On January, 12th 2010 a devastating earthquake of 7 on the Richter scale ravaged Haiti, one of the poorest country of the American continent. The initial assessment claimed 300,000 deaths and 1.3 million IDPs (OCHA source) living in « spontaneous camps » or in the street.
Première Urgence humanitarian response is concentrated, since January the 14th, on the neighborhoods of Martissant and Fontamara, respectively located in Port-au Prince and Carrefour communes.
Since October, 18th 2010, the country is also victim of a cholera epidemic. Starting in the Artibonite region, north of Port-au-Prince, the outbreak has already caused, based on the last report of the MSPP broadcasted on November 27th, 1,603 deaths and 29,871 hospitalized cases. This sanitary crisis intervenes in a highly difficult context where more than 1 million Haitians are still displaced from their area of origin and still live in precarious conditions.
Since the cholera epidemic announcement, Première Urgence has developed prevention activities on its CCCM supported sites, in partnership with a French medical organization, Aide Médicale Internationale (AMI).

The project:
Première Urgence is currently implementing an inclusive project funded by OFDA which focus on the following sector of intervention:
1.Economic support through CFW activities for 1,800 vulnerable persons.
2.Housing support through the distribution of 3,000 emergency shelters and the construction of 250 transitional shelters, regarding a total of 3,250 households.
3.Sanitation support by constructing 300 emergency latrines and 50 transitional latrines regarding 1,750 households.

GENERAL AND SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES OF THE SURVEY:
This survey will be used to evaluate and analyze the general impact on the beneficiaries regarding the assistance provided by Première Urgence within the framework of its operations in the area of Martissant and Fontamara.

More specifically, the aims of the Survey will be as follow:
•To get an estimate of the relevance of this Assistance as far as the beneficiaries are concerned:
-Economic impact of the CFW
-Sanitation impact of the project

•To propose recommendations in order to redefine possible priorities, and identify points to be improved in this kind of intervention, in a similar context in future.
-Relevance of the design and methodology adopted for the T-shelter approach
-Relevance of the emergency shelter approach and methodology
-PU’s approach towards various stakeholders (beneficiaries, local authorities, CBOs…)

METHODOLOGY:
•The evaluator will review the existing documentation (proposals, reports, databases…) related to the program.
•The evaluator will review all activities achieved through a combination of field observations, files studies and discussions.
•The evaluator will interview both the expatriate and local staffs about the used processes and the achieved objectives.
•The evaluator will carry out a survey of all beneficiaries to be interviewed about the impact of the activities.
•Interviews with other stakeholders will be done : local authorities, local NGOs, etc

Before elaborating the sampling method, the unit of the inquiry would have to be defined. A priori, the household would be favored. Then, the size of this sample will be determined on the basis of the “Bernouilli law” integrating 3 parameters: its representativeness, its homogeneity, and its precision.
Lastly, the sampling process will be defined. One of the most rigorous and worthwhile one, would consist drawing lots of beneficiaries in a random way from the list of households, but regarding the huge number of beneficiaries among the focus population, another method could probably be chosen for example the itinerary one (from door to door).

It will be very important to limit external factors which could sway the opinion of the interviewed beneficiaries. For this reason, the formulation of the questions will have to be simplified at the most, and they will have to be asked in a logical and natural way. Structured or semi-structured interview techniques shall be favored.

During the interviews, the “face to face survey” should be emphasized in order to collect data of the highest precision and quality.

Finally, during the interviews, the local Organization in charge of the survey will focus its attention on the respect of interviewed beneficiaries’ households, notably to avoid/shun all the subjects linked to their private lives. Confidentiality of the people asked will also be assured: names will not appear on the filled-in questionnaires. Concerning the selection equity of the people polled, the methodology indicated above is a guarantee for “eligible” beneficiaries to get the same chance to be interviewed.

The whole collection of responses will be centralized by the local organization (in charge) in order to obtain a reference data base. Information collected on the questionnaire hard copies will have to be captured in Excel. Then, a Results Exploitation Methodology will be defined by the Project Coordinator.

Obtained results will have to be communicated in writing. Graphics and Comments will accompany tables with precise figures in order to give the information a more relevant and “incisive» outlook.

Reporting:
A report of the impact survey written in English and in French is expected no longer than 15 days after the survey took place.
The report format appearing below must be strictly followed:
•Cover page
•title of the evaluation report:
•date of the evaluation;
•name of the consultant;
•Indication that “the report has been produced and financed by at the request of OFDA. The comments contained herein reflect the opinions of the consultant only”.
•OFDA logo
•Table of contents
•Executive Summary structured as followed:
-Evaluated action
-Date of the evaluation
-Consultant’s name
-Purpose and methodology
-Main conclusions
-Lessons learned
-Recommendations
•Main body of the report:
The main body of the report shall elaborate the points listed in the Executive Summary. It will include references to the methodology used for the evaluation and the context of the action. In particular, for each key conclusion there should be a corresponding recommendation. Recommendations should be as realistic, operational and pragmatic as possible; that is, they should take careful account of the circumstances currently prevailing in the context of the action, and of the resources available to implement it locally.

•An advanced degree in development studies with solid experience/qualification in the following areas;
•Background in community development and conversant with participatory methodologies.
•Excellent data and livelihoods analysis techniques such as knowledge on comparative analysis, stakeholder’s analysis and creation of data bases.
•Solid experience in design, monitoring and evaluation.
•Relevant experience in shelter building and economic recovery in the context of Haiti.
•Excellent analytical and report writing skills.
•Willingness and ability to conduct fieldwork in Martissant and Fontamara neighborhoods
•Familiarity with OFDA/USAID donor regulations.
•Fluency in spoken and written English, French and Creole is required.

2011-01-05