Interpeace,Consulting team for Final Evaluation of the Trans-Border Dialogue for Peace in the Great Lakes Regional Programme

Closing
date: 15 Jul 2016
A.
Introduction
Interpeace’s
Trans-Border Dialogue for Peace in the Great Lakes Region programme
seeks a team of consultants (one international and one local) to conduct a
final evaluation. The evaluation is expected to measure the programme
achievement of intended outcomes and co

ntribution to behavioural change among
boundary partners. It also aims to assess the effectiveness of the programme
strategies for achieving programme outcomes. The evaluation is also expected to
provide recommendations for ensuring programme effectiveness and efficiency,
adapting to changes in the political context, as well as maximising programme
impact in the next phase of the programme. The programme has been designed
using the outcome mapping approach which is also expected to guide the
methodology of the evaluation. Interpeace anticipates that the evaluation will
commence in late July 2016, for a period of 30 working days, including a
minimum of 15 days in Burundi, DRC, and/or Rwanda.

B.
Background
The
Trans-Border Dialogue for Peace in the Great Lakes Region programme is a
40-month programme implemented between September 2013 and December 2016 by
Interpeace and six local partners: Centre d’Alerte et de Prévention des
Conflits (CENAP) in Burundi; Never Again Rwanda (NAR) in Rwanda;
the Centre d’Etudes Juridiques Appliquées (CEJA) and Pole Institute
in DRC’s North Kivu province, as well as Action pour la Paix et la Concorde (APC)
and Réseau d’Innovation Organisationnelle (RIO) in South Kivu province.
The programme aims to restore trust and collaboration between communities and
other key stakeholders of the region and to reduce the vertical space between
decision makers and citizens. The main strategy employed to achieve this aim is
catalysing and facilitating dialogue, supported by participatory action
research (PAR) processes, on key issue concerning peace and collaboration in
the region.
Interpeace
and its partners designed the Trans-Border Dialogue for Peace in the Great
Lakes Region
programme using the outcome mapping approach, focusing its
efforts on contributing to behavioural change among key stakeholders in order
to promote sustainable in the Great Lakes. In keeping with the outcome mapping
approach, the programme has identified the following:
  • Vision:
    The Great Lakes is a region where there is peace and social cohesion
    achieved through collaboration and inter-cooperation among and between
    diverse populations and decision makers
·
Mission: In support of the vision, the programme will hold dialogue
processes with communities, decision makers, CSOs in particular youth, women
and peacebuilding organizations and regional institutions to promote the value
of common interests and to reduce feelings of mistrust and prejudice held by
local populations. It will conduct participatory action research with various
stakeholders in order to gain a deep understanding of the identified divisive
factors within Great Lakes Region populations and will propose and disseminate
concrete consensus-based solutions to decision makers that take into account
the concerns and recommendations of local populations. It will facilitate
dialogue processes involving decision makers, community members, civil society
organizations and regional institutions in order to strengthen the
collaboration and linkages among and between the populations of the Great Lakes
regions and will sensitize the media and religious leaders about both divisive
factors and opportunities for social cohesion.
·
Boundary Partners: To achieve this mission, the proposed programme has
as direct target groups in the four intervention zones: i) decision makers, ii)
civil-society organizations, iii) community members; and iv) regional
institutions.
These
elements have been complemented by outcome statements and progress
markers
for each boundary partner.
Interpeace
and its partners launched a preparatory phase of the programme in October 2012,
commencing with a PAR on “Identity-based manipulations and stereotypes,” an
issue identified as a key driver of conflict by key stakeholders during the
exploratory research phase, consulting close to 350 people across the Great
Lakes region. A second PAR on “land, identity and population movement,” during
which the programme teams consulted close to 1800 people, is in the process of
finalization. In addition, the programme has established several mechanisms for
cross-border dialogues, a network of cross border civil society organizations
and linkages with decision makers at the local, national and regional levels.
Finally, the programme has advocated for the implementation of recommendations
emerging from stakeholders across the region, specifically for the promotion of
peace education.
The
programme’s research intended to catalyse debate on issues related to regional
peace and conflict, particularly on sensitive topics. The mechanisms for
cross-border dialogues intended to provide a space for citizens to express
themselves freely without the limitations of taboos on issues of peace and to
contribute towards restoring trust and collaboration between communities. They
were also foreseen to provide a space for the generation of ideas and solutions
to hindrances to peace that could then be channelled to key players and
decision makers through advocacy to reduce the vertical space between policy
makers and citizens and to ensure the development of policies based on the
realities and priorities of citizens. Through the combination of the research,
dialogue and advocacy, the programme aimed to contribute to the reconstruction
of sustainable peace in the region.
