Ann Viv Ansanm (We Live Together) was a 26-month (February 2017 - March 2019) project to increase community security and reduce violence in four communities of Haiti through youth-led research, transformative mediation, and economic development.
The project was led by Mercy Corps Haiti in collaboration with Haitian and Canadian partners. Canadian partners included Conrad Grebel University College, Community Justice Initiatives, and the Centre for Community Based Research (CCBR) all located in Waterloo, Ontario, Canada. The project was funded by Global Affairs Canada (GAC) in support of the Government of Canada’s priorities to strengthen vulnerable communities, leading to safer and more prosperous places to live.
The Ann Viv Ansanm project focused on strengthening vulnerable groups – youth, women, and incarcerated minors – in four vulnerable communities of Haiti. The four targeted communities were intentionally selected because of their geographic diversity from highly urban to rural-urban to allow for comparison across the milieu (see map below). Mercy Corps had previously been involved in each of the four communities. These communities (and their corresponding sub-sections) included:
? Arcahaie (Saintard) - rural-urban
? Canaan (Onaville and Jerusalem) - peri-urban
? Carrefour-Feuilles (Sicot) - urban
? Miragoane (Chalon) - rural
There were three main components that made up the Ann Viv Ansanm project: 1) youth-led research and action (including community-based research and resulting micro projects), 2) conflict resolution and life skills (including restorative justice training and life skills training), and 3) economic and financial inclusion (including internships, entrepreneurship training, and savings and loans groups). The project set out to implement core community development principles of improving relationships between the community and the security sector, increasing the youth voice in the reduction of community violence, and supporting the community to provide alternatives to violence for youth and young adults. The project’s theory of change was initially articulated in this way:
“By equipping youth with knowledge and employing that knowledge to uncover the root causes of violence in their communities, there will be relevant interventions to create space for dialogue and conflict resolution which will enable vulnerable communities and groups to recover and rebuild their livelihoods.”

Evaluation Purpose & Description:

The primary aims of the final evaluation are to assess the outcomes of program implementation, to identify evidence of whether the activities led to change (positive or negative) and factors that may have impeded or promoted positive change, in order to provide an overall image of program success or failure, as well as recommend adjustments to program design that would help maximize intended results in potential future iterations of programming.

In order to accomplish this aim, Mercy Corps is searching for a dynamic consultant with proven experience in mixed research methods. The final evaluation will be comprised of multiple sources of data, including the endline data collection on indicators and endline case study analyses conducted by our learning partner, the Conrad Grebel College from the University of Waterloo. The consultant(s) will be expected to pull together the different sources of endline data for the purpose of providing an overarching assessment of the relevance and impact of the Ann Viv Ansanm program. In addition, the consultant will be expected to design and conduct a final evaluation of internal program management structure and processes, and any community feedback on aspects of the program not covered in the case studies. The consultant will be expected to present a final report to demonstrate the achievement of certain key benchmarks; critically evaluate program relevance, connectedness, coherence, coverage, efficiency, effectiveness, outputs, and outcomes; and along with a team of program leadership staff to present a series of recommendations and considerations to maximize impact and capitalize on key synergies for potential future iterations of the project.

Evaluation Objectives:

Overall objectives of the endline evaluation are:

1. To evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of program implementation and the quality of outputs and outcomes, in terms of adherence to terms agreed by GAC and their acceptability and perceived value to target communities, identifying factors that appear to enhance or detract from the quality, acceptability and usefulness of implementation and outputs.
2. To seek evidence of changes (intended and unintended) associated with program activities, evaluate how the changes relate to completion of program objectives, and identify factors that appear to have promoted or hindered the program’s progress toward desired objectives.
3. To evaluate program strategies that sought to assure that positive results of the program will be sustained after it ends, considering the adequacy, strengths and weaknesses of these strategies.
4. Based on the findings from 1-3, to recommend adjustments to program design and explain how these changes would improve program outcomes and sustained impact for future programming.

Specific objectives of this consultancy are:
1. To engage various stakeholders (program staff, donors, beneficiary communities) in an analysis and reflection on the evaluation results to close the information loop and catalyze learning.
2. To assess the internal program management, including the consortium structure and local implementing partner, and aspects that facilitated and/or hindered achievement of program objectives.
3. To assess the effectiveness and relevance of the community microprojects in achieving project objectives, as well as any unplanned outcomes.
4. In coordination with the University of Waterloo, collect any data on effectiveness of the different interventions not covered by the case studies.
5. Conduct additional qualitative data collection to contextualize and elaborate the endline results against the indicators.
6. Prepare a comprehensive final evaluation report that incorporates all of the different data points into one meta analysis of the effectiveness of the program.

