Plan Indonesia –
Psychosocial Intervention for Merapi Recovery (PIMR) Project
Terms of Reference
End of Project Evaluation
I. Background
Plan is an international child‐centred development organization. Plan’s vision is of a world in which all children realize their full potential in societies that respect people’s rights and dignity. Plan works in 66 countries across the world; in 48 developing countries across Africa, Asia and the Americas supported by fundraising in 21 countries and by 4 regional offices as well as Plan international headquarters in the UK.
The eruption of Mt. Merapi on 26th of October 2010 resulted in approximately 386 casualties and the internal displacement of approximately 400,000 people. With the emergency phase concluding on 9 December 2010, hundreds of persons commenced the return to their homes or designated government relocation sites. However, communities are still being reminded to remain vigilant and prepared, especially for cold lava floods, due to intensive rainfall in and around Yogyakarta, some areas of which have already reported flooding. The process of rehabilitation and reconstruction has commenced under the authority of the local government in Yogyakarta and Central Java, that has allocated IDR100 billion for the agriculture sector with a special focus on affected livestock. Plan Indonesia’s supported by the Joint Secretary of Child Protection (formed by UNICEF and MoSA) concluded that Protection remained a gap especially the provision of psychosocial support for
children, youth and adults. For 2 months (October-November 2011) emergency response, Plan Indonesia conducted the Child Friendly Spaces (CFS) for children.
With a support from AusAID and Plan Australia, Plan Indonesia continued support and expansion of Child Friendly Spaces (CFS) through Psychosocial Intervention for Merapi Recovery (PIMR) Project. Plan and its partner Yayasan Lestari Indonesia (YLI) served an estimated beneficiary population of roughly 14,000 individuals in 10 targeted villages in 3 districts of the Sleman (DIY) and Klaten & Magelang (Central Java). PIMR project focus on providing psychosocial support to children (8,000), youth (2,000) and adults (4,000) through psychosocial recovery activities and protection to ensure the well-being of children, youth and adult. This project has also been delivered a provision of Information, Education and Communication (IEC) on Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR), Health and Hygiene, Child Protection, and Early Recovery issues.
Plan has so far commissioned one assessment of Psychosocial Impact and Post Disaster Need and occurred in February-March 2011. The findings of this assessment helped PIMR in implementing an appropriate response to meet the psychosocial needs of the target beneficiaries in Sleman, Klaten and Magelang.
PIMR has been implemented since January 2011. With the program scheduled to conclude in December 2011, Plan Indonesia seeks an external/independent consultant(s) to conduct the end of project evaluation. The evaluation will be outsourced is expected to commence in early December 2011 and to be completed by third week of December 2011 (including the final report).
While the specifics of the evaluation are spelled out in detail in the section below, the overall process of evaluation will be guided by the goals and objectives of the PIMR project. Goals and objectives of the project are detailed below.
II. Scope of Evaluation and Purpose
Evaluation will cover all aspects of the PIMR project implementation starting from February – November 2011, in Sleman, Klaten dan Magelang districts.
The purpose of the PIMR final evaluation is need tobe explored are: (i) determine whether the goal, objectives, and impact as stated in the logical framework were achieved; and (ii) identify factors contributing to successful transformation at community and partner levels (iii) provide recommendations for Plan’s future programming as well as to draw lessons learned and evidence based of the project.
III. Elements To Be Covered In This Evaluation
The evaluation will take into account the project’s relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, sustainability, impacts, and gender equity. Specifically the evaluation will examine the following aspects:
a. Changes in context and review of assumptions (relevance): Is the project’s design adequate to address the problem(s) at hand? Do the objectives and goals match the problems or needs that are being addressed?
b. Results in terms of outputs achieved (effectiveness):Are the beneficiaries satisfied with the quality and delivery of services? If not, in what way did the services not meet with beneficiary expectations and why? What concrete improvements and changes have taken place (at the community, children, youth and adult) as a direct result of the program? What were the major factors influencing the achievement or non-achievement of the objectives? What are the supportive factors and obstacles encountered during the implementation?
c. Assessment of outcome (impact):To what extent has the project contributed the capacity of beneficiaries (children, youth, adult), local/community cadres, and partner? What happened as a result of the project? (This may include intended and unintended positive and negative effects) What real transformation has the activity made to the beneficiaries and project partner such as improved practice and greater awareness on psychosocial aspect as well as it accountability.
d. Achievement of projected performance indicators and targets (efficiency):Did the project achieve the targeted number of [CFS, support group, training programs, dissemination workshops, etc.]? Is the project delivered in a timely and cost-effective manner?
e. Sustainability: Will the project’s effects remain over time? Is there a stream of results that is likely to continue and what are the potential risks? Have the project accumulated knowledge and skills that will endure beyond project period and can be replicated elsewhere. What were the major factors which influenced the achievement and non-achievement of sustainability of the project?
f. Gender Equity: How has the project addressed boys/,male and girls/female particularly in terms equal opportunity to access and control of resources, sharing project benefits and decision making)?
IV.Methodology / Statement of Work
The external consultant(s) should come up with a suitable methodology for this evaluation based on the guidance given in this document. The evaluation will take place mainly in the field.
