Country: Somalia
Closing date: 10 Oct 2016
SOS Children's Villages Somaliland is a Member Association of SOS Children’s Villages International, a federation which was first established in 1949 and focuses on the child’s development into a self-supporting and contributing member of society.
SOS Children’s Villages Somaliland was established in 1999 and has since then been operating in three locations in Somaliland namely Hargeisa, Berbera and Sheikh. The organization’s mission is to build families for children in need, help them shape their own futures and share in the development of their communities.
Intervention programs of SOS Children's Villages Somaliland include SOS Children's Village in Hargeisa which provides care for children through its various support structures; schools and kindergarten that ensure education for both SOS children and children from the surrounding communities; medical centers that are concerned with preventive and curative care for communities; and family strengthening programs which have as a goal prevention of child abandonment through capacity building for local communities for a better self-care of orphans and other vulnerable children (OVCs).
1.Objectives
- What impact has the programme made in the lives of the participating children within our target group, their families as well as in the community?
- How relevant, effective, efficient, sustainable and participatory are the programme interventions?
- What lessons can be drawn from the programme that can be taken to further develop the programme?
The impact evaluation should analyse the progress the programme has made against the five criteria set-up for the family strengthening programme (as per family strengthening manual, working paper, Jan 2007) :
o Focussed on the right target group, i.e. the children most at risk of losing the care of their family
o Participating children have access to essential services for their healthy development
o Participant families are empowered to build their capacity to protect and care for their children
o Participant communities are empowered to respond effectively to children at risk of losing the care of their families.
o There is a network of partners to prevent children from losing the care of their families
Moreover, the impact evaluation should look at the following:
o Relevance
To what extent is the programme focussed on our target group – i.e. the children most at risk of losing the care of their family?
To what extent the programme responds to the needs and priorities of the programme participants?
o Effectiveness
To what extent are the objectives of the programme being attained (or likely to be attained?)
To what extent have children remained in their families instead of losing their care? To what extent has their quality of life improved?
To what extent have families successfully left the programme since the beginning, i.e. became self-reliant? How many children and families have been reached over the whole programme period?
o Efficiency
Is the relation between input of resources and results achieved appropriate and justifiable (cost-benefit ratio)? What are the annual running costs and the average costs per child per month?
Have individual resources been used most economically? (e.g. tenders for the purchase of goods)
Are there any alternatives for reaching the same result with less input?
o Sustainability
To what extent can activities, results and effects be expected to continue after SOS involvement has ended?
Is there progress towards SOS withdrawing from its direct involvement and handing over the full responsibility to run the programme to an implementation partner?
Has the capacity of the implementation partner been developed? If so, in what areas and how?
o Participation
To what extent are stakeholders (participant families (including children), partners, local authority) involved in the design, planning and implementation of the programme?
To what extent is the programme designed to develop the necessary local institutional (governmental and/or non-governmental) capacity to respond to the problem?
2.Key areas
A. Target group
- How the target group has been defined
- How participant families are identified, verified and selected (criteria and process)
B. Health support
- Number of children and caregivers receiving the support – if possible in proportion (number should be proportionate to the total of those who have been identified as needing such support
- Type and appropriateness of health support provided to children and/or care givers by the programme directly or through referral; any health education provided; identify the impact and if there is something to be added, reduced or removed.
- How the health conditions of children and caregivers in the programme are; did they improve, decrease or remain the same since they joined the programme?
- What difference this support has made in the participants’ lives
- Level of satisfaction of children and caregivers regarding this support
C. Educational support
- Number of children supported to access formal basic (primary and secondary) education as well as informal education – if possible in proportion (number should be proportionate to the total of those who have been identified as needing such support)
- Type and appropriateness of educational support provided to children by the programme directly or through referral; identify the impact and there is something to be added, reduced or removed.
- How is the track record concerning children’s attendance, as well as staying enrolled in the educational system
- Level of educational performance of children against their past performance and against national standards/averages (explain the parameters used for evaluating this)
- Level of satisfaction of caregivers and children regarding this support
D. Psychosocial support
- Number of children and caregivers being supported to access counselling services – if possible in proportion (number should be proportionate to the total of those who have been identified as needing such support)
- Type and appropriateness of psycho-social support provided to children and/or care givers by the programme directly or through referral; identify the impact and if there is something to be added, reduced or removed.
- How children and caregivers have been effectively supported to address relevant issues
- Participation of children in seminars/workshops on life skills (if possible provide their number and frequency and type of participation)
- How the programme staff /SOS village and other external specialists view children’s psychological development – (if possible provide number of children who have improved in their psychosocial development after the intervention)
- Frequency of family home visits by the programme
- Participation of caregivers in community life
- Level of satisfaction of children and caregivers regarding this support
E. Living conditions
- Number of families/children supported in shelter and other items related to child’s living conditions
- Type and appropriateness of support provided by the programme directly or through referral (e.g. shelter, blankets); identify the impact and if there is something to be added, reduced or removed.
- How safe families’ living conditions are, and how they feel about it
- Are living conditions adequate relative to acceptable local standards? (relates to such things as number of rooms, especially sleeping rooms; size of house; sanitation; source of light and heat; water supply, etc.)
- Level of satisfaction of caregivers and children regarding this support
F. Promotion of child rights/parenting skills
- Number of children and caregivers taking part in education workshops in child development and child rights
- Type and appropriateness of activities provided to children and/or caregivers by the programme directly or through referral; identify the impact and if there is something to be added, reduced or removed.