The consultant will work closely with the Country Director, AVA Program Manager, and M&E team to design the evaluation methodology and identify key research questions and to conduct the evaluation and post-evaluation workshops.

The consultant will be expected to employ mostly qualitative and participatory methods to conduct this evaluation in coordinating with the evaluation team, including:

? Potential review of small-scale beneficiary-level quantitative surveys (using beneficiary lists as a sampling frame for Simple Random Sampling) to be organized and completed before the arrival of the consultant in country
? Various qualitative research methods including:
o Focus group discussions
o Participatory impact assessment or other participatory rural appraisal-type techniques
o Most significant change methodology
o Semi-structured interviews
o Market mapping and private sector visits
o Literature review

The proposed methodologies and tools will be presented to Mercy Corps for validation and approval prior field work.

While the evaluation will be designed in a participatory fashion with AVA staff and not directly with beneficiaries, it should be noted that actual fieldwork will be conducted using participatory methodologies, engaging communities and different stakeholders, especially members and service providers in target communities, to better understand their perceptions of the implementation and outputs, and to discern their beliefs regarding how AVA activities have affected their lives.

When consulting beneficiaries and other community members, evaluators will be encouraged to look for and report signs of apparent outcomes, both intended and unintended, and consider whether these are signs of achievement of the program objectives, i.e. do they fit the theory of change that defined the results framework, or does either the theory or the activities need to be adjusted. This analysis should involve two-way communication between all stakeholders.

Furthermore, the evaluation team should use existing data from reports and activity records to quantify completion of objectives among direct beneficiaries. For example, data from records of trainings, micro-project completion reports, and internship reports could be used to examine associations among the participation of activities, the duration and timing behavior change activities and messaging, with youth and community members.

Finally, when deemed appropriate, small-scale quantitative surveys to measure coverage of activities and certain knowledge and practices (KPC-style surveys) should be used to quantify progress toward objectives among direct beneficiaries, especially concerning high-level outcomes.

Composition of the Final Evaluation Team:
The consultant or consulting firm will have proven experience in program evaluations, will act as team leader and organizer for the Final Evaluation, and will have primary responsibility for the design, but will have technical support from the MEL team, including support programming and using handheld devices (touch-screen tablets) for digital data collection as well as data consolidation and cleaning (as necessary). In cases where participation of the MEL team, the Country Director, or other program staff might bias the evaluation design, these individuals will serve as informants, and it should be stressed that none of these individuals will have an evaluator role. The advisory team will play a key role in capacity facilitation regarding practicalities of the evaluation (e.g. logistics, protocol requirements), but will not be directly involved in data collection or primary analysis. The MEL team will also provide high quality external surveyors, survey supervisors, translation services into local languages and logistics planning for data collection in accordance with agreed conditions from the consultant. The consultant will be expected to work with the MEL team in order to finalize Scopes of Work for necessary surveyors.

Focal points in community mobilization, training, and economic development will be selected in order to help the team leader design and refine the evaluation plan. These focal points will be selected primarily from field staff, but may include partner organizations and/or Mercy Corps headquarters teams as necessary. The consultant will be expected to integrate input from these focal points into the study design, but will be given the final responsibility of prioritizing evaluation questions in coordination with the Country Director and the Program Manager for this evaluation.

The consultant will be expected to have proven experience in workshop design and intercultural communication skills, and is expected to have substantial experience working with violence prevention, community mobilization, economic development and Social Behavior Change programs in the Caribbean. The consultant will have demonstrated experience in highly participative evaluations, assessments and appraisals approaches in an intercultural context.

