Format authorised by Juriaan Lahr

Terms of reference For evaluation 1. Title: Final evaluation 3FM Youth

This Terms of Reference has been developed for the final evaluation of the 3FM Youth project in the Philippines. The period under review is the total length of the project, from October 2016 until March 2020. The project number is PRJ08-232-0006.

2. Responsibilities and lines of communication

The evaluation will be managed by the Netherlands Red Cross (NLRC) project manager in the Philippines. The NLRC project manager will coordinate the process in close collaboration with the PRC Youth manager and the project team. The evaluation will be carried out by an external evaluator. The external evaluator may team up with a national consultant based in Philippines to work on this assignment

3. Context and history

The Youth Ignite: Agents of Change project started in 2016 and is implemented in in the Philippines (municipalities of Alegria, , and and .). The overall goal of the project is to enhance the personal and economic development of the youth in order to prepare them to cope with the impact and consequences of armed conflict. The project has an holistic approach with activities in four main area’s: Food security, Livelihoods, Micro- credits, Vocational skills trainings, Psychosocial Support, Youth Leadership Development and Integrated Risk Management.

4. Purpose and Objectives

The main purpose of the final evaluation is to learn for future interventions. Several of the approaches that have been used in the project were new for the NLRC and PRC. Therefore, it is important that these are studied especially well. Besides, accountability to the donor and beneficiaries is also an important reason to conduct the evaluation. Specific Objectives of the Evaluation: 1. To assess the overall achievement of results, specifically pointing to possible evidence that the interventions chosen can contribute to positive changes in young people’s lives;

Netherlands Red Cross | International Assistance Department Date/version 09.05.2019/0.1 Terms of Reference for Evaluation Page 1 of 7

2. To evaluate project performance in terms of its effectiveness, relevance and sustainability and factors contributing to such performance (project delivery/standard operating procedures of the Host National Society (PRC), partnership approaches, and beneficiaries engagement practices); 3. To identify lessons learned, good practices and any particular challenges in the implementation of the project and achievement of results; and 4. To review mid-term recommendations/sustainability strategies including those that are useful and have been implemented and provide new recommendations to improve future programming.

5. Scope

The project evaluation is expected to cover all five Municipalities; Alegria, Gigaquit, Bacquag, Malimono and Surigao city. The evaluation should address all the themes covered by the project (Food security, Vocational Training*, Micro credit support, Integrated Risk Management/DRR, Youth Leadership/Life skills* and Psychosocial support*. The consultant is guided by the evaluation objectives and guiding questions addressing the Relevance, Effectiveness, Efficiency, Impact/Effects and Sustainability of the project interventions. The consultant is expected to present around 2 Case studies, specifically on SALT, Livelihoods and Youth Leadership/Life skills interventions. * more in depth 6. Key questions

The following are guiding example questions for the final evaluation.

A. Relevance • To what extent are the objectives of the project still valid (is the content of the project relevant)? • Are the activities of the project consistent with the intended objectives?

B. Effectiveness • To what extent have the objectives been achieved? • What have been the major factors influencing the achievement or non-achievement of the objectives? • To what extent have planned outputs and objectives outlined in the log frame been achieved in line with the agreed timeline? What is their quality? Have the planned activities led to the achievement of these outputs and contributing to objectives? • How effectively have the integrated project components complemented one another to achieve the overall objectives of the project? Are interventions well integrated? • How has the integrated Risk Management approach been promoted and supported within the SALT and Livelihood interventions, and what were the major factors influencing the achievement or non-achievement of IRM approach throughout the project? • What are the major factors influencing the achievement or non-achievement of the objectives? • Who is using and benefiting from the resources the project has provided? What is the partners’ and household/community beneficiaries’ view of the project? • How effective was Red Cross beneficiary involvement and participation throughout the project? How was beneficiary participation and information ensured throughout the project?

Netherlands Red Cross | International Assistance Department Date/version 09.05.2019/0.1 Terms of Reference for Evaluation Page 2 of 7

• How effective were the partnership strategies/modalities with Philippines Red Cross and the host Local Government Units within the project area? • Has there been an effective coordination mechanism established between PRC and other stakeholders within the project area?

C. Efficiency • Have the project budget / resources been efficiently utilized, if not what should have been done differently to enable efficient utilization of the project resources? • Has the project efficiently used the funds/assets (value-for-money)? Did the project achieve desired quality outputs at a reasonable time? • To what extent have measures been taken during planning and implementation to ensure efficient utilization of funding, staff, time and other resources without compromising on the attainment of quality results? • How efficient is are PRC’s systems and procedures (e.g. finance, procurement, contracting practices, staff recruitment/management, etc.)? Have they been applied in a way that ensured project interventions are efficiently delivered? • Were project funds and other support provided to Host National Society (PRC) in a timely manner to meet beneficiary and community needs? Was financial risk properly monitored and managed? • How was the management of the project carried out by Philippines Red Cross and Netherlands Red Cross, in terms of result oriented management approach, considering the geographical scope? • Was there any potential to increase cost-effectiveness, and if so, how? Are there alternative approaches that could have been explored for future program?

D. Impact /Effects • What are the overall effects of the interventions, intended and unintended, directly and indirectly, long term and short term, positive and negative? • Did the project reach all the people it intended to reach? • Is there evidence to show that the project is contributing towards resilience building and socio- economic empowerment? (Profile around 2 case studies (covering Food security/Livelihood/Vocational trainings, Micro credit support, Youth Leadership development or Life skills) • Is there evidence to show that the project is contributing towards the resilience of affected communities? How can these be attributed to Red Cross program? • To what extent and in what ways has local capacity been supported and developed through the project interventions?

