Un Consultant-ACT عودة إلى الفرص

Mid-Term Evaluation ACT Capacity Building Project 

1. General information 

Project name: ACT Capacity Building Project (CBP) 

Country: Tunisia 

Duration: January 2019 – June 2022 

2. Initiative 

This mid-term evaluation is initiated by the Association for Cooperation in Tunisia (ACT) for the  ACT Capacity Building Project. Due to CV-19, the initial project period of 3 years (2019-2021) has  been extended to a total duration of 3,5 years or 42 months (2019 – June 2022). With the  evaluation planned for April 2021 the evaluation will not be exactly halfway but given the nature  of the project (e.g. small scale projects only started end of 2020) and the remaining time for the  project after the evaluation (15 months), the evaluation will be an important tool to assess  progress, ensure learning for ACT and the stakeholders and to adjust the CBP where needed contributing to the successful completion of the CBP. 

3. Purpose of the evaluation 

The primary purpose of the mid-term evaluation is to assess the progress of the CBP and the  performance of all stakeholders involved in the project which includes three sub-objectives: 

1. to objectively measure to what extend the project objective and expected results have  been achieved.  
2. to identify and document lessons learnt and good practices. 
3. to present a list of recommendations enabling informed management decisions for the  remaining of the project. 

The evaluation provides an opportunity for the project management to examine the project  performance more closely and familiarize partners and key stakeholders with the evaluation  outcomes. 

4. Scope of the evaluation 

The mid-term evaluation will be an external evaluation of the Capacity Building Program (CBP)  implemented by ACT and cover approximately the first two years of the project. 

5. Project presentation 

The CBP is an initiative of ACT in partnership with Norwegian Development Partners (NODEPA)  funded by DIGNI/NORAD. After the Yasmine Revolution in 2011, Tunisia has seen a tremendous  increase of new local associations registered. ACT aims to help through the Capacity Building  Program five Tunisian Local Associations (LAs) to become strong and effective associations.

ACT aims to:  

➢ Increased organizational capacity (administrative, financial, governance, etc.).  ➢ Increased project capacity (project cycle management, MEAL, etc.)  

➢ Increased network capacity (sharing and learning in collaboration with others.)  In order to achieve this, the CBP consists of three major activities: 

1. Training Program

Based on a joined assessment on the organizational capacity of the LAs, a tailor-made  training program is offered by ACT. Throughout the project 10 trainings are offered on  organisational matters (e.g. vision, finance, etc.) and followed up in between trainings,  

supporting LAs to apply lessons learnt. At the same time coaching will be offered to the  leadership of the LAs as well.  

1. Small-Scale (Civil Society) Project

Each local association develops and implements a small-scale project (approx. 15.000  euro) that suits the mandate of the association with the duration of 1 to 1,5 years. The  aim is to gain practical project experience, apply trainings and received tools and above  all be active and have an impact in Civil Society. 

III. Network Support 

Through network meetings the LAs will meet to share knowledge and experiences and  learn from one another and expand their network.  

In compliance with the evaluation requirements of Digni and NODEPA, ACT issues this scope of  work for a mid-term evaluation to be carried out by an External Consultant from Monday the  29th of March 2021 until Friday the 30th of April with a total 15 working days. Documents such  as logical framework and project documents will be available during the evaluation. 

6. Questions to be answered 

The evaluator should answer the following questions categorized by four major areas of  Relevance, Effectiveness, Efficiency and Sustainability. 

1. Relevance:

1.1. To what extent did the project interventions meet the needs of the project beneficiaries?  

1.2. To what degree was the project designed considering economic, social and cultural context in the project target areas? 

2. Effectiveness (this includes the quality and effectiveness of the methodologies, approaches and techniques used to achieve program outcomes). 

2.1. To what extent did the project achieve its specific project objective?  2.2. To what extent have the three major activities (see 5 Project Presentation) contributed  to the expected results of increased organisational, project and network capacity? 

2.3. What could be done by ACT, until the end of the project, to make the Local Associations  (LAs) benefit more from the project?  

3. Efficiency (This includes reviewing program processes and program management.) 

3.1. Have project resources (inputs) resulted in expected results?  

3.2. What can be done differently so that the project can be more efficient?  3.3. How would you assess the “value-for-money” of the project?  

3.4. Have program management financial, technical, logistical systems been set up and  functioning?  

4. Sustainability: 

4.1. To what extent has the CBP contributed to strengthen civil society in Tunisia?  4.2. What is the likelihood that the benefits of the project will endure over time after the completion of the project?  

4.3. What could be done by ACT in the remaining of the project to enhance sustainable  impact?  

4.4. What are the most important lessons learnt so far and what are areas of improvements  and recommendations for the remaining of the project? 

