Registered Users
1,882,789
Posted Jobs
103,741

Terms of Reference for HRF-III External Evaluation

 

Introduction

 

The Asia Foundation (the Foundation) has implemented Human Rights Fund III, which have been developed and managed with the support of the Embassy of the Kingdom of the Netherlands (EKN), in the Islamic Republic of Pakistan (hereinafter, Pakistan).  The objective of HRF III is to increase the protection and promotion of rights of expression, assembly, association and thought (REAT[1]) including religious freedoms in Pakistan, especially at the provincial level and in targeted districts where rights are most at risk.  REAT freedoms are enshrined in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR, Articles 18-22), ratified by Pakistan on 23 June 2010.[2] 

 

HRF III has made following two strategic interventions:

 

  • The establishment of a network of civil society and private sector organizations dedicated to the promotion and protection of REAT with specific attention to freedom of religion;
  • Increased public awareness of and support for the promotion and protection of REAT, with specific attention to freedom of religion

 

HRF III focuses on a very specific and targeted set of inter-related human rights themes in order to concentrate efforts and maximize results.  In particular, all efforts have, as their foundation the need for national and provincial legislation, policy and enforcement of Pakistan’s recent ratification of the ICCPR as it relates to REAT, including religious freedoms (ICCPR Articles 18-22).  Program activities include closely associated economic, social and cultural rights, such as the rights of a particular religious group to practice their faith and workers’ rights of collective expression, including by members of a minority group working in a particular industry.

 

Study Objective and Scope but not limited to:

 

The main objectives of the final evaluation are to assess:

  • Quality and progress in delivery of program services, intended outputs and intermediate results
  • Progress made towards achieving sustainable benefits, as proposed
  • Reflect and learn from what has worked well and what has not, and the reasons why
  • Practical recommendations to improve future program design
  • Any issues and challenges confronted and how to tackle those in future

 

Location

 

The External Evaluation of HRF-III will focus on ten ‘hotspot’ districts (Lahore, Nankana Sahib, Faisalabad, Chiniot, Khanewal, Umerkot, Jaccobabad, Larkana, Swat and Quetta) and 4 control districts (Rawalpindi, Sanghar, Shangla and Jaffarabad). The selected districts will include urban and rural populations and areas of religious and ethnic diversity. 

 

Timeline:

 

Submit all deliverables within 55 days of award contract.

 

Core Competencies

The consulting firm / research firm (s) is expected to have:

  • Proven record of at least 15 years of experience in the development field out of which at least 10 years has been gained in the relevant area (human rights)
  • Experience in management of development program will be considered an asset
  • Credible records and references of previous consulting experience in Pakistan

1: Report Outline

1.1 Title Page

1.2 Acknowledgments

1.3 Author’s Details

1.4 Table of Contents

1.5 Executive Summary (The Executive Summary should be articulated in such a manner that it could be presented as standalone document as well.

2. Introduction

2.1 Activity Background

2.2 Review Objectives and Questions

2.3 Review Scope and Methods

2.4 Review Team

3. Review Findings

The main body of the report should directly answers the review questions. Gender segregated quantitative and qualitative data and evidences to support the findings and recommendations needs to be presented as part of the report. The report structure will be determined by the review questions, and can be adjusted accordingly. Findings must specifically address the review criteria; relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, impacts, gender equality, M&E, and present learning in a professional manner.

