Associate Consultant for Mid Term Review of GRO Project
Mawlamyine & Yangon | Yangon
CARE International in Myanmar is looking for a suitable International candidate in its GRO project for the following:
Consultant Title : Associate Consultant for Mid Term Review of GRO Project
Location : Mawlamyine & Yangon (Myanmar)
Duration : Estimated 20 working days including in-country visit and remote assistance
Responsible to : Project Director (GRO Myanmar Project)
1. Project Background
Generating Rubber Opportunities in Myanmar (GRO-Myanmar) project is a market systems development project following the making markets work for the poor (M4P) approach and implemented by CARE International in Myanmar and funded by Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC). The project currently focuses on men and women smallholder rubber farmers and tappers in Mon State in Myanmar.
Following an inception phase of from September, 2014 to May, 2015, the projects first phase started in July, 2015 and will end in December, 2017.
1.1 Project purpose and general approach
The project's vision is to “Strengthen the rubber market system to improve the incomes and livelihoods for women and men smallholder farmers (WMSHF) and tappers in southern Myanmar.”
GRO Myanmar’s poverty reduction objectives are improved livelihoods and increased social capital of poor women and men in the rubber market sector. The focus lies on achieving an increase in the
incomes of women and men smallholder farmers (WMSHFs), and the women and men tappers (WMTs) who work with and for them in Mon state. In total, the project aims to reach 12,000 WMSHFs whose net additional income is targeted to grow following the project interventions.
GRO Myanmar will be implemented during three phases over an estimated ten-year period (2014-2024).During Phase 1, market system approaches will be developed, tested and refined in a relatively small number of locations. The GRO Myanmar target area for Phase 1 activities is Myanmar’s Mon State. Rubber is the main economic crop in Mon State and is concentrated in four main townships of Kyaikmayaw, Mudon, Thanbyuzayat and Ye that collectively account for 76% of the private rubber area.
The program employs a market systems development approach, following the making markets work for the poor (M4P) principles, in acting as a facilitator to deliver results by working through and strengthening private and public sector actors rather than acting as a direct service provider. This includes market-led interventions in rubber, land and gender components.
1.2 Expected outcomes
By facilitating higher production per hectare, improved quality and access to services, more efficient markets, economies of scale, and increased knowledge and research, as well as awareness raised on land security, women’s economic empowerment and gender based violence (GBV) issues, the program will lead to two key outcomes:
WMSHFs who own or manage plantations of up to 20 acres in government and non-state areas and WMTs who work for them have an improved income and decent work opportunities and are better connected to market actors, business associations and civil society organizations
WMSHFs in state and non-state actor areas have more secure access to and control over land
1.3 Strategic output areas
a) Relevant and up to date rubber research covering state and non-state areas is available and made accessible through appropriate channels
b) WMSHFs, WMTs and rubber factories in both government and non-state areas have strengthened knowledge and skills in cultivation and production of rubber
c) WMSHFs, WMTs and other market actors have access to information that allows for profitable business decisions
d) Traded rubber is weighed and graded according to a commonly agreed and transparent quality framework in line with international quality standards
e) WMSHFs, WMTs and other market actors are increasingly aware of and engaged in providing decent work opportunities, transforming inequitable gender relations and addressing GBV
f) WMSHFs have the knowledge, skills and confidence to claim their rights in relation to land.
g) Land conflicts, land registration and land tenure insecurity issues are being resolved in state and non-state areas
through CSO leadership.
h) Local government and non-state actors are engaged in open and transparent dialogue about land governance systems and land use planning in Mon State
1.4 Monitoring and Results Measurement
GRO is adopting a Monitoring and Results Measurement system (MRM) system to support the complex environment the project is working in with framework like systemic insight and developing hypothesis-based pilot interventions. As part of the MRM system a continuous learning and interactive program management focus is placed on implementation, market research, business process management and Knowledge Management.
2. Objectives and scope of the mid term review
2.1 Scope of the assignment
The interventions and their sub-elements all have different starting and run times. The MTR will need to take a process-oriented approach to assess the likelihood that the combined interventions will lead to the desired outcomes. The goal will be to improve the implementation (are the right steps being taken, how the program can do better) and not to prove the results of the program (i.e. ascertain attributable impact).
