education or remain away from work? Assess the prospects for ongoing impact on children and families now that direct support is ending.
  • Institutional and Community Ownership: Evaluate the degree of ownership and capacity among local partners and stakeholders. Did the project successfully build capacity of community structures (CBCPCs) and local institutions (schools, training centers, government bodies) to carry on the work? For instance, are the CBCPCs or local NGOs prepared to continue awareness activities or referrals on their own? Is the National CLTF more active or better coordinated as a result of the project’s support, indicating sustained institutional engagement?
  • Risks to Sustainability: Identify any risks or barriers that may threaten the sustainability of results. This could include factors like economic instability (that might push families back into poverty), lack of continued funding for certain activities, or turnover of trained personnel. Conversely, note any positive signs of sustainability, such as strong commitment from government or community champions who will carry the initiative forward.

Ethical and Safeguarding Statements: 

Plan International is committed to ensuring that the rights of those participating in data collection or analysis are respected and protected, in accordance with the Ethical MERL Framework and our Global Safeguarding Policy. All applicants should include details in their proposal on how they will ensure ethics and safeguarding in the data collection process. Specifically, the consultant 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 shall also explain how confidentiality and anonymity of participants will be guaranteed.

Additionally, all parties involved in the data collection will be requested to provide their consent to participate in this study.

Key Deliverables: 

The evaluation is expected to be carried out over a period of approximately 8–10 weeks, with the inception report delivered by February 2026 (tentative, to be finalized upon contracting). The timeline is set to ensure that results are available to inform the next phase proposal development. Below are the key deliverables and associated timelines:

• Inception Report – Due approximately 2 weeks after contract signing (expected End of February 2026). This report will outline the evaluator’s refined methodology and work plan. It should include: the evaluation design and rationale, data collection tools (draft interview guides, survey questionnaires, etc.), a detailed evaluation matrix linking questions to data sources, sampling plan, and a timeline for fieldwork. The inception report will also address any limitations or needed adjustments to the plan. The evaluator will commence data collection only upon approval of the inception report by Plan International.
• Data Collection and Field Work – Expected late May 2026. During this phase, after approval from ethical review team of Plan International, the evaluator will conduct field visits, interviews, and surveys as per the agreed plan. While not a separate “deliverable” to submit, the evaluator will provide brief field progress updates (via email or calls) to the Plan MERL focal point, highlighting any issues encountered or any need to adapt the approach.
• Presentation of Preliminary Findings (Debriefing) – Due immediately after conclusion of field work. The evaluator will present initial findings, emerging trends, and any early recommendations to key project stakeholders (e.g., Plan staff, partner representatives, possibly donor and government reps) in a debrief meeting or workshop. This can be done in-country or virtually. The purpose is to validate findings, fill any gaps, and ensure factual accuracy. Feedback from this session should be incorporated into the reporting phase. Deliverable: slide deck or summary of preliminary findings (PowerPoint presentation) to be shared in advance of the debrief.
• Draft Evaluation Report – Due by first week of June 2026. The evaluator will submit a comprehensive draft report for review. The report should be written in English and structured logically (executive summary, methodology, findings by criteria, conclusions, recommendations, annexes, etc.). It should address all evaluation questions and criteria with evidence, and include practical recommendations. Plan International and key stakeholders will review the draft and provide feedback, focusing on factual corrections, clarification needs, and alignment with expectations.
• Final Evaluation Report – Due by end of June 2026. The evaluator will deliver the final revised report, incorporating feedback from the draft review. The final report should be professionally edited and include:
  • A concise Executive Summary (2-4 pages) summarizing key findings, conclusions, and recommendations – suitable for sharing with senior decision-makers.
  • The Main Report (with introduction, background, methodology, findings, conclusions, lessons learned, recommendations).
  • Annexes (including the ToR, data collection instruments used, list of people interviewed, detailed data tables or analysis if any, and any case studies or illustrative materials).
  • The final report must be submitted in both Word and PDF formats. It should be of publishable quality, as it may be shared externally (with donors, stakeholders, possibly published on websites). All raw data (e.g., cleaned survey datasets, interview transcripts or notes) should also be handed over to Plan International in an agreed format as part of the assignment’s completion.
  • The report should be submitted electronically in a MS – Word document. The consultant is responsible for English editing and proofreading of the final report which should be well formatted. The report will be credited to the evaluator and potentially placed in the public domain at the decision of Plan International.
  • All handwritten and electronic transcripts of interviews and KIIs, hard copies of survey questionnaires, photographs taken during the assessment and any equipment received from Plan for the purpose of the study should be submitted to Plan. Furthermore, all information generated during the baseline study will be the sole property of Plan and is subject to submission to Plan, along with the final report, prior to the end of the contract.

