Call for Consultant: Project Evaluation

We invite consultants based in Zambia to apply for the opportunity to undertake this exercise. 1. Introduction The National Organisation for Women in Sport Physical Activity and Recreation (NOWSPAR) is a Zambian organisation that supports girls and women’s rights to and through sport. NOWSPAR delivers programmes to facilitate access to sport and physical activity for girls and women and to education and empowerment in areas including reproductive health, education, gender-based violence, financial literacy, and sport skills. NOWSPAR with the support of Women Win (Netherlands), Comic Relief (UK), and Standard Chattered (UK and Zambia), implemented the Play it Forward project over a three (3) year period. Play it Forward has supported fifty (50) young women per year (total 150) who are alumni of NOWSPAR sport programmes to become economically independent through entrepreneurship and employability skills and opportunities. The programme has supported young women who are unemployed and have varying levels of formal education completion with skills development, job placements, and establishment of their own enterprises. Following participation in the project, it is expected that the young women: 2. Purpose of the consultancy This consultancy exercise is part of the monitoring, evaluation and learning process to inform further support and project design or development. The purpose of this consultancy is to conduct a final project evaluation. 3. The objective and scope of the evaluation The final evaluation shall assess areas including: – Has the Project been implemented as planned, what obstacles were faced and how were they addressed during implementation? – What results were achieved by the Project? – What lessons can be learned from the way in which NOWPSAR managed the implementation of the Project? The ultimate beneficiaries of this evaluation are the implementing organisation and the donors of the Project. 4. Evaluation criteria and questions The evaluation questions will be based on five criteria: relevance, impact, effectiveness, efficiency and sustainability as well as three additional criteria: coherence/complementarity, and added value. An indicative list of the questions is provided below. The evaluation questions can be further refined by the Provider. Relevance – To what extent do the intervention objectives address identified needs of the target group(s)? – How far did the design of the intervention address the problems identified? Effectiveness – What has been the progress made towards achievement of the expected results? – What are the reasons for the achievement or nonachievement? Efficiency – How efficient was the Project architecture, processes, and mechanisms in addressing the different areas of intervention? What possibly hampered its efficiency? – To which extent the management of the relationships among stakeholders was effective in establishing a real partnership aiming at the success of the intervention? Impact – To what extent has the project helped young entrepreneurs become more efficient? – To what extent has the project helped consolidate gender equitable practices in sports projects? – Has the intervention caused a significant change in the lives of the intended beneficiaries? – How did the intervention cause higher-level effects (such as changes in norms or systems)? – Did all the intended target groups, including the most disadvantaged and vulnerable, benefit equally from the intervention? – Is the intervention transformative – does it create enduring changes in norms – including gender norms – and systems, whether intended or not? – Is the intervention leading to other changes, including “scalable” or “replicable” results? – How will the intervention contribute to changing the sports sector? Sustainability and ownership – To which extent are the outcomes of the Project likely to continue producing effects after the end of its funding? – To which extent are young women involved in the Project implementation process? – What are the factors that hampered the impact and sustainability of the assistance? Coherence and complementarity – To what extent are the activities implemented within the Project coherent with those implemented in other NOWSPAR projects? – To what extent were coordination mechanisms established and how have they contributed to coherence and efficiency of the project implementation? Added Value – How did the implementation of the Project ensure complementarities and generate synergies with other programmes? – What are the strengths and weaknesses from having NOWSPAR implement the project? The evaluation questions and methodology for this assignment may need to be further elaborated by the Provider. The Provider may suggest additional questions and should indicate success criteria, relevant indicators and the sources for the indicators/methodology for gathering necessary evidence. 