2.2 Specific objectives
The MTR will:
- Assess and review the Projects overall Theory of Change (ToC) and its relevance to the intended outcome and impact
- Assess the projects intervention portfolio– is it coherent with the project’s objectives, ToC and what the potential to reach impact are.
- What is the project’s ‘fit’ with Government, private sector CSO and non state actors priorities, how is it positioned in the market systems development landscape in Myanmar?
- Evidence of impact –What are the evidences of any early signs of impact?. Is the Monitoring and Results Measurement system (MRM) in line with collecting such evidences?
- Assess how the capacity of local staff has been built to successfully implement the project, and whether/what additional skills and understanding is needed
- Gender and Conflict Sensitivity – are these concerns adequately reflected in strategies and implementation?
· Identify key strengths and weaknesses and list potential improvements at the intervention and program level, as well as relating to the MRM-system, in order to enhance relevance, efficiency, effectiveness, impact and sustainability.
2.3 Key evaluation Criterias
The consultant will need to address but not limited to the following key evaluation criteria:
The extent to which the programme is suited to the priorities and policies of the target group, recipient and donor. The following questions can be considered:
· To what extent are the objectives of the programme still valid?
- Are the activities and outputs of the programme consistent with the overall goal and the attainment of its objectives?
- Are the current programme setup, activities and outputs of the programme consistent with the intended impacts and effects?
- Is the projects Theory of Change adequate to steer through to the intended impact?
- Is the approach taken in designing and implementing interventions suited to adequately address Women Economic Empowerment and Gender Based violence issues through market systems approach.
The extent to which the pogramme attained or has the potential to attain the intended objectives. In evaluating the effectiveness of the programme, the following questions might be considered:
- To what extent were the objectives achieved / are likely to be achieved?
- What were the major factors likely to influence the achievement or non-achievement of the objectives?
- To what extent is the project engaging with the appropriate market actors to unlock potential opportunities or resolve some of the key constraints
The positive and negative changes produced by the programme interventions, directly or indirectly, intended or unintended. This involves the main impacts and effects resulting from the activity on the local social, economic, environmental and other development indicators. The following questions could be considered:
- What are the (if any) early signs of impact attributed to project activities?
- What real difference has the activities made with regards to improving business environment, technical knowledge of target beneficiaries, building trust with different stakeholders?
- Who are the market system actors that have been affected or have the potential to be positively affected by the project?
- Has the project been able to develop an effective awareness amongst its partners and stakeholders on the market system development approach?
Sustainability is concerned with measuring whether the benefits of the programme are likely to continue after donor funding has been withdrawn. When evaluating the sustainability, it might be useful to consider the following questions:
- What are the livelihoods that the programme benefits will continue after donor funding ceased?
- What are the major factors which will influence the achievement or non-achievement of sustainability of the programme or project?
- Do what degree does the project implementation take into account the conflict dynamics identified at the design stage? Have there been any external or internal factors that have impacted on these dynamics?
- Is the project facilitating a change in participants’ and stakeholders practices leading to market opportunities? If yes, is the project aimed at expansion beyond the intervention (systemic market change)? If no, is the reason investigated together with participants leading to a redesign of the interventions?
To understand whether the programme is collating results effectively and efficiently through credible results measurement system and maintaining evidence base about the impact and effectiveness of program activities. The following questions could be considered:
- Is there a relevant and effective Monitoring and Results Measurement (MRM) System to collect intended evidences?
- Does the MRM-system adequately and efficiently track learning and progress and show the effectiveness of the program to pilot and then scale up relevant interventions?
- Is there a system in place for (qualitative and quantitative) information from the MRM-system to feed back into program management, allowing for rapid and flexible adaptation?
- Is there an effective communication and knowledge management system to communicate results and relevant outputs to both external and internal audiences?
- Are the key indicators of the project on women’s economic empowerment, gender based violence and land issues attainable and measureable?