Timeline: 

• Contracting of evaluator(s): January 2026
• Inception phase (desk review, inception report): Late February 2026
• Ethical Approval: April 2026
• Data collection (field work, interviews, FGDs, etc.): Late May 2026
• Preliminary findings debrief: June 2026
• Draft report submission: Early June 2026
• Feedback from Plan: June 2026
• Final report submission: Late June 2026

Plan International Jordan and its partners will actively support the endline by logistical support, access to project sites, and introductions to stakeholders; coordinating the mobilization of participants for data collection; providing relevant project documents and MERL data; and ensuring smooth communication through designated focal points. They will also review and validate tools and deliverables, support adherence to ethical and safeguarding standards, and maintain consistent coordination with the consultant throughout the process.

Evaluation Criteria: 

The proposal will be scored on technical (technical approach/methodology, previous experience, and team capacity), financial (budget), and gender responsiveness aspects weighted at 65%,30%, and 5% respectively.

The distribution of technical grades will be as outlined below and the final technical score will be calculated out of 65%:

• Technical proposal quality, encompassing the work-plan (30%)
• Past performance and similar assignments (20%)
• Proposed working methodology (30%)
• CVs of key staff (20%)
• 30% financial offer (fixed lowest to highest).
• 5% gender responsive procurement:
  • Women-owned business: A legal entity in any field that is more than 51% owned, managed and controlled by one or more women.
    Women-led business: A legal entity in any field that has a minimum of 50% women representation in management with senior-level, strategic decision-making capabilities.
  • Gender-responsive business: Legal entity that actively promotes gender equality and empowerment of women and young women through their policies and labour practices.
    10. Budget

The consultant should submit the total budget in the proposal with detailed breakdown including applicable government taxes. The budget allocated for this assignment is between 12,000 and 15,000 euros, with an estimated LOE of approximately 30–40 working days.

Expected Qualifications: 

The Consultant should have the following competencies and qualifications:

• Minimum Master’s Degree in social studies, International Development or any other related field.
• Technical Expertise: Proven expertise in conducting evaluations of development/humanitarian projects using mixed-methods. The lead evaluator should have at least 5-7 years of experience in project evaluation or applied research, including specific experience with endline or summative evaluations.
• Experience in evaluations in the child protection, child labour, education, or livelihoods sectors is highly desirable. Familiarity with issues of child rights and child protection in Middle Eastern or similar contexts will be an asset. Experience working in Jordan, preferably in the project’s target areas.
• Demonstrated experience in incorporating a gender & inclusion lens into research and deliverables.
• Demonstrated experience of facilitating research with participatory methods and tools, particularly with children and young people.
• Competency in managing, organizing and interpreting quantitative and qualitative data and information.
• Relevant experiences in the response to humanitarian crisis, preferably in the areas of education, protection, and livelihoods.
• Solid experience in the development of tools for baseline studies involving vulnerable populations such as refugees and children.
• Excellent report writing skills in Arabic and English.
• Ability to communicate effectively to a range of different stakeholders.
• Availability to work in the project areas for the duration of the data collection.
• Note that the consultant is required to identify, recruit, contract and train enumerators and data collectors. No support can be provided on this matter by Plan International.

Contact: 

Should you need further information, please contact jordan.procurement@plan-international.org. 

How to Apply: 

Interested applicants should provide a proposal covering the following aspects:

• Detailed response to the TOR. (Technical Proposal)
• Proposed methodology.
• Ethics and safeguarding approaches, including any identified risks and associated mitigation strategies.
• Proposed timelines.
• CVs.
• Example of previous work.
• Detailed budget, including daily fee rates, expenses, etc.

Please send your proposal, as one PDF document with the above-mentioned points to (jordan.procurement@plan-international.org) by 8-Jan-2026 referencing “11024857 - End-line Evaluation- Combating the Worst Forms of Child Labour in Jordan ”.