End Term Evaluation

Pétion-Ville | Port-au-Prince

TERMS OF REFERENCE
FOR
END TERM EVALUATION
REDUCTION OF MATERNAL AND CHILD MORBIDITY
AND MORTALITY IN HAITI THROUGH IMPROVING
NUTRITION, HYGIENE AND MATERNAL AND CHILD
HEALTH-SEEKING BEHAVIOUR

  1. PROJECT AND ORGANIZATIONAL OVERVIEW
    1.1 Background information
    DFID provides significant funding to civil society organizations (CSOs) annually in line with its
    overall strategy to alleviate poverty and promote peace, stability and good governance. The
    current political climate and results-based agenda demand a rigorous assessment of the
    effectiveness of funds disbursed to ensure that they are managed to provide value for money.
    DFID has funded a 30-months project in Bellevue La Montagne and Kenscoff, Haiti within its
    Global Poverty Alleviation Fund (GPAF). The grant has been awarded to Food for the Hungry
    UK (the grantee) and the implementing partner, Food for the Hungry Haiti.
    1.2 Introduction
    Founded in 1971, Food for the Hungry (FH) is a Christian international organization that seeks to
    end ALL forms of human poverty by going into the hard places and closely walking with the
    world’s most vulnerable people. It operates relief and development programs in 18 countries
    with a focus on maternal and child health, HIV/AIDS prevention and treatment, agriculture
    production, marketing and natural resource management; child education; clean water, hygiene
    and sanitation, and micro-enterprise development. FH takes a behavior-centered model for all of
    its development programming in order to influence norms and behaviors and create an enabling
    environment for results within all of these sectors.
    Food for the Hungry Haiti (FHH) became operational in 2007 when it assumed responsibility for
    the Foundation of Compassionate American Samaritans’ activities. Following the earthquake in
    January 2010, FH and partners Project Concern International and AmeriCares rapidly responded
    to the needs of communities impacted by the disaster. On February 1, USAID/OFDA awarded
    FHH a grant to expand and strengthen the ongoing joint response to address immediate and
    continuing needs of affected communities in the following sectors: Health, Logistics Support,
    Relief Commodities (NFI distribution), Protection, Shelter and Settlements, and WASH. In
    October 2010, cholera quickly spread throughout Haiti and FHH and its partners responded,
    focusing on prevention activities. In late 2010, FHH began to implement recovery and
    development projects to respond to the long-term needs of the communities in west (Kenscoff
    and Bellevue la montagne) and central plateau department (Belladere).
    1.3 Project context
    The rural mountain areas of Bellevue la montagne and Kenscoff perform poorly compared to the
    rest of Haiti for majority of development indicators, including Maternal and Child Health
    (MCH). The treacherous terrain and eroded roads in Bellevue la montagne and Kenscoff renders
    some section of these communities inaccessible especially during rainy and hurricane season.
    Residents have to walk for more than 6 hours on foot and horse back to access the nearest
    hospital and only 29% of the population in Bellevue la montagne and 10% in Kenscoff have
    access to health services. The common childhood illnesses among children under five (U5) in
    Bellevue la montagne and Kenscoff are diarrhea, malaria, acute respiratory infections and
    malnutrition. The low level of latrine usage, which stands at 21.7% in Bellevue la montagne and
    8.6% in Kenscoff, is a significant contributor to the high incidence of diarrhoea among children
    U5. Chronic malnutrition stands at 15% in BLM and 17% in Kenscoff with an additional 6% of
    children in Bellevue la montagne and 8% in Kenscoff suffering from severe malnutrition. It is
    estimated that only 15% of children in BLM and 8% in Kenscoff are fully vaccinated.
    Traditional cultural practices are among factors leading to the elevated maternal mortality rate
    and U5 mortality rate in Bellevue la montagne and Kenscoff. Only 24.3% of women in these
    rural communities give birth with a skilled birth attendant present and majorities have no
    postpartum check-up at all. Women often prefer local matrons to professionally trained
    midwives because the practice of home childbirth has been passed down through generations.
    With morbidity so high, this project has tried to address the need for both improved prevention
    and treatment of common, yet often fatal, childhood diseases at community level to reduce the
    burden of care on families and to ensure availability of resources when medical attention is
    required.
    The MCH project seeks to improve nutrition, hygiene and health- seeking behaviors among
    pregnant women and caregivers of children under five in Bellevue La Montagne and Kenscoff,
    Haiti, thereby contributing to a reduction in the high maternal and under-five mortality rates in
    these communities.
    Project Outputs
    • Community Health Workers (CHWs) and Care Group Volunteers (CGVs) are better
    trained and equipped to promote positive MCH-seeking behavior at community level.
    • Caregivers of children under-five and pregnant women have improved awareness and
