Compétences et qualifications requises :
3. Objectives and Purpose of the Evaluation
The evaluation will provide an independent and objective assessment of the project’s overall success, including its alignment with original goals and its contribution to the strategy of Ministry of Environment to reduce climate-related shocks and increase the environmental resilience of the targeted regions. The specific purposes include:
• Learning: Generate insights into the project’s successes and challenges, and identify areas for improvement, informing future environmental initiatives by AMURT, Kindernothilfe, and other stakeholders in Haiti.
• Accountability: Offer transparency regarding project implementation and ensure accountability to the funders, stakeholders, and community-based actors.
• Impact Assessment: Measure the impact of the project on key stakeholders, particularly targeted community groups, Self-Help Groups, students, government and non-government representatives, and other local and regional actors.
• Sustainability Assessment: Evaluate the sustainability of the project's outputs, particularly the interventions in stabilizing critical coastal and mountain ecosystems, and the capacity building of the community-based organizations, the local management structures, and government actors.

The evaluation’s results will be used by AMURT, KNH, Ministry of Environment, and other actors in Haiti to improve future project designs and implementation.
4. Evaluation Questions
The consultant/firm will need to conduct the final evaluation following DAC criteria, and focusing on following key questions/objectives:
Relevance:
Were the project’s objectives aligned with the needs of local communities and beneficiaries targeted? How did the project contribute to the national climate-related strategies?
Identify lessons learned of various activities and approaches of the project and explain how the project has addressed the resilience needs of the targeted participants, providing them capacity building, accompaniment, as well as measures to reduce their vulnerability to climate change.
To what extent were the project objectives and strategies valid/appropriate for achieving significant impacts in the context of the targeted geographic regions?
Assess the adequateness of the staff situation to meet the project goals.
Effectiveness:
How effective were the strategies and interventions in reaching the project goals and objectives?
Make a comparison of targets and achievements (of activities and outputs) including the determination of the achieved indicator values as per project proposal, baseline study, and assessment reports, findings of evaluation of predecessor project and discussion with project staff.
What are the factors that influenced achievement of the objectives, (Objectives are outlined in project description)?
To what extent were the intended objectives and indicators realistic? Assess likelihood of achievement of objectives at project end and measurability and significance of indicators and find out how strategies and indicators can be strengthened in order to achieve the project’s objectives in future for the similar kind of interventions.
Assess the involvement of stakeholders (in planning, implementation and monitoring process) and ownership in general.
Efficiency:
Were the project’s resources used efficiently to achieve the desired outcomes? What challenges were encountered, and how were they addressed?
Were the activities of the project cost-effective and implemented within approved resources?
Were the activities and outputs timely achieved and has significantly contributed to the achievement of the project objectives?
How has the current security and overall instability in the country affected the beneficiaries and stakeholders, in terms of project impacts?
Impact:
Assess the social and environmental impacts of the project on direct beneficiaries:
These could include linkages between stakeholders, communities, and government, capacity building of social and environmental actions/actors, volunteer campaigns, environmental education, support for disaster management mechanisms at local level, engagement and awareness of women, awareness of school authorities, etc.
To what extent were results achieved at outcome level in accordance with project indicators/LFA? Suggest with reason if some activities were to be changed or had no impact and how did beneficiaries use the project’s outputs and if not, find out the reasons.
To which extent the resilience and adaptive capacity of rural communities in northwestern Haiti to the negative impacts of climate change has been strengthened, referring to the different aspects as mentioned in the subgoals (mangrove reforestation, nutritional situation, livelihood development, community structures, capacity building & sensitisation of authorities)
Were there any unexpected outcomes (positive or negative)?
Sustainability:
What steps were taken to ensure that the impact of the interventions last beyond the end of the project period lifecycle? How likely are these outcomes to be sustained?
Was the planned exit strategy of the intervention appropriate and realistic?
What measures were undertaken to ensure the sustainability of the community-based management beyond the project end?
How successful was the project in impacting in a sustainable manner the nutritional situation of the families cultivating and processing Moringa and fruit trees?
To what extent did the watershed protection work implemented by the project succeeded in reducing the negative impacts of flashfloods or drought in sustainable manner, beyond the project end?
How has the project ensured the sustainable impact of its accompaniment the Ministry of Environment?
To what extent has the capacity building and environmental sensitization of the local communities and community-based actors been sustainable?
5. Scope of the Evaluation
The scope of the evaluation is to compare project activities and outputs in comparison with baseline, reports and project documents by collecting data from the project participants through a random or if possible stratified sample in the project area, including a review of the project’s primary activities and outputs.
The evaluation will focus on both rural areas in the upper Artibonite, in particular Anse Rouge and Terre Neuve Communes. The primary target groups include Self-Help Groups (SHGs), farmers, Community-Based Associations (CBAs), Ministry of Environment representatives, AMURT staff, and key stakeholders involved in the project.
6. Simplified Methodological Approach and Data Collection
Given the challenging socio-political situation and insecurity in Haiti, the evaluation should propose a methodology which is well adapted to the complicated complex and various challenges associated with displacement to the various geographic regions affected by the project. The evaluation could consider a simplified approach to data collection in order to ensure the safety and feasibility of the staff involved. The following methodologies are mere examples of such an approach:
• Remote interviews: Key stakeholders, including SHGs, CBAs, project staff, and Ministry representatives, will be interviewed remotely, where possible, to minimize risks associated with travel and in-person interactions.
• Document review: A comprehensive review of existing project documentation (incl. project proposal), reports, and monitoring data will be conducted to assess progress and outcomes.
• Focus group discussions: Where security permits, small focus group discussions may be organized with stakeholders to gather qualitative insights into the project’s impact.
7. Expected Deliverables
The evaluator(s) will be required to deliver the following outputs:
1. Inception Report: A brief report outlining the evaluation approach (incl. suggestions on sample sizes based on the list of participants), including any adaptations made due to the security situation.
After the preparatory meeting, the consulting research team is to provide and to share a detailed inception report with AMURT and KNH. The report shall provide information on:
o The selection of key informants and respondents
o The proposed sample sizes
o The proposed study schedules
o The roles and responsibilities of the research team and AMURT.
o The detailed and specified methodology which meets the objectives and questions of the study as well as developed data collection tools (questionnaires).
o A detailed description of how the team/consultant will use DAC into evaluation criteria.

