This work can be defined as a final evaluation at the end of the intervention. More specifically it is a formative and a summative evaluation.
As formative evaluation, we intend it will examine whether the assumed “operational logic” corresponds with actual implementation and will identify the consequences of the application (stages) produces, which aspects worked well or not. Lessons learned will be important in guiding future interventions.
The final formative evaluation will constitute the final phase of a regular internal periodical process assessment activity COOPI will carry on during the implementation phase of the project focusing on operations. This activity will support improving operational problems all along the way during the implementation phase so that major issues can be dealt with immediately to avoid major negative consequences.
The final formative evaluation will focus on project and improvement.

As summative evaluation, the work will have the aim to provide information about the values and impact of the program. The evaluations will be therefore used to answer questions of relevance, performance, impacts, sustainability, external utility, and lessons learned.
This work will focus on results to enable people to make decisions regarding continuing, replicating, scaling up, or ending at the project and its activities.

Scope of the Evaluation*
The Time coverage of the evaluation is from November 2018 up to November 2020. The evaluation should answer following questions:

1. What level of success has the project and its related activities had in general terms?
2. Have resources been used effectively?
3. Had the intervention any impact and/or unintended consequences?
4. Was the intervention sustainable and can it be replicated elsewhere?


Evaluation Criteria to be used*

COOPI requests the work to be conducted according to the Development Assistance Committee (DAC) criteria for evaluation: Impact, Sustainability, Coherence, Coverage, Relevance / Appropriateness, Effectiveness and Efficiency.

Relevance/ Appropriateness
The research will focus on whether the project is addressing the key problems as set out in the project proposal, both from the NGO and the beneficiaries’ perspective. In particular, the research questions to be considered for this criterion are:
• To what extent are the objectives of the program still valid?
• Do the beneficiaries feel that the project is responding to their needs?
• Are the activities and outputs of the program consistent with the intended impacts and effects?

Coverage
The research will assess whether all the intended beneficiaries have been covered by the intervention. It will also consider whether the criteria chosen to identify potential beneficiaries -if any applied- were relevant. In case some beneficiaries were left out, the research will try to explain why this has happened. In particular, the research questions to be considered for this criterion are:
• To what extent were the intended beneficiaries of target population effectively covered by the project?
• Which has been the main challenge for beneficiaries to access and benefit from aid?

Coherence
The research will review to which extent the intervention was coherent with the organization’s mandate, the international aid standards and whether and how it has integrated its strategy national and provincial recommendations and guidelines. In particular, the research questions to be considered for this criterion are:
• Was the project in line with the relevant local, provincial and national guidelines and the international aid standards?

Effectiveness
The research will review to which extent the intervention has been effective and how potential challenges have been addressed. In particular, the research questions to be considered for this criterion are:
• To what extent were the objectives achieved / are likely to be achieved?
• What were the major factors influencing the achievement or non-achievement of the objectives?

Efficiency
The research will assess the cost-effectiveness and the value for money of the project components. In particular, the research questions to be considered for this criterion are:
• To what extent were the costs and benefits of the intervention in a reasonable
proportion to each other from a business and economic point of view?
• Were there alternative approaches that would have been more cost-effective without
effecting quality?

Impact and Unintended Consequences
The research will review the changes produced by the intervention, directly or indirectly, intended or unintended and what are the changes to beneficiaries’ lives. In particular, the research questions to be considered for this criterion are:
• What has happened as a result of the project?
• What real difference have the activities made to the beneficiaries?
• Has the project generated any unintended negative impact?

Sustainability
The research will look into the sustainability and will focus whether the benefits of the activities are likely to continue after donor funding has been withdrawn. The research will consider environmental as well as financial sustainability. In particular, the research questions to be considered for this criterion are:
• What measures, and with what success, did Coopi take to ensure that all interventions were sustainable?
• What are the phase out and hand over plans from Coopi and from communities point of view?

Cross-cutting issues
- Protection (age, gender and diversity)
The research will assess whether women were consulted and involved as much as men and whether activities included special components for women which took into account women’s needs and workload.

-Community involvement and participation
The research will investigate the level of participation of the communities during the designing and the implementation of the program.

-Accountability to Affected Populations (AAP)
The research will focus on the measures taken to ensure transparency and accountability towards the communities and the donors.

-Monitoring
The research will assess the systems aimed to improve the monitoring, the program quality, and the delivery of support services.


Evaluation Outputs*

The expected output of the evaluation is the following:
• Inception report
• Evaluation draft report
• Workshops debriefing in country to present
finding and recommendation
• Evaluation final report

The final evaluation will be done by an external evaluator for more neutrality.
Required evaluation team and profile:
The consulting evaluator must be an experienced and capable professional with a strong Protection background.
The evaluator should have:
• degree in social work, sociology, psychology, social sciences, or other relevant field strongly preferred;
• Strong background/expertise in protection programming (child protection, GBV, psychosocial support) in humanitarian response;
• At least 5 years working experience in these areas;
• Familiarity with related international literature, best practices, and key issues;
• Experience in designing and conducting program evaluation, particularly for protection interventions (in relevant sub-sectors named above) in humanitarian contexts¸ preferable prior experience of evaluating USAID (specifically OFDA) funded projects;
• Experience and expertise in the use of quantitative and qualitative methods for data collection and analysis;
• Familiarity with the socio-cultural context of the area and relevant cultural, political and religious sensitivities; regional experience strongly preferred;
• Demonstrated experience and skill of facilitating stakeholder consultations exercises;
• Excellent analytical and communication skills;
• Excellent writing and communication skills in English required;
• Computer literacy with specific regard to Word, Excel and PowerPoint.

Interested parties must send their CV with a cover letter, a methodological and technical proposal, a comprehensive evaluation budget (separate file) and a timetable/ working plan to the following e-mail addresses:
pm.drr.haiti@coopi.org and coord.haiti@coopi.org
The subject “Final external evaluation USAID/OFDA- 720FDA19GR00002 “should be mentioned. The deadline for proposals reception: October 12, 2020 at 12H AM.

Key Evaluation Dates*

Expected Start Date: October 19, 2020
Submission of Inception Report: October 26, 2020
Submission of First Draft Report: November 20, 2020
Submission of Final Report: November 28, 2020
Expected End Date: November 30, 2020



QUALIFICATION CRITERIA
The maximal technical qualification note is 100 points:

Technical proposal: 80 points
Economical proposal: 20 points

The budget must not exceed eight thousand (8,000.00)