    knowledge about appropriate MCH-seeking behavior.
    • Target households benefit from additional training and support for improved nutrition,
    hygiene and sanitation.
  2. PURPOSE OF THE EVALUATION
    The independent final evaluation reports that are submitted by grantees will be used to inform
    the Fund Manager’s understanding of the grantee’s performance at the project level and will also
    be used to inform the Evaluation Manager’s assessment of performance at the UK Aid Direct
    fund level.
    The independent final evaluation report needs to be a substantial document that (a) answers all
    the elements of theTerms of Reference (ToR); (b) provides findings and conclusions that are
    based on robust and transparent evidence; and (c) where necessary supplements the grantee’s
    own data with independent research.
    Further, FHH also look forward to learn from this project and use evidences to make adjustments
    to country strategy and be guided in future programming.
  3. OBJECTIVES OF THE EVALUATION
    The evaluation has explicit objectives that are explained below:
  4. To independently verify (and supplement where necessary), grantees’ record of achievement
    as reported through its Annual Reports and defined in the project logframe;
  5. To assess the extent to which the project was good value for money, which includes
    considering:
    o How well the project met its objectives;
    o How well the project applied value for money principles of effectiveness, economy,
    efficiency in relation to delivery of its outcome;
    o What has happened because of DFID funding that wouldn’t have otherwise happened;
    and
    o How well the project aligns with DFID’s goals of supporting the delivery of the MDGs
    (now SDGs).
  6. We also wish to:
    • To assess project progress as measured through key indicators against the baseline and
    determine gap closures in key behaviour’s being promoted by the project.
    • Identify and document lessons learned and include recommendations for any new similar
    project going forward.
  7. EVALUATION FRAMEWORK AND METHODOLOGY
    FH Haiti wishes to hire a consultant who is expected to lead and coordinate this evaluation in
    close collaboration with FH staff involved in the implementation of the project. The consultant
    will be expected to adopt a “Learning Process Approach” that integrates both blue print and
    participatory methodology for this evaluation, using deductive as well as inductive data
    collection techniques. The evaluation methodology must conform to a sound study design and
    impeccable sampling techniques. Where appropriate sample size estimation should clearly
    indicate confidence interval and level of significance. The detailed evaluation questions and
    suggested methods are described in the table below:
    Key Question
    Measurement
    Method
    Source of data
    Relevance
    • To what extent did FH support
    achievement towards the MDGs,
    specifically off-track MDGs?
    • To what extent did the project target
    and reach the poor and marginalised?
    • To what extent did the project
    mainstream gender equality in the
    design and delivery of activities (and or
    Analysis and
    Reflections
    Data collected during
    the evaluation
    other relevant excluded groups)?
    • How well did the project respond to the
    needs of target beneficiaries, including
    how these needs evolved over time?
    • To what extent was the project aligned
    to the government of Haiti’s strategy for
    Maternal, Child Health and Nutrition
    Program.
    • To what level is the project aligned to
    FH (Child Focused Community
    Development) CFCT Program model?
    • To what extent did the project
    mainstream gender equality in the
    design and delivery of activities (and or
    other relevant excluded groups)?
    Effectiveness
    • What have been the milestones
    achieved against the baseline?
    • To what extent are the results that are
    reported a fair and accurate record of
    achievement?
    • To what extent has the project delivered
    results that are value for money? To
    include but not limited to:
    o How well the project applied
    value for money principles of
    effectiveness, economy,
    efficiency in relation to delivery
    of its outcome;
    o What has happened because of
    DFID funding that wouldn’t
    have otherwise happened; and
    • To what extent has the project used
    learning to improve delivery?
    • What are the key drivers and barriers
    affecting the delivery of results for the
    project?
    Reports, household
    survey
    Document review
    Cost benefit analysis
    Mothers with children 0-
    59 months
    Project records
    Project recortds
    Efficiency
    • To what extent did FH deliver results on
    time and on budget against agreed
    plans?
    • To what extent did the project
    understand cost drivers and manage
    these in relation to performance
    requirements?
    Financial Analysis
    Financial Reports
    Sustainability
    • To what extent has the project
    leveraged additional resources
    (financial and in-kind) from other
    sources?
    • What effect has this had on the scale,
    delivery or sustainability of activities?
    • To what extent is there evidence that the