4. Relevance

  • Are the objectives of HRF III relevant to Government, TAF and EKN priorities?
  • Is the process adopted for selection of members of the network relevant?
  • Is the establishment of Early Warning System (capacity building of HRDs, helplines and legal aid services etc.) at district level relevant to the need on the ground?
  • Financial support provided to NGOs at district level is relevant for promotion and protection of minority’s rights?
  • Advocacy issues identified by the Network members at district, provincial and national levels and advocacy techniques adopted by HRF-III are relevant for promotion and protection of REAT?
  • Are the processes used for the implementation of HRF-III effective?
  • How far the processes adopted for the implementation translated into effectiveness of results achieved.  
  • How far TAF and the donor were responsive to the context while making financial adjustments?
  • Once decisions made by the TAF and donor regarding realignment of resources whether those decisions were shared with relevant stakeholders i.e. government, local partner etc. in a timely fashion?
  • The REAT network and partner organizations can sustain the HRF-III interventions even after close of project?
  • How far member organizations and REAT network strengthened their systems and processes to become gender responsive and inclusive towards minorities? 
  • Assess the outreach of HRF-III advocacy towards various stakeholders (government, members of parliaments, media and civil society).   
  • Identify the areas of improvement for sustainability of REAT network.
  • Has the project incorporated gender equality aspect at design level?
  • Has implementation strategy taken care of gender equality aspect? Particularly while identifying HRDs and REAT network organizations?
  • Assess the level of gender responsiveness among the network organizations.
  • Has the M&E system established at TAF for HRF III collected the right information (gender wise and content wise) to assess outcomes of the program?
  • Assess the interface and communication of this M&E system with network organization partner organizations, and with other stakeholders.
  • How far findings and observations of reports generated from M&E system were incorporated in program planning and implementation.

5. Effectiveness

6. Efficiency

7. Sustainability

8. Gender Equality

9. Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E)

10. Lessons learned

  • Were the recommendations from baseline and midterm review effectively incorporated in project design and implementation?
  • What were the major challenges faced while approaching/involving the relevant stakeholders such as relevant government institutions, members of the parliament and religious leaders, civil society and media at district, provincial and national level?

11. Conclusion

  • Conclusion should deal with the contextual realities related to human rights agenda, existing trends, emerging scenarios for network of CSOs, role of HRDs in existing situation and their future alignment, role of civil society organizations (who are not part of the network) but are  working in other than program districts.
  • Assess new opportunities coming from the state institutions and their position on minority’s rights.
  • Assess the approach of HRF III while addressing the minority’s issues in Pakistan, and are there any alternatives?
  • Identify the real drivers of change in the area of human rights, i.e. civil society, media, Human rights defenders, social activists, local or provincial government national government.

12. Recommendations

  • At the end of the report, based on above analysis and conclusion, recommendation part should present actionable points for TAF, REAT Network and HRDs in terms of their futuristic approach. 
  • The consultant/ firm after initial discussions will share a detailed work plan with TAF outlining steps and tools for the Review process.
  • Consultant/firm will share the revised/updated instruments as required
  • The consultant/firm will submit a well‐organized and well‐formatted draft report in English language in print and electronic version. Report outline will be finalized with the consultant during the initial discussions and before the finalization of the work plan.
  • Objective wise reports by consultant and each objective should cover the following: project relevance, effectiveness, efficiency and sustainability.
  • Consolidated Final Report

Deliverables:

 

Request for proposal:

 

The Asia Foundation is inviting Technical and Financial Proposal in hard copy for the aforementioned consultancy. The proposal should be sent in a sealed envelope with two inner sealed envelopes (one envelope with technical and the other with financial proposal). The proposal must be accompanied with following documents:

 

  • A short proposal for conducting this assignment including a comprehensive work plan with clear timelines.
  • CVs of Team Lead and other team members with clear role and responsibilities
  • Detailed Profile of firm/organization/individual consultant

 

Who can apply?

 

  1. Consultant firm with proven track record of relevant experience of similar work.
  2. Experience of working with donors and familiarity with donor reporting requirements
  3. Ability to deliver quality work on time

 

Deadline for Proposal Submission:

 

The proposal must reach at following address by the close of business on September 07, 2015.

Country Representative

The Asia Foundation

House No.7, Street 58,

F-7/4, Islamabad, Pakistan

 

Proposals submitted after the deadline shall not be entertained. The sealed envelope must clearly mention the title of the consultancy. The hard copy will be considered as final. For further queries write to Mr. Abrar Ahmed (Senior Program Officer-HRF-III) on email address: [email protected]

Note: only shortlisted consultants will be contacted.

 

All applications will be reviewed under the following standardized criteria:

 

  1. Previous relevant experience (30)
  2. Technical proposal (40)
    1. Proposed sample design and methodology
    2. Proposed Implementation plan (including field deployment plan, monitoring plan, data entry and cleaning plan)
    3. Proposed quantitative and qualitative instruments
    4. Proposed indicators for measurement
    5. Proposed core research staff
  3. Financial Proposal (30)
    1. Budget consistency with the proposed activities and cost effectiveness