E. Sustainability • To what extent are the benefits of the project expected to continue after the project ends? • What are the major factors that are expected to be influencing the achievement or non- achievement of sustainability of the project results? • What strategies did PRC/NLRC take (at both institutional and community levels) to ensure that all interventions lead to sustainable results? And what have been the results in relation to sustainability? • Is there evidence to show that the capacities being developed with communities/youth will be sustained and applied after the project ends? • Is there evidence to show that the PRC-supported youth’s enterprises will remain viable after the project ends?

Netherlands Red Cross | International Assistance Department Date/version 09.05.2019/0.1 Terms of Reference for Evaluation Page 3 of 7

• Has an exit/sustainability strategy been defined and utilized by the project team and to what extent have the strategies defined been achieved within the project period? • What were the major factors and critical assumptions which influenced the achievement or non-achievement of sustainability aspect of the project? • What could concretely be recommended to ensure sustainability of similar projects in the future?

7. Methodology

The final evaluation will be a participative evaluation in combination with two or three case studies. Furthermore, the final evaluation should include an endline survey. Both quantitative and qualitative methods are expected to be used. Allowing for comparison with the baseline situation and triangulation of the data. Methods to be included could be a quantitative household survey, focus group discussions, key informant interviews , the most significant change, and desk review. There are numerous project documents available for the desk review, such as the baseline and midterm review studies. The evaluation should have a participative character, meaning that project staff, volunteers, stakeholders and beneficiaries need to be engaged.

8. Deliverables

Evaluation plan/inception report The consultant is expected to develop an inception report in which the evaluation plan is described in detail including the methodology and planning. Please refer to the OECD-DAC criteria for evaluation standards http://www.oecd.org/dac/evaluation/dcdndep/44798177.pdf. Evaluation report The Evaluation report should have the following structure: • Title page • Table of contents • List of acronyms • Executive Summary (max. 4 pages); must be a stand-alone summary describing the Project, main findings of the evaluation, and conclusions and recommendations. Main body: • Introduction • Background/Description of the project, • Project Log Frame- including goals and objectives • Evaluation purpose /Objectives • Evaluation methodology, approach and analysis • Scope and limitations • Findings and analysis (based on evaluation objectives and guiding questions covering Relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, Impact/Effects, Sustainability) • Lessons learned • Conclusion • Recommendations

Netherlands Red Cross | International Assistance Department Date/version 09.05.2019/0.1 Terms of Reference for Evaluation Page 4 of 7

Annexes • Case studies ( SALT, Livelihood (Micro credit support or Vocational Training) and Youth Leadership /Life skills) • Terms of Reference for the evaluation • Evaluation work plan with timetable • Results indicator tracking matrix • Data collection tools • List of documents reviewed • List of individuals, stakeholder groups, and communities interviewed • Summary tables • Relevant maps and photographs of the study areas • Bibliography of secondary sources • Short biography of the evaluators

The evaluation report needs to meet the ALNAP Quality Pro Forma http://www.alnap.org/pool/files/alnap-quality-pro-forma-2005.pdf. Case studies case studies are expected to be developed covering the topics of vocational training /Micro credit support to youth groups, SALT farming and Youth Leadership/Life skills development. Presentation When the evaluation report and the case studies have been concluded, the consultant will present both to the project team. 9. Profile of the evaluator(s)

0.1 Education a) University degree b) Qualification in development studies or a related area 0.2 Experience a) Experience working for Red Cross and undertaking similar studies within Philippines b) Experience working for a humanitarian aid organisation in developing and conflict affected communities c) Experience with participatory assessment, programme planning and evaluation techniques 0.3 Skills a) Fluency in English language and, Filipino languages if possible b) Ability to write concise, yet comprehensive reports c) Excellent interpersonal skills d) Ability to work effectively in intercultural settings e) Ability to meet deadlines f) Self-supporting in working with computers (word- processing, spreadsheets, statistical software) 0.4 Knowledge a) Technical knowledge of food security livelihoods and youth empowerment is an asset b) Knowledge of the -in Philippines ( Visaya speaking communities). c) If International consultant, capacity to team up with an

Netherlands Red Cross | International Assistance Department Date/version 09.05.2019/0.1 Terms of Reference for Evaluation Page 5 of 7

associate Filipino consultant.

10. Planning The evaluation is scheduled in February /March 2020. 11. Debriefing A debriefing will be scheduled with the NLRC and PRC project managers. In addition, a presentation of the findings will be presented to staff, volunteers and key stakeholders. 11. Costs The consultant is requested to provide a calculation of costs for the evaluation. S/he should indicate a daily fee; the estimated amount of days required for different stages of the assignment; costs for travel, accommodation, communication and printing.

Netherlands Red Cross | International Assistance Department Date/version 09.05.2019/0.1 Terms of Reference for Evaluation Page 6 of 7 Format authorised by Juriaan Lahr Annex B List of key documents

Project documents ▪ Needs assessment ▪ Project proposal ▪ Budget ▪ Logframe ▪ (Bi)annual reports ▪ Baseline study ▪ Midterm review report

Netherlands Red Cross | International Assistance Department Date/version 09.05.2019/0.1 Terms of Reference for Evaluation Page 7 of 7