- To what extent children, caregivers and communities have knowledge on children’s rights
- Any example where children have started to exercise their rights
- If caregivers have improved their parental skills (provide specific information on the parameters used for improved parental skills)
- Any changes or improvements in parent and child relationship and child care practices (if possible provide number of cases known)
G. Economic support
- Type and appropriateness of economic support provided by the programme directly or through referral (e.g. skills training, income generation activities, debt payment, short term cash support; referral to employment service); identify the impact and if there is something to be added, reduced or removed.
- The extent to which this support has changed the lives of families; caregivers have jobs or other income generation activities providing “stable” and “sufficient” income
- Role of economic support in reducing dependency, stress and building confidence; Appropriateness of the economic support responding to the needs and expectations of participants
- If loans are provided, how much and at what rate, and to what extent repayment system is working
H. Family Development Planning
- Number of families who have a family development plan (in proportion to the total number of participating families)
- To what extent families take responsibility (ownership) in realising the goals set in FDP
- What constraints they encounter to take such responsibility
- General improvement in life planning
- Level of satisfaction of caregivers and children regarding the FDP process
- Number of families who have exited the programme – broken down into how many families successfully achieved goals in their FDP; how many were dropped from the programme due to lack of commitment; and how many simply moved out of the programme for other reasons, e.g. move house.
I. Community based structures
- Type of community based structures and activities the programme collaborates with
- Type and number of community structures and activities established with the support of the programme to support families to prevent child abandonment
- Kind and number of community based structures or activities which existed (e.g. family committees, community groups, self help groups, volunteer groups), but have been strengthened by the programme (specify the type of capacity building work carried out)
- Type and number of community based implementation partners, and what interventions they carry out.
- Is the capacity of community structures build in a way that leads to sustainability? Is it foreseeable that families will be supported by community structures without SOS involvement?
- Satisfaction level by the families of the services provided to them by community based structures
- Number of families entering & existing the programme (turn-over rate)
J. Other partners
- Type and number of other local implementation partners (e.g. local government, local NGOs, international NGOs)
- Is the capacity of the implementation partner strengthened in a way that is sustainable? Is it foreseeable that families will be supported by partners also without SOS involvement?
- Type of partnerships with other service providers with whom the programme collaborates; type of services they each provide
- Kind and number of local organisations that have their capacity strengthened through the programme; in what way
- The trend in number of families supported by other service providers collaborating with the programme (number in the increase or decrease)
- Satisfaction level by the participants/clients of the quality of services provided
K. Management / administration systems
- How well the programme is structured and staff is supervised
- To what extent the programme is supported by an appropriate management, monitoring and evaluation system? Is this system geared towards sustainability (with takeover of implementation partner in mind)?
L. Human resources
- Adequate human resources in programme? If not, where/how?
- Relationship between staff members and team work
- Relationship between staff and implementation partner (including volunteers)
- Training of staff and volunteers
- Any training needs?
- Clear division of roles and responsibilities between the staff and between SOS and its partners
3.Methodology
o As a minimum requirement, this evaluation exercise looks at the changes that have happened in participating family’s lives due to their participation in the programme.
o As this impact evaluation is an opportunity for learning for the programme staff, it is critical that the programme staff participates throughout the evaluation process.
o The evaluation should use quantitative (e.g. surveys) and qualitative data collection methods such as semi-structured interviews (for example with focus groups, key informant, large groups, individual interviews, etc.) as necessary.
o As the evaluation criteria as well as the indicators were not developed before the start of the programme, it is not expected to go into depth to seek information on the quantitative aspects of the programme, hence the qualitative information should be the major focus at this stage. However, if quantitative data has been collected by the programme and it is related to the evaluation criteria (objectives), they should be analysed.
o The evaluation should use participatory methodologies to involve programme participants (families currently on the programme as well as families that have already exited the programme) and wherever possible children should be involved in the design and implementation of the impact assessment. It is suggested to group programme participants in the evaluation based on their length of participation in the programme.
4.Major Tasks
Lead the impact evaluation exercise involving the project staff and other key stakeholders, including:
o Plan the evaluation design in coordination with programme staff
o Review the project documentation and other sources of information
o Undertake a SWOT exercise with programme staff
o Plan, design, and coordinate the data collection process
Identification of the major stakeholders who are associated with the programme to be interviewed, such as the direct participants of the programme (children, care-givers) implementation partners, key local government representatives, and other service providers
Composition of a survey team
Selection of representative sample of communities or groups to be interviewed on the basis of agreed criteria
Agreeing on the type of information to be collected
Preparation of checklists and other tools for data collection
Facilitate learning during the data collection exercise
o Collection of data
o Analysis of the data
o Preparation of a draft report and finalisation after inputs from various stakeholders
o Present the findings to the programme staff
o After having received feedback from the various stakeholders – finalise the report
How to apply:
Interested consultants who meet the conditions specified herein are invited to submit their technical and financial proposals including proposed work plans, Curriculum Vitae of lead Consultant(s) and a clear demonstration of understanding and interpretation of this Terms of Reference (TOR) to: hr@sos-somaliland.org and indicate FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR FSP HARGEISA, SOMALILAND in the subject line, to reach not later than 10th October, 2016.