The
programme is approaching the end of the first phase, scheduled to close out at
the end of 2016. The final evaluation is intended to not only assess the implementation
of the programme against key evaluation criteria, assess the results/outcomes
of the programme, and to document challenges and lessons learnt, but also to
provide recommendations for improving programme design and implementation in
the next phase.
C.
Objectives and key questions of the evaluation
The
main objectives of the evaluation are to assess the achievements of Trans-Border
Dialogue for Peace in the Great Lakes Region
programme and to provide
recommendations for improving the programme’s contribution to behaviour change
among boundary partners in future phases of the programme. An additional
objective of the evaluation is to inform donor consideration for the
continuation of the programme. The evaluation is expected to analyse the
effectiveness of programme strategies in achieving the intended outcomes, to
gather lessons learned during programme implementation and to provide
recommendations for maximising impact and achievement of progress markers and
outcomes. The evaluation will be of interest to Interpeace, CENAP, NAR, CEJA,
Pole Institute, APC, and RIO as well as to international donors and policy
makers engaged in the Great Lakes region
Key
evaluation Questions:
Relevance:
  • To
    what extent was the overall strategy of the programme relevant for the
    context of peace and conflict in the Great Lakes region?
  • To
    what extent was the overall strategy of the programme responsive to the
    defined needs and priorities of stakeholders in the region?
  • To
    what extent was the overall strategy of the programme relevant for the
    programme’s boundary partners?
  • To
    what extent was the intervention logic/overall strategy relevant in
    pursuing the programme’s vision?
Effectiveness
and Impact
  • To
    what extent did the programme meet its intended progress markers and
    expected outcomes?
  • To
    what extent has the programme contributed to changes in behaviour among
    boundary partners?
  • How
    has the programme contributed to changes in behaviour among boundary
    partners?
  • What
    were the main factors that influenced whether the programme reached its
    expected outcomes/changes in behaviour or not?
  • To
    what extent did the programme integrate gender into the programme’s
    strategy?
  • How
    effective were the programme’s efforts to integrate gender into the
    programme strategy?
Sustainability
  • How
    likely are boundary partners to sustain these behaviour changes beyond the
    support of the programme?
  • To
    what extent are the programme’s established processes and systems likely
    to support the continued implementation of the programme?
Efficiency
  • To
    what extent were the programme’s strategies and activities sufficient for
    meeting expected outcomes?
  • Did
    the programme partners have adequate capacity to implement the programme?
  • How
    did the project adapt to changes in the context and emerging challenges
    during programme implementation?
  • To
    what extent did the programme adhere to the principles of Do No Harm and
    employ conflict sensitivity while implementing and adapting the programme
    strategies?
  • Were
    the appropriate implementation methodologies applied in the different
    contexts and circumstances of the programme?
Project
Design Improvement
  • What
    best practices and lessons learnt from the programme should be
    incorporated into the next phase of the programme?
  • What
    strategies should the programme employ in its next phase to be more
    relevant to the context, responsive to the needs and priorities defined by
    stakeholders and relevant for the programme’s boundary partners?
  • What
    should programme partners take into consideration to improve the overall
    design of the programme’s next phase?
  • What
    areas/themes would be most relevant for the programme (and any spin-off
    programmes) to focus on in the next phase?
  • What
    do the outcomes of the programme imply for peacebuilding initiatives in
    the Great Lakes region?
Interpeace
anticipates that these key evaluation questions will be further refined with
the selected evaluation consultants.
D.
Timeframe and Methodology
The
anticipated duration of the evaluation is 30 working days with a minimum of 15
days spent in Rwanda, Burundi, North Kivu and South Kivu, as possible. The
anticipated start date is late July 2016 with submission of the final draft
mid-September 2016. The final timeframe will be agreed upon with the selected
consultants.
The
evaluators are expected to use evaluation methodologies consistent with the
outcome mapping approaching, which may include but are not limited to, outcome
harvesting, theories of change, contribution mapping/contribution analysis,
interviews, focus group discussions, most significant change, etc. The
methodology used should also be gender sensitive. The evaluators are expected
to apply the conceptual framework of assessing outcomes and changes in behaviour
and relationships among boundary partners as a result of engagement in
programme activities and actions. The evaluation will be both an objective and
a consultative/participatory exercise, and is expected to involve the following
elements:
Initial
planning process
:
in conjunction with Interpeace and partners, finalize the methodology, guiding
questions and indicators, and workplan.