During the evaluation, the consultants are expected to apply the following approaches for data collection and analysis. Primary data will be collected through variety of methods, including key informant interviews and focus group discussions with representatives of key stakeholder groups.
1) Develop the evaluation protocol detailing the methods and instruments. This will also include working with project team and relevant people in developing and agreeing on key elements to be evaluated of the component described in section III.
2) Review of relevant documents, including but not limited to project documentation, records, and monitoring reports.
3) Comparison of project goals and objectives with actual activities.
4) Interview with manager, supervisor and staff involved with the project including YLI (partner), field staff and Plan’s PIMR staff and management.
5) Interview with program participants and key stakeholders, direct beneficiaries (children, youth adult), teachers, parents and community/local cadres. Interviews should consist of key focus the stated evaluation elements/components.
6) Analysis and interpretation of Psychosocial Impact and Post Disaster Needs Assessment data compared, if required.
7) Adhere to all relevant procedures and policies of the Plan Indonesia.
8) Adhere to ethical guidelines as outlined in section X.
V. Deliverables
The external/independent consultant is expected to deliver as follows to Plan Indonesia:
1) Evaluation protocols, detailing the evaluation activity timeline and proposed instruments, for discussion and approval (before starting the field work).
2) Presentation of the preliminary findings to the Plan Indonesia management and relevant staff at the end of the evaluation field works.
3) Submission of the draft report in English language within two weeks of the completion of the field work.
4) Submission of the FINAL Report in English language within one week after receiving the feedback from the Plan Indonesia team on the draft report.
5) Properly filed/archived hard copies of filled-in questionnaire (if used), transcripts of any discussions and interviews etc.
6) Evidence based of project (story report).
VI.Time Line
The consultancy is expected to start in early December 2011 and to be completed by the third week of December 2011.
VII. Qualification and Professional Experience Requirement
External/independent consultant or institution with following portfolio will be required to undertake the evaluation.
Qualifications and Professional Experience Requirements:
· Post graduate qualification in evaluation, social science or a related M&E field.
· At least five years of experience in evaluation of a range of interventions, including Psychosocial and Community Development setting including Disaster Risk Reduction.
· Experience in conducting project assessment or evaluation with quantitative and qualitative research methods.
· Ability to work independently and be comfortable in field environment.
· Has good analytical skills and evaluation report writing skills
· Excellent interpersonal communication and presentation skills.
· Excellent written and spoken English.
VIII. Selection Process and Management
Application Procedures & Selection:
Step 1:
Interested institutions or individuals can send their expression of interest (EOI) via email to
a) PME Team (Bekti Andari:
Bekti.andari@plan-international.org)
b) DRM Program Manager (Vanda Lengkong:
vanda.lengkong@plan-international.org),
c) PIMR Project Coordinator (Agustina Pamuso:
agustina.pamuso@plan-international.org)
Expected materials:
· The detailed proposals.
· Proposed evaluation methodology and Instruments.
· Detailed Time Line.
· Detailed Budget: (personals, training, cost of entry program, etc).
· A brief description of your institution (for applicants other than individual contractors) and a covering letter justifying your suitability for the assignment.
· Curricula Vitae (CV) for all members of the team applying for consideration;
· Daily rate quote(s);
· Three (3) professional references.
Deadline of submission of the proposal is 26th November 2011.
Step 2:
The short-listed candidates/institutions will be asked to present their proposal. Interviews will be conducted and reference will be checked before making the final selection. PME Program Manager and DRM Program Manager will be responsible for the final selection of the consultants/institutions in close collaboration with the PIMR Project Coordinator, and for approving the evaluation methodology, instruments and the final deliverables.
Plan Indonesia will assist the external consultant as follows:
1) Provide all documents and data required for the evaluation.
2) Provide logistical support.
3) Arrangement of field work (to meet the community and stakeholders) for interviews and groups discussions.
IX.Contact
Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation (PME) Team (attd. Gender Specialist, Ms. Bekti Andari) will be the primary contact person for the evaluation.
X. Ethical Guidelines
It is expected that the evaluation team will adhere to ethical guidelines as outlined in the American Evaluation Association’s Guiding Principles for Evaluator as reference. A summary of these guidelines is provided below. www.eval.org/Publications/GuidingPrinciplesPrintable.asp.
1) Informed Consent:All participants are expected to provide informed consent following standard and pre-agreed upon consent protocols.
2) Systematic Inquiry:Evaluation team/evaluator conducts systematic, data-based inquiries.
3) Competence:Evaluation team/evaluator provides competent performance to stakeholders.
4) Integrity/Honesty:Evaluation team display honesty and integrity in their behavior, and attempt to ensure the honesty and integrity of the entire evaluation process.
5) Respect for People:Evaluation team/evaluator respects the security, dignity and self-worth of respondents, program participants, clients, and other stakeholders. It is expected that the evaluation team/evaluator will obtain the informed consent of participants to ensure that they can decide in a conscious, deliberate way whether they want to participate.
6) Responsibilities for General and Public Welfare:Evaluation team/evaluator articulate and take into account the diversity of general and public interests and values that may be related to the evaluation.
Best,
Bekti Andari
