Midterm Evaluation Consultant(770 Views)
A. Project description
1. Project goal and development objective. The overall goal of the project is to contribute to reduce poverty in rural Afghanistan. More specifically, the project objective is to improve food security of 169,500 rural households in selected districts in the provinces of Kabul, Parwan, and Logar by increasing agriculture and livestock productivity. This will be achieved by enhancing productive assets, skills, services, technologies, and income opportunities of the targeted beneficiaries (i.e. by introducing appropriate livestock and agriculture technology options, strengthening local capacity, and strengthening some weak areas of value-chain, including linkages with markets). The project also aims at reducing gender disparities by increasing the social and economic status of women engaged in these activities.
2. Project components. The project is organized around three mutually reinforcing components:
(1) Community Development, including Productive Infrastructures and Institutional Strengthening(US$ 25.4 million):This component aims at strengthening the capacity of local communities and local institutions, by supporting the construction of small-scale infrastructures aimed at enhancing agriculture productivity (thus resulting in positive socio-economic benefits), and by supporting local institutions (community organizations and local government agencies) to address issues of ownership and sustainability. This component includes three sub-components: (1.1) Productive Infrastructures (US$ 23.1 m), (1.2) Institutional Strengthening (US$ 1.1 m), and (1.3) Gender Mainstreaming and Capacity Building (US$ 1.2 m).
(2) Livestock and Agriculture Development (US$ 28.5 million): This component aims at reducing poverty through enhancing food security with a strong emphasis on women-headed households and the vulnerable and marginalized within the rural communities by introducing appropriate livestock and agricultural practices and packages, and, to a limited extent, supporting value-chain development and linkages to market. These activities will be linked to the productive infrastructure and community development/institutional strengthening activities to the maximum possible extent, to ensure a holistic and integrated approach. This component includes four sub-components: (2.1) Dairy Development (US$ 10.5 m), (2.2) Poultry Development (US$ 5 m), (2.3.) Improved Food, Fodder, and Vegetable Crops (US$ 8 m), and (2.4) Livestock Development among the Kutchi (US$ 5 m).
(3) Project Management, Policy Support, and Young Professional Program (US$ 11.7 million): This component aims at supporting the project coordination and technical support responsibilities of the Project Support Team. In addition, based on the successful experience of the RMLSP, the Young Professionals Program will be continued under this component. Finally, a special fund to support policy development (US$ 0.5 m) and a special financing facility to support any activity that requires additional support and/or expanding any promising/well performing activity (US$ 3.5 m) will be established under this component.
3. Project area. The project area comprises the Central Region’s Provinces of Kabul, Parwan and Logar. Within these Provinces, three districts per province have been selected for project implementation. The criteria used for the selection of the project area included: (i) Accessibility: the project area should be easily accessible; (ii) Security: the project area should guarantee a level of security that allows regular and safe access; and (iii) Contiguity: the project area should include geographically contiguous provinces, to minimize administrative and logistical constraints. The selected provinces/districts offer a great deal of underexploited agriculture and livestock potential, with considerable scope for development through appropriate interventions.
4. Target group and beneficiaries.The project will specifically target the three following groups: (a) Small farmers and livestock-keepers, including the landless and those who lost their livestock and/or aspire to keep livestock or restock; (b) Women and female-headed households; (c) Resettled and nomadic Kutchi. It is expected that approximately 169,500 resource-poor rural households (equivalent to some 1,017,000 individuals)among an estimated 367 rural Community Development Councils (CDCs) within the nine districts would benefit from the project activities (cost/beneficiary ratio: US$ 386/household or US$ 64/person).
I. Objectives of the Mid Term Evaluation
The objective of the midterm will be to objectively assess the project’s progress in delivery of the outcomes and based on this assessment, to take decisions on the future orientation and emphasis of the project during the remaining time, and stakeholder analysis would be also the part of the objective of the midterm evaluation.
|Date Posted:||05 Jun 2017||Reference:||M.E.C 31052017/MAIL/CLAP|
|Closing Date:||20 Jun 2017||Work Type:||Full Time|
|Number of Vacancies:||1||Gender:||Any|
|Functional Area:||M & E||Open Ended:||NO|
|Nationality:||International||Salary Range:||As per company salary scale|
|Contract Type:||Short Term||Years of Experience:||5 Year(s)|
|Contract Duration:||0 Year(s) & 0 Month(s)||Extension Possibility:||No|
Duties and Responsibilities
Duties and responsibilities:
Although the consultant will be given a suggested checklist of questions to be covered under each section, the specific objectives of the midterm evaluation are to provide:
1. Review the proposed objectives, results and indicators and provide concrete reference data and hence recommendations for project re-adjustment.
1.1. Relevance & quality of design
- Did the project proposal match to the goals of the MAIL Objective?
- Was the design appropriate for the selected geographic area?