As the evaluation will be mostly conducted in Creole (with interpretation into French or English), spoken French or Creole is preferred; as the final report will be in English, excellent written English is also necessary. The consultant should have significant experience in using mixed methods for evaluations. Experience with DFATD, GAC or PSOPs programs is a strong advantage.
Mercy Corps responsibilities: Mercy Corps will provide office space in Port-au-Prince and field offices as available, logistic for field trips including vehicle, translation services into local languages, high quality surveyors, survey supervisors, date entry, etc. The consultant will be responsible to provide his/her own computer as required. All data collection materials, databases and analysis material will remain the sole property of Mercy Corps and will have to be handed over at the end of the assignment in a way that they can be easily consulted if required. Mercy Corps is responsible for organizing all appointments with the donor and other key stakeholders, preparing and providing background and reporting documents, data and other material. The consultant will also be provided with program mapping documents, including a list of beneficiary sites. Mercy Corps also takes the responsibility of sharing the draft evaluation report with key stakeholders, gathering feedback, and transferring a consolidated feedback document to the consultant in order to generate a final version of the Final Evaluation Report. Finally, Mercy Corps retains the responsibility of translating the English version of the final report into French (and/or Creole) for distribution to staff and local stakeholders. Deliverables: The consultant will provide the following during their contract (subject to change pending finalization of the evaluation design): ? An evaluation plan, including: o Evaluation methodology and sampling frame (using purposive sampling for qualitative research) o Qualitative protocols for data collection and analysis o Suggested improvements to evaluation scope o Revised evaluation timeline ? 1-day workshop to present the evaluation plan to key staff ? 2-3 day training of surveyors (if necessary) ? 2-day preliminary results analysis workshop ? 1-day presentation of results to the donor (location likely to be in Port-au-Prince) ? Final evaluation report of a maximum of 30 pages excluding title page, executive summary and annexes, written in English, and including the following components: o Background o Evaluation purpose and objectives o Sections on each strategic objective, incorporating results from each intermediate result o Section on program quality and cross-cutting areas o Section on implementation process o Key recommendations o Annexes ? Executive summary of 2-3 pages ? One (1) electronic file of the clean (final) qualitative (and potentially some quantitative) data collected. Methodological strengths and limitations: As a mostly qualitative methods approach, this final evaluation aims to maximize the amount of actionable information acquired from the field, but it should be noted that none of the results acquired from this study will be generalizable to the population in a rigorous statistically significant manner. While qualitative research are appropriate for recognizing trends in programming and gathering in-depth information on program processes, results from the quantitative study (performed internally by the MEL team) will need to be validated in order to be comparable to indicators from baseline. Presentations: Three presentations will be required. One will be required at the beginning of the work in-country to present the methodology of the evaluation to the program team, and two at the end to present preliminary results. The first of the results presentations will be before the program team to discuss results and receive meaningful feedback. The final presentation will be a smaller presentation presented to GAC representatives, partners, and other stakeholders. Estimated Timeframe / Schedule: Mercy Corps estimates between 4 and 5 weeks for the assignment with 3 weeks of in-country work and 1 week of out-of-country work, subject to discussion and agreement with the consultant. The consultant will be responsible to propose a schedule for his/her work, however, it is mandatory that the data collection is being done during the month of March 2019. A proposed schedule could be: Date Activities Duration March 27 (Out of country) Initial literature review of program documentation 1 day March 28 - April 1 (Out of country) Evaluation design 1-2 days April 8 - 12 (In country) - Introductory meetings between evaluation team and stakeholders - Briefing of evaluation team (objectives, organizations, methods, approaches, tools) and finalization of qualitative study tools - Train enumerators and/or qualitative interviewers 5 days April 13 - 26 (In country) Pre-test and field work (interviews, focus groups discussions, observations, analyses, triangulations) 10-14 days April 26 - May 1 (In country) - Data cleaning, - Preliminary analysis - Presentation of preliminary observations to validate findings and interpretations - Presentation of detailed results including preliminary recommendations to consortium members - Summary presentation of key findings and implications to GAC and other relevant stakeholders 5 days May 2 - 5 (Out of country) Report writing 2 days May 6 (Out of country) Draft report due May 8 (Out of country) Revision of draft report considering feedback from AVA team 1 day May 14 (Out of country) Final report due Total number of days: 30 Eligibility Requirements: • Demonstrated experience in program evaluation design and implementation • Oral Fluency in French or Creole a must; written fluency in either French or English (final report may be in either language) • Knowledge of Haitian context a plus • Strong writing skills (writing sample should be included in offer) All offers must include the following: • 1-2 page cover letter presenting why you are the strongest candidate • CV of consultant or consultants who will be conducting the work • List of evaluations or similar work done in past 12 months • 3 references • Writing sample (an excerpt from a past report not to exceed 2 pages is sufficient) • Fees • Calendar of activities and deliverables

Cliquer ici pour télécharger le dossier complet d’appel d’offres

ht-demandedap@mercycorps.org.