All questionnaires or interview guidelines must be submitted to AMURT and KNH for approval before being applied in the field.
2. Draft Evaluation Report: A draft report summarizing key findings, which will be shared with AMURT, Ministry of Environment, and Kindernothilfe for feedback.
3. Debriefing/validation workshop after submitting the Draft

4. Final Evaluation Report: A comprehensive report, in both English and Haitian Creole, incorporating feedback from stakeholders. The reports should conform to the following specifications:
 Cover page (Title of the study, the date of the study, recipient’s name, name(s) of the evaluation team.
 Preface or Acknowledgements (Optional)
 Table of Contents
 List of Acronyms
 Lists of Charts, Tables or Figures [Only required in long reports that use these extensively]
 Executive Summary [Stand-Alone, note more than 2 pages, summary of report. This section may not contain any material not found in the main part of the report]
 Main Part of the Report
- Introduction/Background and Purpose (Overview of the evaluation process. Covers the purpose and intended audiences for the study and the key questions as identified in the ToRs)
- Study Approach and Methods (Brief summary. Additional information, including instruments should be presented in an Annex).
- Findings: (This section, organized in whatever way the team wishes, must present the basic answers to the key questions, i.e., the empirical facts and other types of evidence the study team collected including the assumptions)
- Conclusions (This section should present the team’s interpretations or judgements about its findings). Conclusions should be stated as objectively as possible.
- Recommendations on project activities and project monitoring (if applicable)
- Annexes
 Research tools,
 evaluation schedule
 list of stakeholders and project actors interviewed,
 List of interview guidelines
 Clean Database
 Analysis in Ms. Excel or SPPS form
5. Presentation of Findings: A presentation of key findings to project stakeholders, either in-person or via a virtual platform, depending on security conditions.
8. Required Consultant Qualifications and Expertise
The evaluation team should possess the following qualifications:
• The consultant/firm should have at least five years proven experience in evaluating environmental projects, with a focus on developing countries and challenging socio-political environments.
• Strong understanding of the domains of development, environment, project management, and evaluation
• Experience with remote data collection methods, given the constraints in the field and experience in environmental evaluations
• Fluency in English and Haitian Creole.
• Strong report-writing and presentation skills, with the ability to produce reports in both English and Haitian Creole.
• The ability to analyses and synthesize data from a wide variety of sources and present the resulting information in a clear and concise format
9. Roles and Responsibilities
AMURT Haiti will provide logistical and administrative support, including access to relevant documents and stakeholders. The evaluator(s) will be responsible for conducting the evaluation, ensuring timely data collection, and preparing the evaluation reports.
10. Timeframe

Activity Time By who
Document Review
includes review of project plans, project progress reports, M+E Reports, and general/ official documents regarding project 3 days Consultant
Inception report
(update methodology of Project Review before inceptions) 5 days Consultant

Field work and data collection
Data collection (ensuring quality of data) 10 days Consultant

Reports
Data analysis
1st draft report and feedback
Presentation of Findings
Final report
10 days Consultant

The evaluation will take place from July 1, 2026, to August 22, 2026, with the following timeline:
• July 1-5: Inception report submitted and methodology confirmed.
• July 5 - 16: Data collection, including remote interviews, document reviews, and focus groups (if feasible).
• August 12: Submission of the draft evaluation report.
• August 18: Presentation of findings.
• August 22: Final report submitted.
11. Mode of Payment
The payment for the evaluation will be disbursed as follows:
• 30% upon signing the contract.
• 30% upon submission of the draft report.
• 40% upon submission and approval of the final report.
12. Ethical Considerations and Use of AI
The evaluator(s) must adhere to ethical standards throughout the evaluation process, ensuring confidentiality, informed consent, and respect for all participants. Given the increasing use of AI in evaluations, any AI tools or techniques used for data collection or analysis must be transparent, and risks associated with AI, such as bias or privacy concerns, should be clearly addressed.
13. Technical Proposal Format

The Technical proposal should include but not limited to the following information:

• Introduction of Firm/organization (in case if a firm is applying)
• A brief outline of recent experience and client references in carrying out assignments of similar nature. (Maximum 2 pages).
• Detailed description of how the consultant understands and will respond to the TOR including time frame, weekly work plan and number of persons involved including comments on the TOR (Max 2 pages)
• A clear methodology for conducting this assignment
• Clear description of roles of the proposed members involved in the assignment. (Max 2 pages)
• Relevant Signed Curriculum Vitae of all the professional members of the team (Max 2 pages for each personnel).
Please note that the team whose CVs are submitted, should actually be involved in conducting the evaluation in the field work.
14. Supervision / Logistics
• The direct supervisor of the contractor will be under the overall supervision of the Country Director of AMURT-Haiti.
• During the assignment AMURT Haiti will advise the consultants with regard to the security situation.
• In consideration of the present security situation in Haiti interviews might be scheduled for Port-au-Prince only. Additionally, two or three extra days should be planned to allow flexible response if required by the actual security situation.