    benefits delivered by the project will be
    sustained after the project ends?
    Document Review, Key
    Informant Interviews
    Project Staff
    Impact
    • To what extent and how has the project
    built the capacity of civil society?
    • How many people are receiving support
    from the project that otherwise would
    not have received support?
    • To what extent and how has the project
    affected people in ways that were not
    originally intended?
    • To what extent have changes occurred
    through the project's direct influence
    over caregivers/pregnant women
    behaviours
    Analysis and
    Reflections
    Outcome mapping
    Data collected during
    the evaluation
  8. Timeframe
    FH proposes January 2 – February 28, 2017 as the dates for the final evaluation. The draft report
    should be available from February 17th and final report by February 28th. Details can be
    negotiated based on the availability of the selected consultant.
    Reporting
    Evaluation reports should not be longer than 40 pages long (excluding potential annexes) and
    should follow guidelines provided in the UK Aid Direct Final Independent Evaluation FAQs.
  9. Consultants’ Qualifications
    FH seeks to engage the services of an experienced Firm or individuals to undertake the specified
    tasks thereof.
    The consultants must possess the following:
    • A minimum of seven years’ experience in program/project evaluation in an international
    development context.
    • Experience of results-based monitoring and evaluation;
    • Ability to design and plan the evaluation approaches and research methodologies, including
    quantitative and qualitative research methods. Skills and expertise in design, planning and
    conducting impact evaluation using experimental or quasi-experimental techniques;
    • Knowledge in maternal and child health and nutrition programming
    • Ability to manage a potentially complex evaluation and research process, including
    interpreting baseline data and conducting a final evaluation;
    • Ability to manage data and information and handling large datasets for monitoring and
    evaluation purposes;
    The consultant should submit the “Expression of Interest” detailing understanding of this term of
    reference and a proposal for conducting this evaluation. Additionally, consultant should provide
    a proof of past experience and recent assignments and submit a CV of key personnel who will be
    involved in this assignment
  10. Deliverables and timeframe
    The final evaluation report needs to be a substantial document that (a) answers all the elements
    of the Terms of Reference (ToR); (b) provides findings and conclusions that are based on robust
    and transparent evidence; and (c) where necessary supplements the grantee’s own data with
    independent research.
    To ensure consistency across evaluation reports, the following structure should be used for
    reporting:
    Executive Summary
    Introduction
    • Purpose of the evaluation
    • Organisation context
    • Logic and assumptions of the evaluation
    • Overview of UK Aid Direct funded activities
    Evaluation Methodology
    • Evaluation plan
    • Strengths and weaknesses of selected design and research methods
    • Summary of problems and issues encountered
    Findings
    • Overall Results
    • Assessment of accuracy of reported results
    • Relevance
    • Effectiveness
    • Efficiency
    • Sustainability
    • Impact
    Conclusions
    • Summary of achievements against evaluation questions
    • Summary of achievements against rationale for GPAF funding
    • Overall impact and value for money of GPAF funded activities
    Lessons learnt (where relevant)
    • Project level - management, design, implementation
    • Policy level
    • Sector level
    • UK Aid Direct management
    Recommendations
    Annexes (such as)
    • Independent final evaluation terms of reference
    • Evaluation research schedule
    • Evaluation framework
    • Data collection tools
    • List of people consulted
    • List of supporting documentary information
    • Details of the evaluation team
    • Grantee management response to report findings and recommendations

Submission should be made to: hrhaiti@fh.org

Before applying, please make sure that you have read the requirements for the position and that you qualify.
Applications from non-qualifying applicants will most likely be discarded by the recruiting manager.
Apply
  • Organization: FH - Food for the Hungry
  • Location: Pétion-Ville | Port-au-Prince
  • Grade: Mid/Senior
  • Occupational Groups:
    • Accounting (Audit, Controlling)
    • Accounting (Audit, Controlling)
    • Accounting (Audit, Controlling)
    • Monitoring and Evaluation
    • Monitoring and Evaluation
    • Monitoring and Evaluation
  • Closing Date: 2016-12-09

Similar Jobs

Treasury Senior Specialist / Manager

GCF - Green Climate Fund

Risk Policy and Procedure Specialist

GCF - Green Climate Fund

Sr Social Development Specialist–Safeguards&Sustainability Standards

WB - World Bank

Senior Economist

ADB - Asian Development Bank

Experts Roster – Internal Oversight (Audit, Evaluations, Investigations and Ethics)

UNRWA - United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees

Sector Urban / Regional Development Specialists

EIB - European Investment Bank