- Was the intervention logic coherent and accurate?
- Were the indicators of progress and of impact in the design of good quality?
- How was the quality of the outputs going to be determined?
- Were the outputs achievable or overly ambitious?
1.2. Efficiency of implementation
- Did the project start on time?
- Were all inputs delivered on time?
- Were inputs of acceptable quality?
- Was the methodology of implementation the right one under the circumstances?
- Did the service provider/ Implementation partner get good cooperation from relevant local government authorities?
- Did the Service provider/ Implementation partner get good cooperation from relevant local leaders?
- Was access to project areas acceptable?
- Were most of the outputs achieved to an acceptable standard?
- Did the community contribute in cash and in kind according to the proposal?
- To what extent did the Service provider/ Implementation partner take on board the recommendations from IFAD?
- Did the activities listed in the proposal result in total achievement of the specific objectives and attainment of outputs?
- Were there any non-planned effects and were these good or bad?
- Was coordination with other development actors effective?
1.4. Impact to date
- To what extent have beneficiaries, benefited from the project activities and outputs under the project interventions?
- To what extent have local government institutions benefited from the activities and outputs?
- To what extent have local leaders benefited from the activities and outputs?
- To what extent is the impact sustainable over the longer term?
- Has the project increased or decreased dependency on outside intervention?
1.5. Effect on improving poverty
- To what extent did the project alleviate poverty
- To what extent were gender issues addressed by the project?
1.6. Potential sustainability
- To what extent can the outputs be expected to be sustainable?
- Do the local government authorities fully support the initiatives taken by the project?
- Do the local community leaders fully support the initiatives taken by the project?
- To what extent has the project strengthened the capacities of local government and local leadership structures?
- To what extent are the people themselves contributing to the sustainability of the initiatives?
- To what extent has the private sector become involved in the development of the area as a result of the project?
- Did the Service provider/ Implementation partner formulate a practical exit strategy and is it working?
The desired methodology is participatory and the entire stakeholder in the project will be considered to be part of the midterm evaluation process. The anticipated benefit of a Participatory and stakeholder-centred approach is the empowering that, the process will impart to those service providers and the beneficiaries/ stakeholders who will participate in the exercise. Focus group discussions, key informant interviews, site visits etc. are proposed amongst the methods to be used for the review. The consultant will however provide leadership and bear responsibility for the process, the findings, the comments and the content of the final document. The additional desired objective underlying the participatory approach is to build capacity of the consortium members’ staffs plus partners such as government staff in conducting midterm evaluation.
The main expected output of the Midterm evaluation is a comprehensive final report based on the Midterm evaluation having relevant annexes with detailed data.
• The draft report is expected
• The final report is expected after the presentation to the stakeholders. The final report will be presented in hard copies.
The final report will at the very least contain, but not be restricted to the following.
• Executive Summary (including main conclusions and recommendations).
• Background with analysis of the state context.
• Main Findings,
• Conclusion and recommendations
• Annexes (a revised logframe, TOR, abbreviations, persons interviewed, references, tables with survey data, questionnaire forms used, etc.).
The expected duration of the consultancy is 20 working days excluded international travel days
Skills of the lead Consultant:
• Excellent analytical and communication skills in English
• Demonstrated publications record, covering research, technical, and policy areas;
• Ability to work as a part of a multi cultural and international team;
• Extensive computer skills including excel, word and power point.
The required Knowledge and Experience of the lead Consultant:
• At least a Master’s degree in food security-related area & over 5 years of significant research/work experience.
• Applied qualitative research experience (quantitative research experience an asset).
• Experience evaluation of the IFAD funded project would be major advantage.
• Successful previous Afghanistan Ministry of Agriculture consultancy experience will be a big advantage.
Afghanistan - Kabul
Masters Degree, Agriculture
• The interested candidates should submit their resume alone with a cover letter
• Put “Midterm Evaluation Consultant- M.E.C 31052017/MAIL/CLAP)” in the subject line otherwise your application will NOT be considered.
• Candidate’s educational degree must be attested by Ministry of Higher Education - Afghanistan otherwise we will not accept the application in short listing process.
• Please note that application received after the closing date will not be considered.
• Only short listed candidates whose application responds to the above criteria will be contacted for interview.
Please note that hard copies of resumes with cover letters will not be accepted.
Interested candidates should submit a covering letter highlighting relevant qualifications and experience, a CV and their daily rate
|More jobs in this category|
|Senior Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning O.. at Danish Refugee Council..||Kabul||21 Jan 2018|
|Monitoring and Evaluation Specialist at GoodWeave International in Afghan..||Kabul||25 Jan 2018|
|M&E officer at NEI (Nutrition and Education International)||Kabul||18 Jan 2018|
|MONITORING AND EVALUATION ADVISER at Department for International Develop..||Kabul||21 Jan 2018|