3. Expected outcomes
The key expected outcomes are:
- Indication on whether the intended results and outcomes will likely be reached under the current set-up
- Recommendations to stimulate efficiency and effectiveness of results measurement and adaptive management system. Formulate recommendations for programme design and approach, intervention design/selection, and management
Assess whether the current log frame, particularly its indicators, are appropriate to the nature and situation of the project
Reflect and recommend areas of improvement to attain the intended systemic change around land markets, Womens Economic empowerments, Gender Based Violence and Land issues.
Resource Implications (if needed)
o What additional resources are required (funds, time, staff) to deliver anticipated results?
o How will they be utilised? What are the implications/risk for project outcomes if these additional resources are not available?
4. Approach and methodology
The approach to the MTR will be to:
i) Review existing documentation on market analyses, intervention strategies, implementation plans, annual reports, the MRM-system etc
ii) Review existing data from the MRM-system including baseline data, project performance assessments, stakeholder surveys and data collected on program indicators
iii) Organize interviews on process and progress with relevant program staff in Country Office and Project Office
iv) Organize group discussions and/or individual interviews with participants/stakeholders and partners
Based on the above approach the consultant will further design the appropriate MTR methodology. Field work should include but not limited to meetings with rubber farmers and rubber traders, government representatives, private sectors, representatives of INGOs and LNGOs/CSOs working with the project. Stakeholder meetings in Yangon, Mawlamyine and Naypyidaw should also be conducted with government agencies including National RPPA and private sector, including UMFCCI where appropriate.
The following deliverables are expected:
- Work in a team of 1 Lead Consultant and 1 Associate Consultant in developing the methodology, including interview questions, field work schedules and sampling strategy
- Inputs in the Draft Evaluation Report in English
- Inputs to finalize the report in English, not exceeding 20-30 pages excluding annexes. This must at a minimum contain:
i. Table of content
ii. Executive Summary
iv. Objectives of the MTR
vi. Process how the MTR was conducted, including methodology
vii. Limitations of the MTR
viii.Findings of the MTR
ix. Recommendations for the GRO project
- Soft copy of full report, with all attachments and original raw data files (if any)
- One final presentation in Yangon, Myanmar of the MTR findings to the GRO steering committee, program management team, and other relevant stakeholders.
The MTR is expected to commence in December 2016 with fieldwork happening between 4th December- 16th December, 2016.
7. Coordination and Management
The Project Steering Committee will coordinate the MTR and the MTR will be managed by CARE. The MTR team will comprise of 3 external consultants as following:
a) Lead Consultant – To be appointed by the Project Steering Committee
b) Associate Consultant – To be appointed through a selection process based on applications.
c) Local Consultant – To be appointed through a selection process or appointed by the Project Steering Committee
Required experience and expertise for the Associate Consultant include:
- Good understanding of and proven track record in evaluating market systems development projects including implementation and knowledge of results measurement
- Experience with the evaluation of large-scale rural development/poverty alleviation projects in a rural setting
- Academic qualifications in theory-based mixed methods research, including a clear understanding on various social research methodologies
- Sound experience in participatory review and evaluation methodologies
- Good interpersonal skills, including the ability to conduct discussions with a diversity of people ranging from donor to project participants
- Familiarity with the Myanmar context will be an advantage but is not mandatory
- Ability to analyze and synthesize over different sources of information relating to the scope of the evaluation
- Good eye for detail, adherence to logic, and capacity for inductive reasoning
- Strong presentation, facilitating, communication and reporting skills
Interested applicants should send their CV, along with a Cover letter and clearly mentioning their proposed daily rate as consulting fees to the email address below.
Human Resources Department
CARE International in Myanmar
The subject line should mention “Application for Associate Consultant for Mid Term Review of GRO Project”. Last date of proposal submission is 26th October, 2016.
- Organization: CARE
- Location: Mawlamyine & Yangon | Yangon
- Grade: Junior
- Management, Administration and Finance
- Management, Administration and Finance
- Management, Administration and Finance
- Management, Administration and Finance
- Monitoring and Evaluation
- Closing Date: 2016-10-26