Closing date: 30 Nov 2009 -- (CLOSED)
Location: Somalia - Mogadishu
1. BACKGROUND OF THE PROJECT
The Danish Refugee Council (DRC) and SAACID are implementing a hot-meal wet feeding distribution project in Mogadishu. The project started in November 2007 as a way to distribute food through a safer methodology as the methodology that had been used (general dry food distributions) was vulnerable to placing the beneficiary at risk, diversion of food, etc.
The hot-meals are provided to beneficiaries through district level kitchens. One kitchen is operational in each of Mogadishu’s 16 districts and has a capacity to distribute 5,000 meals per day to people in need. The overall service capacity of the project is 80,000 meals per day. This reaches an average of 165,000 different people each month. 95% of the direct recipients of the meals are women and children. The meals served are prepared based on WFP food rations with additional soup condiments and some fresh fruits.
The kitchen sites are also used to identify and refer malnourished under-5 children to appropriate therapeutic feeding centers.
2. PURPOSE OF THE EVALUATION
This will be the third evaluation of the project. The first evaluation focused on the project design and project rational; the second evaluation focused on the financial management of the project while this evaluation will answer the following questions:
1) What are the intended, knock-off and unintended effects as well as the deeper impacts of the project? This will capture impacts beyond those in the logical framework and highlight the positive, negative and neutral impacts/effects that were foreseen, and not foreseen, and will propose appropriate recommendations.
2) How can food insecurity in Mogadishu be addressed through aid programming? Given the operating context what activities are appropriate and realistic? Through an increased understanding of food insecurity in Mogadishu and the modalities that have been used to address food insecurity what could work? This aspect of the evaluation goes beyond the modalities of food aid delivery and looks at alternative approaches to addressing the secondary and the root causes of food insecurity.
The evaluation is envisioned to develop its findings through qualitative data collection based on detailed interviews and focus group discussions. The evaluator will be responsible for collecting this information in Mogadishu. The outputs of the evaluations will be used by DRC and SAACID to shape and advocate for alternative approaches to addressing food insecurity in Mogadishu as well as improve the current approach of the wet-feeding project.
3. EXPECTED OUTPUTS
- The main positive, negative and neutral impacts/effects of the project are identified, understood and measured.
- Modalities of realistc safe approaches to addressing food insecurity in Mogadishu are proposed based on solid justifications.
Key focus should be done on the main impact on:
- Beneficiaries
The projects impact on beneficiaries should be assessed notably on, but not limited to, subjects such as food security, malnutrition, social relationships, livelihoods, risk of dependency, resource sharing, time consumption, etc. The inclusion error should be measured and the reasons for it identified. Recommendations should outline ways to decrease the inclusion error, increase positive effects or opportunities, and decrease negative effects of the project.
- Non-beneficiaries
The exclusion error of the project should be measured and the root causes (access, perception of legitimacy, food needs, etc.) of the error identified. Recommendations should outline ways to decrease the exclusion error.
- Local stakeholders
The projects impact on major local stakeholders (civil society leaders, suppliers, etc.) should be assessed as well as the way the project is understood by the greater community explored. The projects positive, negative and neutral effects/impacts on the local economy, local prices, local job market, etc. should be understood. The process of supplier and employee selection mapped and assessed; the actual, or opportunity for, inter-linkages captured. Recommendations should outline how positive effects/impacts can be enhanced, negative effects/impacts reduced and opportunities actualized.
- Food security
Against mostly likely scenarios, and in light of operational realities, alternate modalities to address food insecurity inside Mogadishu will be mapped. The modalities should not be limited to augmenting modalities of food aid delivery but should explore innovative activities that address food insecurity.
As DRC and SAACID would like the evaluation to focus on unintended and knock-off effects/impacts, as well as intended impacts, the above should guide, rather then limit, the scope of the evaluation. The evaluator should focus on any significant and relevant effects/impacts identified during the course of the evaluation.
All effects/impacts identified by the evaluator should be fully justified, explained and documented.
4. METHODOLOGY
The evaluation must be a field evaluation. Presence in Mogadishu is necessary to meet the different actors of the project and to carryout direct data collection and field analysis. As needed the consultants can consist of a team with counter part/s in Mogadishu.
Data collection preparation (3 working days)
- Preparation of the list of actors to meet. Focus groups with various groups of beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries conducted; key stakeholders and actors should be met during structured interviews.
- Preparation of the templates used for the data collection system
- An inception report shared with DRC focal point for this evaluation
Data Collection (18-20 working days)
- Focus group and individual interviews are conducted by the evaluator. While the articulation of the data collection should be guided by the methodology and templates presented for the inception report, they should not be limited to them. The evaluator should focus on specific findings during the interviews and the focus groups discussions in order to highlight unexpected effects/impacts and to understand the cause-effect link. The reasons for any effect/impact identified should be clearly justified and articulated.
Data analysis and reporting (4 working days)
- Pre-final draft for review
Finalization of report (2 working days)
5. DELIVERABLES
- An inception report with methodology, templates, groups or people to be met should be submitted to DRC for validation prior the data collection phase.
- Final report (maximum 30 pages) highlighting the main effects/impacts of the project. The bulk of the report on focus on the issues outlined in section-3. Each factor must be accompanied with its associated risks, limits and recommendations.
- Powerpoint presentation of the key findings of the evaluation. This presentation will be shared with all donors of the project.
6. TIMEFRAME
The duration of this evaluation is 30 working days.
7. KEY QUALIFICATIONS
- Experience in emergency humanitarian operations in chronic-complex environments
- Previous experience of external evaluation for NGOs
- Excellent knowledge of Mogadishu context
- Somali speaker. Given the current context of Mogadishu and the limitation of access at field level, the evaluator should be Somali in order to conduct a field evaluation.
- Proven ability to design and actualize evaluation methodologies and to write clear and concise reports in English. Writing samples may be requested.
- Proven experience in conducting structured focus group and individual interviews as well as guided informal discussions.
Please note that the Final version of the Report of the evaluation must be completed by January 30th 2010.
Reference Code: RW_7XHF3G-66