Documentary
review
:
a review of relevant documentation, including the original and revised
programme document; programme logical framework; programme reports and updates;
reports of workshop proceedings; research outputs; and relevant audio visual
material produced for the programme.
Stakeholder
interviews and focus group discussions
: including with employees of Interpeace;
the Interpeace partner organisations; authorities in Rwanda, Burundi, North
Kivu and South Kivu, as possible; representatives of regional institutions
engaged by the programme; donor representatives; members of the boards of the
Interpeace partners; civil society organizations engaged by the programme and
community members participating in programme activities. Indicators to assess
the progress and impact of the programme, complementing existing progress
markers and outcome statements, will be developed in consultation with
Interpeace, local partners and stakeholders.
While
Interpeace anticipates the use of the elements listed above, the list is not
exhaustive. The evaluation may include additional elements and approaches as
appropriate for responding to the final evaluation questions. The applicant is
encouraged to suggest a comprehensive methodology that includes these elements
and others that the evaluators deem fit for meeting the evaluation objectives.
The methodology for data collection should be described in the proposals. The
final list of elements will be discussed with the selected team of consultants.
E.
Deliverables, Reporting and feedback
The
evaluators will provide:
·
A brief inception report (no more than 5 pages) at the end of the
initial planning phase, setting out a timetable for the evaluation, an overview
of the final agreed upon methodology, the names of people and groups to be
interviewed, a detailed workplan and a list of documents to be reviewed. Data
collection tools are expected to be reviewed by and finalized together with
Interpeace.
·
The evaluators will provide a brief mid-term progress report and presentation
at the end of the fieldwork phase (no more than 10 pages) summarising the
progress of the evaluation, highlighting any changes to the evaluation
schedule, and providing tentative findings.
·
The evaluators will submit a draft report within 15 days after
completing the fieldwork.
·
They will provide a final report taking into account comments on
the draft report within 5 days of receiving such comments.
The
evaluators will hold a feedback meeting (or meetings) for the Interpeace
partner organisations, the Interpeace East and Central Africa office and
invited stakeholders. This will be an opportunity to debrief on the evaluation,
and to exchange views on preliminary findings and recommendations.
The
evaluation report will include a main text of no more than 30 pages with
findings and recommendations. The report will be expected to include:
  1. An
    analysis of the programme achievements, strategies, challenges and lessons
    learned
  2. Recommendations
    for optimizing programme activities and interventions to ensure
    effectiveness, efficiency and continued relevance as well as
    responsiveness to the evolving political context and achievement of
    intended outcomes during the programme’s next phase.
  3. An
    analysis of areas/themes which the programme should consider in the design
    of the next phase
F.
Qualifications
The
evaluation will be undertaken by a team composed of an international consultant,
who will be the team leader, and a local consultant from the Great Lakes region
(Rwanda, Burundi or the DR Congo).
The
consultants will be expected to have the following skills and experience at a
minimum:
Ÿ Experience conducting
evaluations/assessments
Experience
in conducting gender sensitive evaluations
Ÿ Strong analytical skills and
experience working with the Outcome Mapping approach
Ÿ Strong knowledge of and experience
with conflict resolution, peacebuilding and reconciliation programmes
Ÿ Experience working in the Great Lakes
region or other conflict or post-conflict environments, with preference given
to Great Lakes-specific experience
Ÿ Experience in conducting gender
sensitive evaluations
Ÿ Proven record of delivering
professional outputs
Ÿ A willingness to travel to the Great
Lakes region
Ÿ Excellent French and English speaking
and writing skills, for both the international and the local consultant.
Ÿ An ability to work within tight
deadlines
Ÿ Ability to work effectively and
inclusively with people of different culture, race, nationality, gender,
religious belief, age, sexual orientation, marital status, disability or
political
Interpeace
and its partners will be responsible for:
Ÿ Providing a focal point for the
evaluation, who may or may not travel with the consultants (time and funds
permitting)
Ÿ Providing a focal point at each
partner organization
Ÿ Providing logistical support inside
and outside the Great Lakes region
Ÿ Providing standard Interpeace security
support for the evaluators (responsibility rests with the consultants)
Ÿ Arranging meetings with stakeholders
Ÿ Providing relevant programme reports
and documentation in advance.
How to apply:
For
consideration for this opportunity, please submit a team expression of interest
(no longer than 3 pages) that provides a brief overview of a proposed
evaluation plan or strategy and a CV for both the international and local
consultants proposed by July 15, 2016 (midnight Nairobi time) via email
to: recruitment@interpeace.org
Interpeace
values diversity among its staff and aims at achieving greater gender parity in
all levels of its work. We welcome applications from women and men, including
those with disabilities.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *