Consultancy Final Evaluation for Syria and Turkey Emergency Appeal Tender, Jordan - 102590638

Procurement Summary

Country : Jordan

Summary : Consultancy Final Evaluation for Syria and Turkey Emergency Appeal

Deadline : 25 Jun 2024

Other Information

Notice Type : Tender

TOT Ref.No.: 102590638

Document Ref. No. :

Competition : ICB

Financier : Other Funding Agencies

Purchaser Ownership : Public

Tender Value : Refer Document

Purchaser's Detail

Name :Login to see tender_details

Address : Login to see tender_details

Email : Login to see tender_details

Login to see details

Tender Details

Tenders are invited for Consultancy Final Evaluation for Syria and Turkey Emergency Appeal.

Closing Date: 25 Jun 2024

Type: Consultancy

TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR:

Final Evaluation for Syria and turkey emergency appeal

Country(ies) covered: Northwest Syria, GOS, Turkey

Dates :1 September - 31 October

Overall objective of evaluation:

This evaluation aims to comprehensively assess ActionAid-s overall contribution and performance in supporting of the response of the earthquake in Turkey and Syria. It will also assess the effectiveness, efficiency, relevance, sustainability, and impact of the interventions. It will provide an overview of the response, draw lessons and recommendations for the DEC and ActionAid, gather partner feedback, identify gaps, and engage members through various mediums. Special consideration will also be given to the CHS and the DEC Accountability Framework.

BACKGROUND AND RATIONALE :

On 6th February 2023, an earthquake with magnitude of 7.8 struck south-east Turkey and north-west Syria. A second major earthquake, further north of the original epi centre, struck a few hours later, and recorded magnitude of 7.5.According to a situation report published by OCHA to mark one month since the earthquake occurred, 9.1 million people have been affected by the crisis and 46, 000 thousand have lost their lives, including 4, 267 in Syria. The scale of destruction is highlighted by the fact that, according to the Turkish government, 214, 000 buildings have collapsed or have been heavily damaged by the disaster. There have also been a reported 13, 000 aftershocks in the month since the initial earthquakes took place, causing further destress to an already traumatised affected population. Initial assessments found that priority needs among affected communities were shelter, food, non-food items, water, sanitation, hygiene items, and psycho-social support. Alongside this, the WHO has highlighted urgent health needs among the affected population, including trauma care, provision of essential medicines and prevention/control of disease outbreaks. In Syria, especially, the earthquake occurred in an area already experiencing high humanitarian needs, because of the country-s 12- year-long civil war.

In response to rising humanitarian needs in both Turkey and Syria the DEC launched an appeal on 9 February 2023. To date, the appeal has raised £159.5 m. Fourteen Member Charities are responding as part of the DEC appeal, working with national and local partners across both countries and as for Phase 2, the project is focusing on 4 main areas as the followings:

Priority Area 1: Affected women and families- immediate needs are met (urgent and maternity medical care, psychological first aid, cash, shelter, food, medical kits, NFIs and WASH).

Priority Area 2: Gender-based violence (GBV) risk mitigation, response and prevention measures are in place to enhance the crisis affected women and girls- safety and dignity.

Priority Area 3: Affected populations know their rights and entitlements and are leading the response through strengthening women and youth leadership “to build back better.”

Priority Area 4: Promoting longer-term social, economic, and environmental recovery and resilience in a protracted crisis, as well as supporting the recovery and resettlement of Syrian refugees in Türkiye and Syria.

From September 2023 to the end of May 2024, 84, 422 people were reached under the DEC funded project working with ActionAid partners on the following sectors:

Protection.

Livelihood.

Health; and

Capacity building.

2. OBJECTIVES AND FOCUS OF THE EVALUATION:

The purpose of the final evaluation of the Syria and Turkey earthquake program is to comprehensively assess the overall effectiveness, efficiency, relevance, impact and sustainability of the implemented interventions, as well as generating actionable learning and recommendations to inform similar interventions in other locations and in the future. The evaluation aims to provide a thorough assessment of the program's outcomes and the extent to which it has achieved its intended objectives against the Theory of Change, and also in relation to the Core Humanitarian Standard (CHS) and the DEC Accountability Framework (DECAF).