5. Evaluation methodology Apart from comparing actual results to initially planned ones, to the possible extent looking at relevant indicators set out at the design stage, the assessment of impact has to provide concrete quantitative indications of the impact brought about by NOWSPAR activities, to the extent possible. This means also that when comparing the impact, it should be taken into account the average costs and efforts incurred to achieve that level of impact. The evaluation methodology will include documents review, surveys and semi-structured interviews with the NOWSPAR staff in as well as participants, co-operation partners and the donor (via videoconference). The evaluation will rely on data collected as part of the monitoring exercise led by the Provider. Further information on the Project activities’ implementation, will be made available. The Provider is to propose other means of collecting information such as, but not limited to, focus groups, questionnaires, online surveys. 6. Expected deliverables The deliverables that the evaluator(s) will be accountable for producing are: Deliverable 1: An inception report, including a fine-tuned evaluation and monitoring plan developed on the basis of the proposal submitted by the evaluator, containing the methodology, phases, etc., and including the schedule with key dates and related details, the proposed data collection methods and data sources to be used for answering each evaluation question (i.e. in form of an evaluation matrix, if feasible). Deliverable 2: A draft final evaluation report which should be delivered with adequate time to allow discussion of the findings and formulation of comments. Deliverable 3: The final evaluation report should contain a satisfactory response to the evaluation questions in the Terms of Reference. The recommendations should be supported by the findings and conclusions and their implementation should be feasible. The final evaluation report should be logically structured, containing evidence-based findings, conclusions, recommendations and – if applicable – lessons learnt, and should be free of information that is not relevant to the overall analysis. The report should be presented in a way that makes the information accessible and comprehensible. A tentative outline of the evaluation report could include the following: – Executive Summary – Introduction Purpose of the evaluation o Description of the objectives of the evaluation o Evaluation methodology o Difficulties encountered during the evaluation – Findings o Findings related to evaluation questions Additional relevant findings – Conclusions – Recommendations – Lessons learnt – Annexes (including list of interviews, questionnaires and documents reviewed, etc.) The timeframe for the deliverables will be confirmed during the first meeting between the selected Provider(s) and the Project team. All the reports and expected outputs shall be produced in English, using the appropriate style and structuring the text in a clear and concise way. All draft reports will be submitted to the project management in electronic form by e-mail and in a format compatible with MS Office software. NOWSPAR reserves the right to request the necessary additional revisions of the reports in order to reach an appropriate outcome and quality control requirements. The final report should be usable for publication. 7. Other considerations i. Location of assignment The desk research will be performed at the Provider’s office. The field research will be organised and carried out by the Provider online and in person with the support of NOWSPAR (cost of convening participants to be borne by NOWSPAR). ii. Budget The maximum budget for this consultancy, covering all the deliverables to be achieved by the contractor as listed above, is ZMW 150, 000. The allocated budget includes consultancy fees, and travel and subsistence required for field interviews, interpretation and translation costs, if any. iii. Assumptions The following are relevant assumptions for the above evaluations: – Access to requested documentation and information on the programmes is ensured by NOWSPAR and the project beneficiaries; – The NOWSPAR staff and implementing parties are regularly informed on objectives and methods of this evaluation, in order to ensure their full cooperation. In the event that one or several of the above assumptions prove to be untrue, the Provider should immediately inform the Project management. The Provider will also report in advance any limitations to the evaluations due to insufficient collaboration from key stakeholders. iv. Conflict of interests The expert(s) carrying out the evaluation shall have no involvement with the project subject of this exercise. More specifically, the expert(s) must fulfil the following criterion: – No previous involvement in programming and/or implementation of NOWSPAR activities which will be evaluated as part of this evaluation. – No previous or current involvement with project stakeholders. During all contacts with stakeholders, the Provider will clearly identify themselves as independent consultants and not as an official representative of NOWSPAR. The Consultancy is expected to be completed between January 10th – 20th March 2022. Contact: Submit proposal to The Executive Director by 27th December 2021 Interested consultants must submit the following documents/information to demonstrate their qualifications: A two to three-page proposal: Explaining why they are the most suitable for the work, providing a brief methodology on how they will approach and conduct the work, considerations re: Covid19 context Financial proposal that indicates the all-inclusive fixed total contract price Personal CV/profile including experience in similar projects and at least 3 references Submit proposal to The Executive Director by 27th December 2021