In compliance with Digni-funded projects an Empowerment Assessment Table will need to be  filled (see also section 7 Methods) answering the following questions:  

1. To what degree is the change in empowerment – at output, outcome, or impact level?  2. At what levels are the empowerment taking place: Individual, Community or Society?  3. Are there differences in empowerment with regard to “themes/areas of work” in the  project? 
2. Methods 

The mid-term evaluation will use a participatory approach by which the External Evaluator will  work closely with CBP project staff, local associations, and other stakeholders. It will use  qualitative methods involving key informant interviews, focus group discussions and site visits.  The External Evaluator will ensure that relevant partners and stakeholders actively participate to  ensure high quality, credibility, and effectiveness of the exercise. 

The evaluator will, in consultation with the CBP Project Manager, take responsibility for the  design of the evaluation methodology. This will be a combination of using existing tools within  CBP like the Organisational Capacity Assessment (OCA) and the Capacity Assessment for Project  Implementation (CAPI) and determining appropriate other tools. The evaluator will have to  follow the detailed timetable (see 11) for information collection, analysis and reporting. 

Collection methods must include a combination of primary sources from interviewing  beneficiaries, partners and stakeholders, general observations, and gathering information from secondary sources including the CBP monitoring and reporting system. It is expected that the  results will be disaggregated by gender.

With the CBP being a Digni funded project, an Empowerment Assessment should be made in  connection with this mid-term evaluation and the External Evaluator is required to familiarize  him/herself with the tool and complete an Empowerment Assessment Table in the evaluation  report. The External Evaluator will receive detailed instructions and background information for  the Empowerment Assessment Tool (EAT) during the first meeting with ACT. 

In the preparation of the final report, the External Evaluator is expected to provide the reader  with accurate sources of its information and conclusions. All evaluation statements must be  backed by existing data and information. When this is not the case, the evaluator is required to  state its rationale for its observations and conclusions. If some of the questions do not apply,  the Consultant must explain the reason(s). 

8. Sampling and limitations/delimitations 

The evaluator will need to meet/visit all five local associations participating in the CBP. 

9. Expected product presentations 

After approval of the submitted Technical and Methodological proposal and proposed  fees, the selected External Evaluator will be invited to attend a meeting of one day with the CBP staff by Monday the 29th of March 2021 in order to have more details about the CBP project and  the purpose of the evaluation mission. Within two working days the evaluator should submit an  updated version of the Technical and Methodological proposal which will function as the  Evaluation Design which will become an Annex to the Evaluation report. 

The Evaluation Design will include: 

1. A detailed Evaluation Design Plan that links the evaluation questions in the ToR to data  sources and data analysis methods. 
2. Draft questionnaires and other data collection instruments or their main features. 3. The list of potential interviewees and sites/associations to be visited. 4. Known limitations to the evaluation design. 
3. The list of further collaborators if needed, delineated by roles and responsibilities. 

Once the External Evaluator receives the approval on the Evaluation Design from the CBP  Project Manager, the evaluator is expected to start Data Collection and Data Analysis with close  collaboration with the CBP staff who will be responsible for the coordination with the different stakeholders and the preparative of the logistical needs. 

The draft Evaluation Report should be submitted to the CBP Project Manager in English. The  report will address each of the questions identified in the ToR and any other issues the evaluator considers having a bearing on the objectives of the evaluation. Any such issues can be included in the report only after consultation with the CBP Project Manager 

Once the initial draft Evaluation Report is submitted, ACT will send comments and feedback to the Consultant after five days of receiving the draft report. The External Evaluator will be  asked to take no more than four business days to respond/incorporate the final comments from 

ACT and submit the Final Mid Term Evaluation Report with the 30th of April 2021 as the  deadline. 

After submitting the final report, the evaluator will present the findings and recommendation in  a 2-hour meeting/workshop for ACT, CBP staff and the LAs on the 6th of May 2021. 

All project data and records (detailed work plan, evaluation interviews tools for FGD and Key informant interviews, draft final evaluation report, final evaluation report) will be submitted to ACT in English and should be in electronic form in easily readable format, organized and  documented for use by those not fully familiar with the intervention or evaluation. 

All deliverable documents and reports should be in English language. 

10. The utilization of the evaluation findings 

ACT will use the mid-term evaluation report and the outcomes of the meeting/workshop with  the evaluator as a base to discuss/plan (with the Steering Committee including LAs) possible  adjustments to the project. Those possible revisions (including budget revision) will be included  in the mid-year report and re-allocation of budgets.  

11. Timeframe for evaluation and reporting 

The Evaluator should start its work by Monday the 29th of March 2021. The final mid-term  evaluation report should be submitted to CBP Project Manager by Friday the 30th of April 2021.  The table below illustrates the schedule of the evaluation activities:

12. Report format 

The final report should include the following sections: 

• Cover page 
• Table of content 
• Executive summary 
• Body of the report: 

o Introduction 

o Purpose and specific objectives for the final evaluation 

o Methodology employed 

o Findings 

o Analysis/discussions 

o Conclusion and recommendations 

• Supporting data should be included in appendices.  

The report should be max. 25 pages, excluding appendices. 

13. Evaluation team 

Must be gender balanced.  

15. Payments / Detailed budget