The key deliverables of the final evaluation will be to:

Provide an overview and assessment of the response so far against appropriate DAC criteria; Core Humanitarian Standard commitments; Grand Bargain commitments; DEC Accountability Framework; intended objectives of the intervention, and learnings from similar humanitarian crises and earthquakes.
Gather feedback from local and national partners on the relationship with members and support provided to locally led humanitarian activities.
Where relevant, identify gaps, areas of unmet needs, and challenges to the humanitarian operations funded by the DEC in both Turkey and Syria, from both a sectoral and cross-cutting perspective; this should include a consideration of the inclusiveness of the humanitarian response and whether (geographically, socially or politically) marginalised groups are sufficiently covered and what barriers (if any) there are to reaching them.
Draw out key learning from the response to date and engage members with the findings through a range of mediums, including workshops and written outputs.
Draw out key lessons and actionable recommendations for DEC and ActionAid members, at the operational level, that can inform real-time adjustments and be utilised during implementation of ongoing, and other future DEC programmes; highlight good practice in the humanitarian operations funded by the DEC.
Key evaluation criteria and guiding evaluation questions are proposed based on the five (5) OECD/DAC evaluation criteria on relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, impact, and sustainability with an additional lens on coordination and collaboration, Accountability to Affected Population (AAP). Special consideration should also be given to the CHS and the DEC Accountability Framework.

RELEVANCE AND APPROPRIATENESS:

The extent to which the intervention objectives and design responded to beneficiaries, global, country, and partner/institution needs, policies, and priorities.

To what extent the program adhered to the CHS in its intervention.

The extent to which the programme ensured context, cultural and conflict sensitivity in its interventions.

EFFECTIVENESS AND EFFICIENCY:

To what extent were the intervention results defined, monitored, and achieved (or not).

In which areas does the project have the greatest achievements? Why and what have been the supporting/contributing factors?In which areas does the project have the fewest achievements? What have been the constraining factors and why? How can or could they be overcome?

IMPACT :

To what extent the project was impactful in the affected communities in Syria and turkey and its objectives.
What change (positive or negative) did the project intervention contribute to in the lives of the communities affected by the earthquake?
Were there any unintended effects to the affected communities, especially to the vulnerable group of populations (incl. people with disabilities, refugees, asylum seekers, etc.), women, girls, above all others?
What transformational change (policy, practice, norms) did the intervention contribute to from national to global levels with regards the conduct or governments, INGOs and other similar actors.
CONNECTEDNESS AND SUSTAINABILITY:

To which extent are the results of the intervention likely to have a long term, sustainable positive contribution to CHS and relevant targets? (explicitly or implicitly)
To what extent are DEC members considering Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) in their programming, to reduce the impact of future events?
To what extent has the intervention contributed to building resilience and preparedness of any future shocks by the affected communities.
How can the achievements of this project inform the design and implementation of future similar interventions to ensure their sustainability and long-term impact?
COORDINATION AND COLLABORATION:

To what extent the program assessed the effectiveness of coordination and collaboration among different stakeholders, including government agencies, local partners, and other humanitarian actors.

To what extent the program Identify opportunities for improving coordination mechanisms for future emergency responses.

Assess the effectiveness of coordination and collaboration among different stakeholders, including government agencies, local partners, and other humanitarian actors.

Identify opportunities for improving coordination mechanisms for future emergency responses.

ACCOUNTABILITY TO AFFECTED POPULATIONS (AAP):

To what extent have the views of crisis affected people been considered in programme design and implementation and brought to the attention of decision makers?

To what extent has the complaint and feedback mechanisms been useful for the affected populations?

How easily accessible are the complaint and feedback mechanisms for the beneficiaries and stakeholders? Are complaint and feedback mechanisms accessible to marginalized groups, including women, children, young people, the elderly, persons with disabilities, and minority groups?

Are there any barriers preventing marginalized groups from using the mechanisms effectively?

What has partners experience been working with DEC agencies and/or managing relationships with multiple agencies? What worked, and what could be improved?

How have partners been supported, what capacity strengthening or sharing approaches are in place? To what extent are partnerships between DEC members and partners “transformational”?

How did the DEC intervention effectively account to the crisis affected people?

How did the programme support the affected people to hold other humanitarian actors to ac

Documents

 Tender Notice